How many exam study hours are you given?

[Emily]

Originally Posted by The Drunken Actuary

Emily, aren't you the same person that would opt for a bonus over a raise of the same amount because of your perception of annual salary review practices? Please tell me where you work so I will never set foot near the place.

Well, if it makes you feel better we actually get raises. I still can't understand why so many people couldn't grasp my argument about bonuses vs. raises, but that's another thread.

From what I've seen all consulting companies work pretty much the same. They know most people don't finish the exams, and they use that to their advantage.

Originally Posted by Pi Man

insurance = study time & exam progress
consulting = experience & money

[Brad Gile]

I think that if you are getting less than 100 hours of study time, you are getting screwed, blued, and tattooed. Your employer doesn't really care whether you pass exams. When I was an actuarial student at Aetna L&C more than thirty years ago, I got about 140 hours per exam and the company made damn sure we all got our allotted time, because getting that ASA/FSA had highest priority.
Later on in my (long) exam taking career, I was with the Wisconsin Insurance Department (1974-87). There, I had NO study time, paid for all of my own exam fees and study materials as well as ASA dues. The Department just plain didn't care whether I passed or even took exams. It was then that I truly valued the student program I had left.



Brad

[The Matrix]

Emily, your posts are breaking my heart.

Please tell me where you work. You can just PM me. I really never want to work where you do.

I worked in consulting for a little while and got 120 hrs. for study time. It was fine. Some days, I'd work overtime (as expected), but the 4 weeks before the exam was mostly respected as 'don't work overtime unless entirely necessary' time.

Not all consulting companies are the same. I've interviewed at a few consulting companies where I was told afte rthe first year, there would be 10 - 20% travel, and overtime was expected. The interviewer even went as far as saying "Will there be a month you will end up working 80-hour weeks? I can't promise there won't be. Will it possibly be during an exam sitting? Can't make any promises."

While I appreciated the up-frontness and honesty, I steered clear of that place. Further, not all insurance companies are the same. Some stress passing exams, and some stress overtime and climbing the corporate ladder. Yes, typically consulting = overtime and 2 to 3 sittings before passing each exam, and insurance = laid-back, etc... but there are many, many exceptions to this.

Bottom line - if you want to work in consulting and still pass exams, it's very possible.

[Incredible Hulctuary]

It has often been said that consulting students make more money than those in insurance companies. But if the consultant takes 50% (or some other nontrivial percentage) more sittings to pass their exams, do they really make more money? Wouldn't an eighth year person in an insurance company who is an FSA make more than an eighth year consultant who has only 5 or 6 exams?

[The Matrix]

Originally Posted by techguy

Wouldn't an eighth year person in an insurance company who is an FSA make more than an eighth year consultant who has only 5 or 6 exams?

Not necessarily. However, the FSA with eight years of experience would certainly have more employment OPTIONS.

[Incredible Hulctuary]

Originally Posted by The Matrix

Not necessarily. However, the FSA with eight years of experience would certainly have more employment OPTIONS.

I don't expect the FSA would always earn more -- but what is the usual trend? The DW Simpson survey has FSA with 6.5-9.5 years of experience earning $94-137K, and 5 exam candidates with the same experience earning $68-88K. Seems like consulting usually makes you earn less money per year of experience, if the extra work hours significantly hinder your exam progress.

[dumber]

I have worked at a couple companies and interviewed at 20+. I have never seen a study program that provides less than 100 hours for the new exam structure.

[what the !@#$]

Originally Posted by dumber

I have worked at a couple companies and interviewed at 20+. I have never seen a study program that provides less than 100 hours for the new exam structure.

FYI...I am at my third consulting company. The other two were similiar...12 days for the 4 hour exams. My current company however is not kind to exam takers...only 4 days for a 4 hour exam! THAT SUCKS!!!!!

[The Matrix]

Originally Posted by techguy

I don't expect the FSA would always earn more -- but what is the usual trend? The DW Simpson survey has FSA with 6.5-9.5 years of experience earning $94-137K, and 5 exam candidates with the same experience earning $68-88K. Seems like consulting usually makes you earn less money per year of experience, if the extra work hours significantly hinder your exam progress.

Somehow, it seems to me that your argument here is specious. Here's my take:
-- When I look across the practice areas in the same survey, for those candidates with 5 exams and 6.5-9.5 years of experience, the bands are congruent;
-- Comparing an FSA ("apples") to someone without ANY credentials ("oranges") seriously underestimates the market value of designations (either ASA or FSA); and,
-- Anyone, whose exam progress suffers (even at insurance companies), will experience a market value loss relative to someone who can more gracefully pass exams.

Additionally, some companies pay oranges more than some apples will ever make because of their abilities. Consulting, I think, gives you more opportunities to work on those abilities that employers REALLY value. JMO.