Skip to main content

You are here

Advertisement

Reader Poll: What’s Your Investment in Plan Committees?

Time spent preparing and delivering quarterly reviews is a critical aspect of an advisor’s work – and one that, for a distinct plurality of NAPA Net readers, is consuming more time.

Certainly every investment committee can be as unique as the plan itself, as varied as the members (or the process that resulted in their committee membership), and as complex as the issues that confront them at any given time – not to mention the advisors who lead them.

Preparation Time

More than 4 in 10 (43%) of this week’s respondents say they spend several hours per client each quarter preparing those reviews. More than a quarter (29%) spend a day per client each quarter, and the rest fell into a highly variable category per client/review. One reader explained, “I delegate most of this work to colleagues at the firm, but I spend around 2-4 hours per client reviewing and preparing for each meeting.”

Those numbers could, of course, vary by the number (and type) of clients. Sure enough, the longer preparation time commitments were reported by those who had more clients – 42% had 25-50 clients, for example, and 28% reported 15-25 clients, while 15% were in the 5-10 client category. The rest were split between 1-5 clients and more than 50 clients.

Of course, it’s not just preparation; there is the delivery of the review. Approximately two-thirds (67%) spend several hours per client per quarter doing so, while 15% spend a day, and a similar number spend more than two weeks. As one reader noted, the math adds up quickly: “Each meeting is typically 1-2 hours, so for 15 meetings a quarter I’d wager I spend 25 hours delivering reviews.”

That was pretty much par for the course for 58% of this week’s respondents, while 42% said they were now spending more time on the process than they had two years ago.

Reader Comments

Readers had a number of additional comments and observations to share, including these:


  • We are forward thinking. Even labeling a committee an “investment committee” falls short. Should be labeled a “Fiduciary Committee.” There is a lot more to a retirement plan than just investing. And there is a lot more to investing than just benchmarking funds/fees.

  • In addition to the standard quarterly investment monitoring reports, we have four different ad-hoc reports that we review throughout the year (Plan Health Report, Year in Review, TDF Due Diligence & Stable Value Due Diligence).

  • Results and outcomes, the true measure if the plan is working.

  • We have run searches for independent fiduciaries for company stock, ESPPs, Multinational Savings Plans and financial wellness programs. There has been a trend more recently to obtain more data around “digital engagement” with the recordkeeper.

  • 90% of advisors are doing it wrong and not helping clients as they should. Focusing solely on fund performance and fees doesn’t lead to results for the plan participants.

  • We have a committee charter template that we review with our clients to better define roles, responsibilities and quorum size. Most committees are 3-9 members from HR, Finance and other departments.

  • Process training for the committee is crucial; having a standardized review model and framework assists the committee in this important task, but educates them along the way... what are we reviewing and why...


Thanks to everyone who participated in our weekly NAPA Net reader poll!

Advertisement