Giving time to investment governance

Roger Urwin, global head of content at Towers Watson and governance specialist, says most organisations don’t spend enough time on it, but transformational change is all about giving time to investment governance.

Culture and leadership, for example is so self-evidently important in people organisations and yet it is understated in asset owners, he says.

“The soft stuff really matters. You have to get the right people on the bus, but you also have to get the wrong people off the bus,” he says. “Culture and leadership, and talent and reward are not talked about. Why not? They are key to asset owner performance. This industry has strong managers, but not strong leaders. Leadership is principled, prioritised and very personal, and we need it in the community.”

Effecting change

Before a board embarks on investment policy work, Towers Watson’s transformational change model says mission, values and goals need to be established, and organisational effectiveness needs to be looked at. This includes culture and leadership, talent and reward and the value chain relationships.

Then investment policy work, including strategy, asset allocation, manager selection, and client delivery, can be honed. Execution, which includes actions and decisions, and measurement and review is the last step.

Urwin has recently worked with RailPen in the UK, CalPERS in the US and a large UAE sovereign wealth fund on transformational change and says execution plays a key role in success.

Sponsored Content

“These funds are all interesting to learn from. They all had big journeys and have come out feeling confident about their future. The key is execution; not what you did, but how you did it.”

This is all supported by a research paper conducted in 2007 by Urwin and Professor Gordon Clark from Oxford University that shows the key differentiator of the top performing funds was they were excellent in execution: whatever they did, they did well. But Urwin says it has to be self-generated change.

“We are living in a world of complexity and competition. There is a war for talent, it’s a low-yield environment and there is intense competition for returns. Also the bargaining power of external managers means large asset owners have an opportunity to do something different.”

The strength of differentiation, alignment of strategy and good execution are all part of this journey.

“Funds need to recognise the importance of investment governance, incorporating a new investment model, transforming organisational design and behaviours through top-down and bottom-up work.”

Super majority rules

Urwin works with boards, investment committees and the executives of funds to facilitate change.

He says investment beliefs have to be established at the board and executive level then brought together in a system that allows for the ambiguity within which investment decisions lie.

“Consensus is the lowest common denominator in boards, but it’s the dominant governance model,” he says. “There is a lot of inertia around the existing situation and not a lot of action. That’s a culture that’s grown up which should be challenged. A super majority is a good ploy.”

In establishing its investment beliefs, the CalPERS’ board recently used this strategy, with the votes requiring a two-thirds majority to be passed.

“Investment is decision making under uncertainty, so it is always marginal. A 3:5 vote is commensurate with that type of situation.”

The big elephant in the room, according to Urwin, is that investment committees tend to have many promising discussions, but few good decisions are actually made.

“It’s not time well spent on committees. There is too much oversight without insight. There needs to be more insight and engagement with executive teams who are increasingly senior people, so the investment committees need to be more like peer-to-peer relationships.”

 

Leave a Comment

Sort content by

Tail risk parity, V 1.0

Just when you thought you were safe, the next reiteration of risk parity has arrived. AllianceBernstein’s tail risk parity takes the concept of risk parity, reallocating assets uniformly according to risk, but it uses tail risk, not volatility, as the core measure. The concept of risk parity is a portfolio diversified according to risk, rather

Retirement: a cause worth working on

There are two things that drive the newly appointed global chief operating officer of State Street Global Advisors, Greg Ehret, in his bid to improve the client experience: the retirement business is a cause worth working on and the clients are the reason the business exists. Ehret was appointed to the new position at SSgA,

Pension funds, where banks no longer go?

There continues to be potential for pension capital appearing where bank lending no longer wants to go. Commentators in the UK and continental Europe have heightened expectations that pension funds will step in to help fill the continent’s bank financing gap. Societe Generale, for instance, recently predicted further “disintermediation” by investors sidestepping banks and looking

Building consensus for investment beliefs at CalPERS

An investment-beliefs workshop for the CalPERS board, held in April, revealed five areas, including active management, where the views of the board and staff lacked consensus. The contentious, or unsettled, topics for discussion were active management, private asset classes, sustainability (environmental, social and governance), investment performance targets and stakeholder considerations. At the board workshop, Janine

Behind PGGM’s ESG index

In 2010 PGGM conducted a study to see if it was possible to reduce the number of companies it invested in from 4000 to 400, based on its environmental, social and governance leanings, and still maintain it’s beta risk/return profile. The idea was that the €133-billion ($174-billion) fund would better know and understand what it

Holland’s hybrid: defined ambition

Jan Tamerus, actuary director at PGGM, was instrumental in developing the new Dutch pension defined-ambition structure. Back in 2006, he was involved in looking at the sustainability of the defined benefit system and in concluding it was not in fact sustainable, the idea of defined ambition evolved. One of the key reasons for not going

Previous