Editorial: The Franchise

by C. K. "Stan" Khury

Readers will notice elsewhere in this issue the announcement of a number of changes in the staffing of the Actuarial Review. After nine years of service as editor-in-chief and more than twenty years of service, off and on, on the staff of the Actuarial Review, the choice of subject for this last column, written as editor-in-chief, invariably offers some intriguing possibilities. After considerable reflection, the topic that stands out is one that deals with The Franchise.

In 1914, a group of visionary people recognized the differences between the actuarial problems emerging in casualty insurance, most particularly in workers compensation, and those of traditional life insurance. The franchise for serving society professionally as "casualty actuaries" was claimed by these 97 individuals, and this claim was publicly affirmed and proclaimed by the formation of the Casualty Actuarial Society. The distinguished history of this franchise is well known and needs little additional comment. Today the CAS consists of more than 3,000 members. Members today serve their clients in a multitude of capacities ranging across an entire rainbow of problems rooted in casualty (and similar) risk exposures.

One of the most outstanding features of the CAS, in its 84th year, is that it is a vibrant institution, animated almost exclusively by the energy of its members serving in numerous way-all of which is given on a volunteer basis. In other words, the franchise is thriving primarily because those who are practicing under its imprimatur, the members of the CAS, view the franchise very solemnly and seriously, in fact if not by intention, and serve in numerous capacities to keep this franchise alive and well.

Because the franchise does not have a societal charter that is granted affirmatively (whether legislatively or otherwise), its sustenance and preservation are contingent upon the members of the CAS continuing to fulfill the needs of their clients better than any other professional. Note here that the reference is to members of the CAS, not the CAS. As such, the vitality of the CAS is a direct corollary of the vitality of its members. Thus, our conclusion that the franchise can be sustained only if the members of the CAS serve their clients better than any other professional who may be able to claim similar abilities.

This naturally leads to an inquiry into the ways in which the focus of this franchise can remain on its members doing a good job for their clients. While there are many such ways, in this column we will focus on just three: actively minimizing the role of "bureaucracy," minimizing the role of actuarial theology, and maximizing the voice of the membership.

For many years now, the CAS has been and continues to be blessed with an outstanding, efficient, capable, and professional office staff-as well as with an outstanding line of leaders-with no end of this supply in sight. This infrastructure-whether it is the CAS Office staff or the multitude of volunteers organized in numerous committees, task forces, councils, boards, nationally and regionally-is minimal. Keeping such infrastructure in a fully, and exclusively, supportive role is a serious responsibility of every member and is one of the keys to keeping the focus off the organization and on the individual member.

Once again, for many years, the CAS has engaged in a systematic and deliberate effort to articulate basic principles, standards, and guides on all fronts. This has been an evolutionary process-largely in response to the needs of the member practitioners. As such, what we have promulgated has withstood the test of time. Keeping this process in the mode of responding to needs is a clear and unambiguous path to preventing anything that might look like an actuarial theology from taking root. We can give such efforts a lofty name, such as Principles of Actuarial Practice and the like. But any such wholesale codification can only serve to minimize the role of the individual member-to simply applying the principles articulated in this theology. A continued evolutionary path on this front, I believe, is essential to the continued vitality of the CAS.

Another way in which members can tend and safeguard this franchise is by making sure that their voices are heard. One of the best avenues we have had for this ability to express oneself is this very publication. Over the years, the Actuarial Review has served as an excellent forum for ideas of many shades. And most fortunately, the leadership of the CAS has always permitted and encouraged the Actuarial Review to operate as an independent official publication of the CAS-a forum to publish news and views of interest to its members. This is a vital voice. Its vitality is an essential element of the vitality of the CAS.

Over the years, I have had the very special privilege of being associated with this voice. The joy of this service is, at the same time, hard to describe and easy to recognize. The extensive effort that goes into making this publication possible, by the many capable and dedicated members of its staff, I believe, is its own reward.

On the occasion of concluding my official service on the staff of the Actuarial Review, I am reminded of the words of its first editor, Matthew Rodermund, in his 1989 editorial, about the sweet sorrow he felt upon departing. I unabashedly admit to the same feelings. But these feeling are accompanied by an even stronger feeling of hope. Hope that this voice, the Actuarial Review, will continue to be a strong and independent element sustaining that very special franchise that was first proclaimed in 1914.