Description: This article describes a hypothetical workplace dilemma, then invites SOA members to submit their comments and solutions. This situation deals with a mortality study and what disclosures should be made in the report on the study with regard to the treatment of reinsurance.

Description: The author summarizes reader responses to the previously published “Jam Sandwich” case study, which illustrated one challenge of being stuck in the middle of a management situation. Reader responses including references to potential violations of the Code of Professional Conduct and to Actuarial Standard of Practice No. 23, ‘Data Quality’ as well as suggestions for corrective action. From ‘The Stepping Stone’ issue number 43.

Description: Feature article describing a hypothetical workplace dilemma and asking readers for answers to the problem.

Description: Feature article highlighting readers’ responses to a previously published hypothetical workplace dilemma where unlocking assumptions resulted in an unexpected DAC writedown.

Description: Responses to the previous issue’s Actuarial Ethicist case study where a new CEO questioned the conservative nature of the chief actuary's LTD claim reserves.

Description: An article describing a hypothetical workplace dilemma involving defined benefit pension plan funding.

Description: This article shows readers' responses to a case study presented in the April 2010 issue of Stepping Stone. The part time in house actuary for a defined benefits pension plan feels the plan is under funded and recommends corrective action. The needed corrections are not felt needed by senior management.

Description: The author presents a case study that sets out a hypothetical workplace dilemma involving professional conduct and an actuarial report, and invites reader responses. From ‘The Stepping Stone’ issue number 43.

Description: Readers’ responses to the mortality study conundrum from the previous issue.

Description: A summary of the responses to the article “Stochastic Cherry Orchard”. A situation where a subordinate actuary was asked by his superior to reduce the number of scenarios run on a UL valuation in order to meet a time deadline.