Killjoy
Recently, the Singaporean actuary clinched an actuarial project awarded by a government agency. This was after he had gathered a team (2 Indonesian actuaries and I) and we then sent a proposal to that agency with respect to the job scope they had given earlier.
Problem came immediately: instead of an engagement letter or contract agreement as the legal binding document, the agency issued a purcahse order that merely stated item "purchased" was "Technical and organizational studies". This form was, in my opinion, supposed to be used to purchase goods e.g. 10 chairs, and unsuitable to be used to engage services.
By not including or at least referring to job scope and our proposal, there is risk of potentially huge griefs in future due to conflicts/disagreements. Despite this...
Qualified actuary #1: I'm apprehensive about this project but wth, let's have fun.
Qualified actuary #2: You can do it! Let's relax and have fun.
Unqualified errr associate actuary (me!): *proceed to list some risks*
I felt bad for being a killjoy among these "to infinity and beyond!"-gungho-going qualified actuaries lol.
The lead actuary was gracious to assure me that I wasn't a party pooper and in fact, my concerns reminded him to ask that the apppointment letter, to be given by the agency later, should include or refer to the scope of work document.
Comments
Agree!