Size Matters with Investment Committees

An employer’s retirement plan investment committee will be at its best when it is big enough but not too unwieldy, according to a new study.

In its new review of how group decisionmaking theory applies to the operation of a typical plan investment panel, Vanguard Investment Counseling and Research said investment committees are best at five to 10 members.

A properly sized group can take advantage of the power of a vigorous discussion and disagreement without getting bogged down in too many like opinions, Vanguard said.

For more stories like this, sign up for the PLANADVISERdash daily newsletter.

“Heterogeneous groups appear to be highly important because they can broaden the experience of the group and engender healthy debate,’ the report said. “As such, investment committees should strive for member diversity in knowledge, skills, abilities, personality, attitudes, and demographics. Committee members who express different opinions can remedy the negative effects of groupthink, can reduce confirmation bias, and can ameliorate the polarizing effects of groups.’

If necessary, researchers said, the committee can rely on a “devil’s advocate’ or can simply invite outside members to attend and participate in meetings.

It’s also helpful to be able to rely on a number of people’s recall about how the company dealt with a particular situations in the past. “So, for example, solutions to problems or questions can often be solved when different group members recall how things were handled in the past,’ the study said. “In addition, group discussions can trigger recall of important memories in group members that would not occur when individuals work alone.’

Other findings include:

  • Committees can facilitate the use of expertise by providing the group with background information about committee members by giving out resumes, bios, or curricula vitae every time a new member joins the committee, or at the very least once a year.
  • Social loafing can be minimized when each member’s contribution to the group can be clearly identified, when group members trust one another, when involvement in group activities is high, and when members are made to feel personally responsible for their inputs and the group’s overall performance.

“Taking these steps cannot guarantee successful group decisionmaking,’ the Vanguard researchers concluded. “It is clear, however, that investment committees can improve their performance. By following basic guidelines when forming and operating their committees—guidelines based on fundamental research on group decisionmaking—committees can reduce the problems associated with group decisions while leveraging the full power of their members.’

Court Says 404(c) No Defense in Fiduciary Stock Suit

The U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire determined that Tyco International Ltd. cannot use Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) section 404(c) protection in its defense against participants’ fiduciary claims regarding its retirement plan company stock fund offering.

U.S. District Judge Paul Barbadoro said in his opinion that several factors led him to his conclusion, including that section 404(c) is unclear as to whether it can be used to bar a claim based on a fiduciary’s designation of investment options. Barbadoro noted that section 404(c) requires the DoL to adopt regulations, explaining when a participant or beneficiary has sufficient control over his assets to be subject to a section 404(c) defense—but it is unclear whether this can be applied to designated investment options by the fiduciary.

According to the court, the DoL reasonably determined in the preamble to its regulations that losses that result from a fiduciary’s designation decision are neither a “direct” nor a “necessary” result of a participant’s exercise of control over plan assets, and the court pointed out that both the Supreme Court and the 1st Circuit have recognized in similar circumstances that an agency’s reasonable interpretation of its own regulations in a regulatory preamble is entitled to deference.

For more stories like this, sign up for the PLANADVISERdash daily newsletter.

In the case, participants claim Tyco and other defendants were negligent in designating the Tyco Stock Fund as an investment option in its retirement plan and allowing participants to invest in the fund. The company denied their claims and asserted an affirmative defense based on section 404(c).

The participants claim that the price of Tyco International’s stock was grossly inflated during the class period as a result of undisclosed looting and pervasive accounting fraud by its senior management, which caused them to experience substantial losses when the company’s true financial condition was exposed.

The court order is available here.

«