Ezra’s guide to good investment governance

Co chair of global consulting at Russell, Don Ezra, says the progress towards best practice in investment governance is painfully slow. He spoke to Amanda White about why that path is worth enduring and some principles for creating a good governance structure.

Don Ezra, co chair of global consulting at Russell, believes a distinction between governance and management is still relevant when it comes to discussing investments.

“Management is about running an organisation, governance is about seeing that it is run well,” he says. “A simple definition of governance is that it is the decision and oversight structure established in any enterprise.”

While that seems a simple definition, it is surprising how many pension funds struggle with governance structures.

Numerous academic studies have found that barriers to excellences in pension fund management have been “poor process”. In the 2001 Myners Review of Institutional Investment in the UK, Myners pointed out two things: One is that decisions should be taken only by persons or organisations with the skills, information and resources necessary to take them effectively.

Sponsored Content

And the second, as Ezra says is more subtle, is decision-makers do not need to be experts, but they need to know enough to be able to assess the advice they are given by experts, and to have the experience and skill to mount a sophisticated challenge to the advice received.

But Ezra says this lesson has not been broadly learned, as board of trustees often feel they should rubber-stamp recommendations made to them by experts.

It is a fine line between knowledge and interpretation.

“I read somewhere that the difference between data and information is human interaction,” Ezra says. “And a lot of it is common sense and faith. Imagine if you had two situations, one where the decision making was easy, and the other where you were overburdened with structure. The first one would get you better results, you would think.”

Ezra, who has been studying and observing investment governance for some years, has changed his tune about the need for academic research in the area.

“For years I’ve been calling for academic studies on this, but I’ve been stopped because of the thinking by Ram Charam that the quality of dialogue between the board and management is hard to measure,” he says.

In “Boards that Deliver” Charam says: “No matter how sophisticated the math, such research misses how directors actually interact, work together, and contribute.”

While Ezra says boards and executives should assess each situation as it arises, he also says there are two basic principles of good investment governance.

Firstly each type of decision should have clarity as to where the three words ‘inputs’, ‘decides’ and ‘oversees’ go. An overriding theme accompanying this is for decision makers to seek clarity and avoid duplication.

The second principle is for each decision, ask three questions: What are the knowledge requirements? What are the time requirements? Do we have someone, or a group, that meets these qualifications?

He says that for the most part pension funds fall short of good governance by having poor processes and over-elaborate oversight reports.

But this also leads to a Catch-22 situation, where there is insufficient delegation of responsibility because boards and investment committees are not confident of the monitoring processes.

“It’s not easy for those doing the monitoring who may simply want to know if it’s ok and the report is multiple pages long. Big reports are typically given by junior staff to those higher up. It’s like a child boasting to their parents, there are too many levels of complexity in reporting,” he says. “Consultants do it too, it’s like proof and pride of what they’ve done.”

He says boards should dictate that they simply want “the essence” for their monitoring and an alert, and more detail, when it’s not going well.

“Give me traffic light protocols, once a year I’ll look at everything that is green, but if something is amber I want to look at it now, and if it’s red why have we waited this long?”

Decision making is an art, he says, but so is report writing.

“The ideal report for me is a test of whether you can fold it and put it in your pocket.”

Leave a Comment

Sort content by

Academics and industry unite

The gargantuan impact of systemic risk in global financial markets has been corroborated by a consortium of industry and academics collaborating to provide independent quantitative research, insight and leadership on systemic risk. Driven by director of MIT’s Laboratory for Financial Engineering,  Andrew Lo, senior managing director at State Street Global Markets, Jessica Donohue, and managing

Rethink remuneration

Institutional investors around the world have been lobbying for the right to have a say on pay, a right to have an input into the remuneration of the executives in the companies they invest in. In June the UK’s business secretary, Vince Cable, laid out new plans that will give shareholders three-yearly votes on executive

Endowments fall
from grace

US college and university endowments have gone from pioneers in the adoption of socially responsible investing (SRI) to markedly trailing the rest of the investment industry in integrating environmental social and corporate governance (ESG), new research reveals. The Boston-based Tellus Institute, an independent not-for-profit think-tank, looked at 464 endowments and was damning in its findings,

Kay Review recommendations tackle short-termism

Co-head of responsible investment at the £32 billion Universities Superannuation Scheme, David Russell, says asset manager engagement with companies should move away from its “almost myopic focus on remuneration” to other issues that impact value and strategy. His comments come on the back of the final report of the Kay Review of the UK equity

POLL: Which strategy within emerging markets debt do you find the most compelling?

mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

CalPERS: “opaquely transparent”

A Columbia Business School case study on CalPERS has criticised the fund for being “opaquely transparent”, with a computation of investment expenses revealing the fund pays three-to-four times its peers in fees. Written by Columbia professor of business Andrew Ang and Columbia CaseWorks fellow, Jeremy Abrams, Californian dreamin’: The mess at CalPERS examines the political,

Previous