Conference Board Reveals 6 Key Areas to Drive Productivity

Skills development, management capabilities and organizational agility are among the key drivers of team productivity.

Strategies to enhance productivity and success can be influenced by skills development, managerial capabilities and organizational adaptability, according to The Conference Board, a member-driven think tank. Leaders are trying to keep their staff members motivated, engaged and most importantly, productive in the post-pandemic work environment, according to discussion during a June 17 webinar held by the nonprofit.

Marion Devine, principal researcher in human capital for Europe at The Conference Board, broke out six key drivers affecting workplace productivity for firms to consider.

Want the latest retirement plan adviser news and insights? Sign up for PLANADVISER newsletters.

1. Reskilling and Upskilling

Reskilling involves transitioning employees from declining work areas to new, growing sectors by retraining them, Devine explained. Meanwhile, upskilling helps employees adapt to the changing needs of the business by broadening their skill set.

Both strategies require investing in a comprehensive range of skills to ensure employees can quickly adapt to evolving job roles and emerging positions. But it’s crucial, Devine said, for large companies to commit to these areas to maintain workforce agility and growth.  

2. Leaning Into Artificial Intelligence

“AI is now generative, something that everybody can use,” Devine told the virtual audience. “It’s something that is exploding in terms of its use through speech, images and language. We’re seeing that AI can transform how people work.”

AI has the potential to transform how people work by handling simple, repetitive, and administrative tasks, she stated. This shift allows employees to focus on more human and complex tasks that require imagination, creativity, and relationship-building—areas where machines cannot compete. By freeing up time for these activities, AI not only transforms work but also enhances productivity.

3. Diversity and Inclusion

The importance of maintaining ethical standards and adapting to evolving industry spaces is crucial for companies, recommended Devine. She emphasizes that, despite occasional pushback, prioritizing diversity and inclusion is vital not only from a moral standpoint but also for enhancing business productivity. As the industry grows, businesses must continually revisit these principles to stay competitive.

“If you have a diverse workforce, management team and board, you will see gains in terms of profitability, financial performance, innovation and collaboration,” she said

4. Employee Well-Being

Work can be extremely taxing, therefore ensuring employee well-being crucial for productivity, Devine suggested. Making sure that employees have the energy, commitment and imagination needed for their roles is essential. Evidence supports this connection, she said, highlighting the importance of looking after employees to maintain high levels of performance.

5. Chief Human Resources Officer Leadership

One of the fundamental challenges for CHROs is mobilizing their own department to help leaders and HR practitioners understand that productivity is intrinsically linked to their roles, Devine said. Productivity is deeply connected to people, culture and management. Therefore, it’s crucial for the HR function to recognize that enhancing productivity is central to its mission.

A key task for CHROs is to align the HR function with this understanding and encourage a different perspective on productivity. Additionally, CHROs play a vital role in the C-suite by educating its members around a cohesive strategy on driving productivity.

6. Agility and Resilience

Agility is essential for both individuals and organizations, Devine stated. It involves the ability to adapt to the changing needs of customers and the evolving environment, requiring constant strategic adjustments.

“Agility and resilience as an organization means, in very volatile times, the ability of the company to respond quickly to external changes in the business landscape,” she said.

Is that accurate? She was talking about both?

Judge Dismisses 401(k) Excessive-Fee Lawsuit Against PNC Financial

A federal judge in Pennsylvania decided an an expert witness to the plaintiffs was unreliable, leading to a dismissal of the allegations.

PNC Financial Services Group Inc. has had a lawsuit dropped from workers accusing the company of paying excessive recordkeeping fees for their incentive savings plan.   

Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand said in the June 21 decision that the expert witness, named Ty Minnich, used by the workers to discuss 401(k) recordkeeping fees did not use “reliable methodology” in concluding that the plan fees were unreasonable. The case, John McCauley v. PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. et al, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. 

Never miss a story — sign up for PLANADVISER newsletters to keep up on the latest retirement plan adviser news.

In August 2021, John McCauley, a participant of the PNC Incentive Savings Plan, filed an amended complaint against PNC, accusing the financial services company of breaching its fiduciary duty of prudence under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act by failing to properly monitor recordkeeping fees from October 2, 2014, to the present. 

PNC hired Alight Solutions to serve as its recordkeeper in September 2007, according to the legal filing. Alight charged the plan a flat dollar amount per participant for its core services, as well as additional fees for other participant-elective services like loan processing and qualification of domestic relations orders. According to the ruling, Alight never received fees from PNC or the plan that were calculated as asset-based fees.  The plan allocated the cost of Alight’s recordkeeping services to participants’ individual accounts on a pro-rata “asset-based” charge. 

In 2014, the plan’s base recordkeeping fee was $46.55 per participant, and it declined to $32 per participant by January 2022, according to the case documents. 

Expert Witness

To support his claims against PNC, McCauley engaged Minnich as an expert witness. On May 17, 2023, Minnich submitted an expert report, which evaluated the plan’s recordkeeping fees, estimated the reasonable market rate for such fees and calculated the plaintiffs’ damages for paying allegedly excessive fees. 

Minnich argued that PNC “failed to act consistent with industry standards and custom applicable to fiduciaries” causing “the plan to pay recordkeeping and administrative fees in excess of the reasonable market rate.” 

Based on his estimated reasonable market rate, Minnich contended that the plan lost more than $25 million by paying excessive fees. 

PNC disputed Minnich’s conclusions and sought to exclude Minnich as an expert witness, which the court granted. PNC argued that Minnich’s testimony was not reliable because his opinion is “based soley on his experience without using any reproduceable or traceable process,” according to the judge’s ruling. 

Minnich asserted that he based his opinion on his industry experience and three pertinent factors: participant count, the services provided and any ancillary revenue. He argued that the participant count is most important because when the number of participants increases, the recordkeeping fees should exponentially decline.  

“It appears that Mr. Minnich’s opinions are based on his subjective belief and experience and, therefore, he has not demonstrated that it is more likely than not that his testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods,” Wiegand wrote. 

Not Comparable

Minnich’s report also pointed to four other retirement plans that he believes are comparable to the PNC plan and demonstrated that PNC could have negotiated lower fees, but the court found that the four comparable plans “do not salvage the reliability of Minnich’s opinion.” 

In its motion for summary judgment, PNC argued that the plan committee prudently monitored recordkeeping fees through quarterly meetings, benchmarking studies and a request for proposal. 

The PNC Inventive Savings plan contains about $8.1 billion in assets and 80,335 participants, according to the most recent Form 5500 filing. 

PNC did not respond immediately to a request for comment on the decision. 

The law firms representing the plaintiffs are Lynch Carpenter LLP and Miller Shah LLP.  Firms Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP and Youman & Caputo LLC are representing PNC.  

«