Alaska’s recruitment challenges threaten performance and reputation

Recruitment and retention of investment and operations staff at the $79.4 billion Alaska Permanent Fund Corporation is now so acute the fund is exposed to operational risk with potential adverse impacts on performance and corporate reputation.

So heard the board of trustees in a specially-convened meeting to discuss the issue following an unprecedented wave of staff leaving the fund in recent months that includes Steve Moseley, deputy chief investment officer and head of alternatives, and the entire operations team who will exit APFC on the same day in August. Others include the director of administrative operations – a big gap going into the budget – and members of the IT and procurement teams. Here the fund has only received 10 applications in the last five months, none of which meet the minimum qualification.

The board heard how the root cause of the problem lies with “materially below par” compensation linked to budget constraints. It means efforts to train and develop staff are often wasted as many are snatched away by those able to pay more, leaving APFC struggling to build a bench of talent. Trustees heard how one recent leaver had gone to a salary paying 200 per cent more.

For sure, trustees heard how departures should be seen in the context of the high turnover in the wider investment industry and the Great Resignation through the pandemic. Moreover, APFC has added some 17 positions over the last five years.

However, employees have left the fund over a short period of time rather than throughout the year, and APFC’s already smallish internal team leave departures more keenly felt than if they were spread cross a deeper organisation. It means team members are wearing multiple hats like the chief compliance officer also doubling up as chief risk officer. Chief investment officer, Marcus Frampton, currently has 11 direct reports.

Trustees heard how the exodus of APFC’s three-strong operations team, who provide essential support to the internal trading of the portfolio and trade settlement, is particularly linked to the fact they are not bonus eligible unlike the investment team, creating a rift in culture and team spirit.

Sponsored Content

Their exodus has led to APFC now hunting a costly, outsourced solution to the services they provide.

“It is not an area of operations we can afford to have gaps in support,” trustees heard.

Incentive compensation

In an approach designed to fit with wider pay structures across Alaska’s public sector, incentive compensation only applies to investment personnel. However, although it was first approved in 2018, in the years since the investment team have experienced changes to payout levels that have resulted in haircuts to their bonus. Most recently, bonus payments were reduced by about 44 per cent.

The level of bonuses that investment team members receive is a complex process with many contingencies.

Payouts are capped at a percentage of salary; bonus calculations take into consideration individuals’ prior compensation and performance of the total fund as well as asset class weightings. Short and long-term performance also goes into the calculation.

In another complexity, bogey levels or targets by which the investment team need to beat the benchmark to fully earn their bonus, are notably steeper in fixed income compared to peer funds.

Frampton told the board candidates read the policy and dislike the lack of clarity on the bonus structure. He said that paying out incentive compensation is crucial to motivate investment staff.

Solutions

Other considerations the board discussed to support recruitment and retention included  locating staff in Anchorage and developing a more flexible approach to work. So far only three members of the investment team are approved to work remotely.

Trustees heard how starting salaries on the operations side are not much higher than for a public accounting firm.

Other solutions include working with local universities and building the intern program.  Trustees also heard about the importance of encouraging and nurturing internal growth and promotion, offering different titles, levels of promotion and compensation.

 

Leave a Comment

NY Common joins allocator push on company AI transparency

NY Common joins allocator push on company AI transparency

The $273 billion New York State Common has upped the pressure on portfolio companies to report on how artificial intelligence usage is contributing to layoffs, as AI governance becomes a growing focus in the proxy voting and engagement activities of asset owners.

Sort content by

Better decision-making from diversity

Gender diversity is only part of the story when it comes to creating a robust and diverse investment culture. Clare Armstrong writes how Mercer keeps its teams on track for the best outcomes.

Constant improvement a core value at AP2

The total investment costs of AP2 are only 17 basis points, yet the portfolio is described by chief executive, Eva Halvarsson as complex and advanced. So how do they do it?

Ditch managers, invest in corporate America

Warren Buffett says although outstanding managers are invaluable, the net result of hiring professional management is a minus. “More money is made in Wall Street through salesmanship than investment ability”.

Oregon’s evolving strategy

Oregon State Treasury has undergone material change to its structure and process evolving its investment strategy and techniques including smart beta, private equity and internal management.

The future of pension management

Keith Ambachtsheer’s fourth book, to launch next month, tackles the persistent problems in pension governance, design and investment, including the sizeable aspiration/implementation gap.

The collective brain

The Future Fund knows exactly where its leadership team’s cognitive strengths, and weaknesses, lie. Does your fund?

Previous