Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-j4x9h Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-08T17:49:25.286Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Expert judgement

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 April 2016

M. Ashcroft ,
R. Austin ,
K. Barnes ,
D. MacDonald ,
S. Makin ,
S. Morgan ,
R. Taylor  and
P. Scolley
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Expert judgement has been used since the actuarial profession was founded. In the past, there has often been a lack of transparency regarding the use of expert judgement, even though those judgements could have a very significant impact on the outputs of calculations and the decisions made by organisations. The lack of transparency has a number of dimensions, including the nature of the underlying judgements, as well as the process used to derive those judgements. This paper aims to provide a practical framework regarding expert judgement processes, and how those processes may be validated. It includes a worked example illustrating how the process could be used for setting a particular assumption. It concludes with some suggested tools for use within expert judgement. Although primarily focussed on the insurance sector, the proposed process framework could be applied more widely without the need for significant changes.

Keywords

Expert JudgementSolvency IIMaterialityProcessValidation

Information

Type
Sessional meetings: papers and abstracts of discussions
Information
British Actuarial Journal , Volume 21 , Issue 2 , July 2016 , pp. 314 - 363
Copyright
© Institute and Faculty of Actuaries 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Brown, M.B. & Keeley, S.M. (2007). Asking the Right Questions – A Guide to Critical Thinking, 8th ed. New Jersey: Pearson Hall.Google Scholar
Continuous Mortality Investigation (CMI). (2013). CMI library of mortality projections, available at http://www.actuaries.org.uk/research-and-resources/pages/cmi-library-mortality-projections (accessed 18 December 2013).Google Scholar
Continuous Mortality Investigation (CMI). (2014). CMI Working Paper No. 74, Continuous Mortality Investigation, s.l.Google Scholar
Cooke, R.M. & Gossans, L.H.J. (1999). Procedures Guide for Structured Expert Judgement. Delft, Delft University of Technology.Google Scholar
EIOPA (2014a). Guidelines on valuation of technical provisions, Final Report on Public Consultation No. 14/036, EIOPA, s.l.Google Scholar
EIOPA (2014b). Guidelines on Solvency II relating to Pillar 1 requirements, consultation paper, EIOPA, s.l.Google Scholar
EIOPA (2014c). Guidelines on the use of internal models, Final Report on Public Consultation No. 14/019EIOPA, s.l.Google Scholar
EIOPA (2014d). Guidelines on application of outwards reinsurance arrangements to the non-life underwriting risk sub-module, Final Report on Public Consultation No. 14/036, EIOPA, s.l.Google Scholar
EIOPA (2014e). Guidelines on health catastrophe risk sub-module, Final Report on Public Consultation No. 14/036, , EIOPA, s.l.Google Scholar
EIOPA (2014f). Guidelines on undertaking-specific parameters, Final Report on Public Consultation No. 14/036, EIOPA, s.l.Google Scholar
Frankland, R. et al. (2013). Difficult risks and capital models – a discussion paper. British Actuarial Journal, 19(3), 556–616.Google Scholar
FRC, Board for Actuarial Standards (2009). Technical Actuarial Standard R: Reporting Actuarial Information. s.l., FRC, Board for Actuarial Standards.Google Scholar
Leonard, D. & Swap, W. (2005). Deep Smarts: How to Cult ivate and Transfer Enduring Business Wisdom . s.l.: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
Nonaka, I. & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation, 1st ed. USA: OUP.Google Scholar
Official Journal of the European Union . (2009). Directive 2009/138/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council.Google Scholar
Official Journal of the European Union . (2015). Supplementing Directive 2009/138/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/35.Google Scholar
Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA). (2013). Solvency II: applying EIOPA’s preparatory guidelines to PRA-authorised firms, PRA, s.l.Google Scholar