For certain tasks I’m able to identify tools or practices, usually used by engineers within the organization that can either get them done really fast or prevent problems from occurring in the future.
However sometimes I’m asked not to use them because everyone else isn’t familiar with them and that creates a kind of key person risk in my position. It’s not an IT issue since everyone has access to this stuff and can install it, it’s just foreign to the actuaries.
Usually it’s an easy sell if the tool gets the job done fast. Managers like that. But the latter benefit - preventing problems from occurring later on is much tougher. Sometimes they just want the project done without thinking about how neglecting certain practices will make things much tougher later on.
I guess an easy example to point out is version control. Countless files get named v1, v2, vFINAL, vFINAL2 and so on or whatever. I sometimes point out that we haven’t needed to do things that way for the last 20 years or so and there’s version control that just lets you have 1 file and you can go forwards and backwards in time as you please if you need to undo a change or see what you did a long time ago and see exactly when you did it, and in short, makes life way easier, at least for me. But many times I’m asked to just “make a v3 on the shared drive” and that my way is just too hard to comprehend or wastes too much time (it doesn’t).
What grinds my gears is that I know I will be asked in 6 months to clean up the mess of all these inconsistent copies and I don’t want to get into some argument about how it didn’t have to wind up that way in the first place.