C1. Is there Fund expenditure on member Research firms; AIST considers this is an ambiguous indicator that depends on informed education and engagement fund disclosures; the definition of expenditure on member education and member as a proportion of total fund surveys engagement, as well as on marketing. It is likely to be difficult to engagement? marketing expenditure* disaggregate data that is specifically targeted for member (input) retention. We also note that it will be difficult to separately identify expenditure on “group” or brand advertising (e.g., in a multiple product financial conglomerate) from product or single super fund marketing expenditure. We are also uncertain what constitutes a “bad” score for this indicator. Is it a high spend? Member retention is needed as proof of competitiveness, as well as scale. C1. Is there Availability of meaningful and Reviews by others; AIST endorses this indicator but cautions that member informed comparable information on member surveys perception of availability of information is likely to be skewed by member fees, product features engagement. Thus not level playing field. Critical that member engagement? (including insurance) and surveys stratify by characteristics such as age, gender, NESB, risks#* (input) income and account balance. Of course, everyone conforms to PDS requirements, but the fact that most don't read those in detail if at all demonstrates how difficult this issue is. Further, difficulty in gaining agreement on RG97 demonstrates fractured industry views. C1. Is there Fund and product switching Member surveys; The absence of such costs should be a positive indicator, but informed costs for members research firms AIST cautions that administrative fees are likely to be gamed. As member (administrative, search and SuperStream reforms are bedded down transaction costs should engagement? learning costs) and costs to reduce. Learning and search costs are still very high given opt out of insurance (input) current disclosure regimes, especially in the Choice environment.
C1. Is there informed member engagement? Fund expenditure on member education and engagement as a proportion of total marketing expenditure* (input) Research firms; fund disclosures; fund surveys AIST considers this is an ambiguous indicator that depends on the definition of expenditure on member education and engagement, as well as on marketing. It is likely to be difficult to disaggregate data that is specifically targeted for member retention. We also note that it will be difficult to separately identify expenditure on “group” or brand advertising (e.g., in a multiple product financial conglomerate) from product or single super fund marketing expenditure. We are also uncertain what constitutes a “bad” score for this indicator. Is it a high spend? Member retention is needed as proof of competitiveness, as well as scale. C1. Is there informed member engagement? Availability of meaningful and comparable information on fees, product features (including insurance) and risks#* (input) Reviews by others; member surveys AIST endorses this indicator but cautions that member perception of availability of information is likely to be skewed by engagement. Thus not level playing field. Critical that member surveys stratify by characteristics such as age, gender, NESB, income and account balance. Of course, everyone conforms to PDS requirements, but the fact that most don't read those in detail if at all demonstrates how difficult this issue is. Further, difficulty in gaining agreement on RG97 demonstrates fractured industry views. C1. Is there informed member engagement? Fund and product switching costs for members (administrative, search and learning costs) and costs to opt out of insurance (input) Member surveys; research firms The absence of such costs should be a positive indicator, but AIST cautions that administrative fees are likely to be gamed. As SuperStream reforms are bedded down transaction costs should reduce. Learning and search costs are still very high given current disclosure regimes, especially in the Choice environment.
sub039-superannuation-assessment.docx