Description: This article on developing effective risk management strategies to protect your organization looked at the following topics: • Successfully identifying, assessing and managing risks for all stakeholders. • Identifying the appropriate strategy for your particular needs. • Ensuring the governance body understands risk. • Developing a risk management framework. • Incorporating risk management into your business planning.

Description: This article is based on the author's discussions with many executives of insurance companies regarding the challenges and limitations in ERM at its current state of evolvement. The following areas need to be addressed and improved on, in the author's opinion, to 'take ERM to the next level': 1. Reconciling Risk Concerns of Creditors and Shareholders. 2. Managing of Operational Risk. 3. Execution Risks. 4. Producing Credible and Useful Risk Adjusted Performance Measures. 5. Aligning Performance Metrics with Management’s Performance Measurement Philosophy.

Description: How insurers can include a liquidity score and liquidity stress scenarios as part of their asset liability management (ALM) protocol.

Description: This paper applies the research in Prospect Theory of Kahneman and Tversky to explain why sales of annuities lag sales of life insurance products. The author theorizes that life insurance is easier to sell because customers perceive themselves to be in the domain of losses, while potential annuity customers perceive themselves to be in the domain of gains. Kahneman and Tversky showed us that people are mostly risk averse in the domain of gains and risk seeking in the domain of losses. Purchase of an annuity or life product is a risky investment. Customers will find it easier to take the risk in the life insurance domain of losses than the annuity domain of gains. The author then proposes a hybrid life annuity product that might address both mortality and longevity risk in one product that would allow both products to be more competitive than stand-alone products.

Description: COVID19 highlights the need for greater complexity expertise in risk management. Crisis like the current COVID19 pandemic and 2008 Financial meltdown and others help us to turn into focus inwards for introspection on how we can better manage our resources and provide a deeper understanding of what our objectives should be and how we can achieve them through applying complexity science.

Description: This article highlights 13 attributes shared by various groups of companies that landed in trouble. The companies are identified, and the attributes are described.

Description: The Chairperson discusses risk appetite.

Description: This article discusses the risk management skills and aptitudes needed for the future.

Description: In this article, we summarize inflationary factors that may result in a sharp increase in interest rates and implications for life insurer convexity risk exposure, most notably to dynamic policyholder lapsation. We further provide insights into potential ALM strategies to mitigate this convexity risk. Due to the prolonged low-interest rate environment and low minimum interest rate guarantees offered to policyholders, liability convexity is higher than prior historical periods, which results in life insurers’ ALM positions being extremely vulnerable to short-term interest rate spikes. Convexity mismatches cause issues for life insurers under both rising and declining interest rate scenarios. This means that life insurers are not compensated for taking convexity risk and, therefore, convexity matching should always be considered in the asset optimization process. There are mixed signals from policymakers and financial markets regarding potential inflationary and sharply rising interest rate scenarios. The key takeaway is that life insurers are not compensated for taking convexity risk and it is the right time for insurers to review convexity exposure. There are different approaches available to mitigate convexity exposure through rebalancing of asset positions and hedges within each life insurer’s risk limits.

Description: A critical step in valuing a company for the purpose of financial reporting is the computation of the market value of economic surplus (MVES). This article provides a novel approach to the valuation of MVES that is stable and reasonably immune to “market noise.” Current approaches to the calculation of economic surplus of an insurance company generally define such surplus as the market value of the assets (MVA) supporting the liabilities less the market value of liabilities (MVL). While MVA is observable in the market, MVL is typically computed directly, without regard to the underlying supporting assets. Subtracting MVL from any value of assets that changes with market movements results in an unstable surplus. Consequently, a surplus that is not fully reflective of market sentiment has been rejected by many. This same approach is further used in the calculation of market consistent embedded value (MCEV) when a balance sheet approach is used .