CLIVE KEATINGE

Why do you want to serve on the CAS Board of Directors?

Last year, the American Academy of Actuaries established a presidential task force, the Critical Review of the U.S. Actuarial Profession, or CRUSAP, to undertake a critical self-analysis of the U.S. actuarial profession. Chaired by former CAS President Fred Kilbourne, the charge to the CRUSAP is to identify risks and opportunities faced by the profession, analyze those risks, and develop recommendations for their management. The overriding criterion in the evaluation of risks and opportunities is to be the needs of the various publics for actuarial services and whether those needs are being met through the profession and its members.

The CRUSAP will be issuing its report later this year, and I believe a key role of the CAS Board over the next few years will be to work with the other North American actuarial organizations to act on the recommendations coming out of the CRUSAP. As a Board member, I would be committed to making the CAS a constructive partner in that effort.

From a CAS perspective, the most controversial aspects of the report are surely to be those dealing with the organizational structure of the actuarial profession. In the past, the CAS has consistently obstructed change in this area, which has resulted in the continued fractured state of the profession in North America. The issuance of the CRUSAP report would be an excellent time for us to change our stance and begin working cooperatively toward a professional structure that makes sense.

I attended the Enterprise Risk Management Symposium earlier this year, and I recall two of the panelists commenting on how valuable it was to have actuaries from different practice areas interacting together within their organizations and working toward a common goal. The ERM Symposium offered attendees a glimpse into the benefits of this interaction, and the symposium has been a very successful joint venture among two actuarial organizations, the CAS and SOA, and a non-actuarial organization, the Professional Risk Managers' International Association (PRMIA).

If the casualty actuarial profession is to thrive in the future, we need more of this cooperation-in basic education, continuing education, research, and on the international front. For this to occur on a large scale, we need a professional organizational structure that will allow for the needed coordination and communication. The structure of the American Academy of Actuaries, with its branches for different practice areas, may provide a model for this.

To continue to move the casualty actuarial profession forward in the twenty-first century, we are going to need to take bold steps that entail significant change. I am committed to making that change a reality.