Beyond the Numbers:
Professionalism Education at
Its Finest

Each November/December issue of Actuarial Review celebrates a CAS Working Group whose members have gone above and beyond in their service to the Society and its members. This year, we recognize the Professionalism Education Working Group (PEWG) for its exceptional contributions to the CAS and the actuarial profession.

ou are reviewing the results of a model used to support an important business decision. The analysis is technically sound, but something about the result does not sit right. Maybe the data have limitations that are not immediately apparent. Maybe an AI-enabled tool played a role in producing the analysis, and the documentation isn’t clear. Or perhaps someone with a stake in the outcome is pushing you toward a particular conclusion.

There may not be a rule that tells you exactly what to do next.

Should you rely on the result? What needs to be disclosed? When is additional validation necessary? What happens if another actuary sees the situation differently? And what if questioning the result puts you at odds with an employer or client?

This is where actuarial professionalism moves from the theoretical to the very real.

Actuaries have the Code of Professional Conduct and Actuarial Standards of Practice (ASOPs) to guide them, but those standards cannot anticipate every situation an actuary will encounter. Technical education can help actuaries build the skills to perform an analysis. Professionalism education governs whether the actuary should be the one doing the analysis, important considerations as part of the analysis, and what communication obligations follow from sharing the results.

“I see professionalism as a thread that runs through everything we do in professional education,” said Vice President, Professional Education and former PEWG Chair, Melissa Huenefeldt. “We can give actuaries opportunities to build their technical skills and learn about emerging issues, but they also need to know how to apply that knowledge in the real world.”

That need is becoming more important as actuarial work changes.

Huenefeldt points to questions surrounding data quality, transparency, bias, reliance on models, and AI-generated work, among others. Professional standards provide a foundation, but actuaries will increasingly encounter situations that are not specifically addressed by an ASOP or the Code of Professional Conduct.

“The tools will change,” Huenefeldt said. “Our responsibility for the work won’t.”

The PEWG’s challenge is not simply teaching actuaries what professional standards say. The challenge is creating opportunities for them to practice applying those standards when the answer is less obvious.

That distinction shapes the group’s approach to both continuing education and the CAS Course on Professionalism (CoP).

“We approach all of our professionalism education materials, both for continuing education and the Course on Professionalism, with a strong focus on audience engagement,” said PEWG Chair Zach Suter. “Our goal is to make each topic relatable while remaining educational.”

One example is “Are You Qualified?” — an interactive presentation based on an idea developed by Ron Kozlowski in Asia and adapted to U.S. Qualification Standards. Rather than simply presenting those standards, the session asks participants to work through career and job-transition scenarios and to consider whether they would be qualified to do the work inherent in those transitions.

There is room for disagreement — intentionally.

“The scenarios are open to interpretation,” Suter said, noting that the resulting conversations can surface perspectives even the facilitator had not considered. Feedback from participants is then incorporated into future versions of the program, creating what Suter described as a continuous cycle of development and improvement.

That emphasis on discussion is especially evident in the Course on Professionalism, often one of a new CAS candidate’s earliest experiences with the Society.

Volunteer Co-Vice-Chair Sydney McIndoo said candidates regularly tell her they did not expect a professionalism course to be so interactive or enjoyable.

“Our group works hard to make sure that the presentations, topics, and case studies are thought provoking, engaging, and current with scenarios actuaries face in their work today,” McIndoo said.

This year, that included bringing artificial intelligence into the conversation. The PEWG added a “snapper,” or mini case study, to the Course on Professionalism that asks candidates to begin considering how AI interacts with ASOPs and the Code of Professional Conduct.

For McIndoo, the goal is not necessarily to give candidates a definitive answer to every question AI may create. It is to begin building the habits necessary to think through them.

“By incorporating this topic into the CoP, we are helping lay the foundation for the continued discussion and thoughtful consideration of AI within the actuarial profession,” she said.

The AI discussion illustrates a larger challenge for professionalism education: The profession can change faster than its standards.

“We’re going to encounter situations that aren’t specifically addressed in an ASOP or the Code of Professional Conduct, and actuaries need to be comfortable exercising professional judgement as they navigate those situations,” Huenefeldt said.

The PEWG has responded by continually developing and refining its educational offerings. After several years of increased demand for continuing education, record-high participation in the Course on Professionalism, and numerous ASOP exposure drafts requiring review and comment, Suter describes this year as one of “refinement and growth.” The group has closely reviewed participant feedback and used it to strengthen material that was already receiving strong evaluations.

The group’s work also extends well beyond courses and meeting sessions. Its subcommittees develop continuing education, administer and improve the CoP, expand professionalism education internationally, and review exposure drafts of ASOPs. Volunteers contribute comments on proposed actuarial standards and develop new resources for the profession.

Among those resources is a new professionalism monograph authored by Volunteer Co-Vice-Chair Josh Taub.

Taub has been part of PEWG since 2015, although professionalism education was not originally what drew him to the group. After beginning to work fully remotely, he was looking for more opportunities to interact with other actuaries. Instead, he discovered a subject that fascinated him.

“What I didn’t know at the time was how interesting I’d find the professionalism topics and how much I’d truly enjoy working with the people in the group,” Taub said. “And it has given me a broader perspective and understanding of the actuarial profession as a whole.”

His monograph became a substantial undertaking involving input from numerous experts and an extended period of development and refinement. Suter remembers Taub being so excited about the original idea that he insisted Suter call him while Suter was on PTO so he could explain it.

Later this year, the finished work is expected to become part of the CAS Monograph series. Taub believes even experienced actuaries will find something new in it.

“I certainly learned a lot putting it together,” he said.

PEWG’s educational philosophy reflects the volunteers creating it.

They are practicing actuaries from different roles, subject areas, and career stages. They bring the professional questions they encounter in their own working lives into a group where those questions can be considered from multiple perspectives.

“Professionalism education isn’t just about telling members what the standards say,” Huenefeldt said. “It’s helping them think about what those standards look like when you actually have to apply them.”

McIndoo has experienced that firsthand. Working with a relatively small circle of actuaries for much of her career, she originally joined PEWG in part to build connections and learn from others. She now describes the group as a network she can turn to as a sounding board and says the experience has highlighted “how professionalism touches nearly every aspect of my work as an actuary.”

The volunteers also seem determined to prove that professionalism does not have to be dry.

Taub describes the group’s culture as “very positive and sometimes playful,” including group dinners during the Course on Professionalism and, according to Taub, rumors of karaoke afterward.

That camaraderie carries into the work. McIndoo sees members readily volunteering, contributing ideas and remaining active in discussions. Suter points to the unusually long tenure of many volunteers as another indication of their commitment. Members stay because they believe in the mission, but they also continue contributing rather than simply occupying a seat.

The results are evident in the response from CAS members. Taub said professionalism sessions developed by PEWG tend to be among the highest-rated sessions at CAS meetings.

“Hopefully we are giving them a good welcome to the profession and the CAS,” Taub said.

But perhaps the group’s greatest contribution is creating a place where actuaries can wrestle with questions for which an appropriate response may depend on context, judgment, and perspective.

“Many of the topics we discuss are not always black and white,” McIndoo said. PEWG, she added, creates an environment where actuaries can have “healthy, thoughtful conversations surrounding different perspectives.”

The PEWG is helping actuaries prepare for problems that cannot be solved by technical expertise alone. Its volunteers are creating education that asks actuaries to question, discuss, listen, and exercise judgment — whether the issue involves qualification standards, an ASOP, pressure from a stakeholder, or a technology that did not exist when today’s professional standards were written.

The group cannot tell an actuary exactly what to do in every situation. But it can prepare actuaries to make that decision when the moment comes.