10-point plan for employers and trustees of defined contribution pension plans

Defined contribution company plans began 2009 on the heels of a bruising year. The significant decline in capital markets coupled with extreme investment volatility raises many issues for companies with DC plans. There are numerous issues employers/plan trustees need to address when reviewing their plans this year. These range from the plan’s governance to the choice of low-risk investment options. Mercer’s Dublin office has prepared a 10 point plan that employers and trustees could potentially adopt as they re-evaluate their DC plans and related responsibilities in 2009.

  1. Review the adequacy of DC benefits and consider whether current pension provision is meeting employees’ needs. Economic conditions and future expectations have changed considerably since many DC arrangements were designed. Depending on their ages and time horizons, members may need to adjust their expectations of retirement income. Employers may also need to assess the workforce management implications.
  2. Review DC provider performance. The market for DC provision has evolved with new providers and products entering the market while others exit. Trustees should consider if the existing arrangements continue to meet the investment needs of all members and if performance continues to meet the objectives set when selected.
  3. Review the suitability of investment options. Poor investment choice is likely to be one of the main issues impacting members’ benefits and trustees should consider the current options available to members in light of new industry developments. If the investment range has not been reviewed for some time, consider the membership profile, how this might have changed, how members are making investment decisions and whether the existing range includes a facility for members to manage their investment needs over time.
  4. Review the default investment option. A feature of most DC plans is that the majority of members “end up” invested in the default option; this makes it crucially important for trustees and members. Is it effective in varying investment conditions and over time for members’ changing investment needs? Does it protect members who are close to retirement from annuity risk or market risk, while at the same time catering for members with longer time horizons? As DC schemes develop, the member population becomes more diversified, and consequently the existing default option may no longer cater for all groups of members. There may also be an opportunity to improve the efficiency of the default option (in terms of the risk/reward trade off), given the wider range of investment vehicles now available.
  5. Monitor the choices being made by individual plan members (not in aggregate). Review individual member asset allocations and/or individual members’ rates of return. This type of review can provide good insight into whether your DC plan is working, and can point out areas for improvement, such as member education or fund choices.
  6. Assess the effectiveness of your member communications strategy. This is a good time to revisit financial and investment education. Given the market turbulence and economic uncertainty, what information should be provided to plan participants?
  7. Review and revise your plan’s Statement of Investment Policy Principles (SIPP). In the current market environment, fiduciary risk is high and a review of the SIPP can help minimise this risk.
  8. Ascertain if your plan members are engaged at all. Are they knowledgeable about their savings and retirement plan choices? Given the recent market volatility and economic turmoil, this is a good time to revisit engagement and education about investing and retirement planning. Larger employers/trustees may wish to consider focus groups to find out what members see as their challenges, education needs and barriers to understanding.
  9. Assess what kind of retirement income or replacement ratio employees can expect from the plan. If this is projected to be lower than previously expected, action is required sooner rather than later. Consider revising the scheme design, allowing additional member contributions, or reinforcing the importance of saving more outside the plan in order to secure a comfortable retirement for members.
  10. Review the stability and risk exposures of investment managers in light of the current economic turmoil.  Consider the status of the plan’s investment managers(s) and their commitment to continue to develop their offerings to meet member needs.

Sponsored Content

Leave a Comment

Sort content by

What does an effective board look like?

Pension fund boards are complex, evolving, collective bodies and the individuals that serve them face unique challenges. The Rotman-ICPM Board Effectiveness Program is a week-long course designed specifically for pension fund trustees that showcases how an effective board looks and behaves. Pension management beneficiaries are delegating to a body that then delegates to an executive,

ESG rethink can add 40 basis points per month: Hermes

Rigorous Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) management can deliver an extra 40 basis points per month according to Saker Nusseibeh, CEO and head of investment at Hermes Fund Managers. “Where it [ESG] really matters for performance is in consistently avoiding bad governance. You can add 40 basis points per month… Per month!” Nusseibeh told a

International reaction to QSuper’s innovation

Australian fund, QSuper’s creation of eight different investment cohorts for its 440,000 default fund members this month has sparked curiosity and admiration from defined contribution experts in the US, the UK and New Zealand. The investment strategies for each group will be focussed on an estimated retirement outcome for that segment, taking into account the

Investors ignore liability matching at their peril

Two high profile pension funds, ATP of Denmark and HOOPP of Canada, have been very successful in managing their assets in two distinct portfolios. But the practice of fund separation, a portion of the portfolio for liability hedging and another for alpha generation, is not common in pension management. It should be. For these two

Home bias in corporate engagement revealed

Investors should take care in selecting corporate engagement firms to ensure the engagement reflects their portfolio holdings, warn academics at Oxford and Maastricht Universities following a new study which reveals a home bias in such activity. As the investment portfolios of large institutional investors become increasingly global, it is particularly important that they carefully select

The power of benchmarking: GRESB comes of age

Now in its fifth year GRESB, the benchmark that measures the sustainability performance of real estate portfolios, has been influential in changing the sector’s performance and environmental impact. Now Nils Kok, executive director of GRESB and associate professor in finance at Maastricht University, says that infrastructure and private equity assets are ripe for a benchmark

Previous