Participants Report Low Levels of Trust in Recordkeepers, Advisers

The way retirement plan participants are communicated with drives higher trust levels.

Generalized retirement plan participant trust levels in financial institutions fell from 13% in 2015—Top Box rating of “can just about always trust them to do the right thing”—to only 8% in 2016, according to the National Association of Retirement Plan Participants (NARPP’s) 2016 Participant Trust & Engagement Study.

Trust in one’s respective retirement plan recordkeeper held steady (but still low) at 26% in 2016 (28% in 2015).

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

Confidence in the people running financial institutions was down slightly (20% to 17%) yet unchanged for the recordkeeper, at 40% in both years. On a mildly positive note, those indicating they have had a bad experience with their recordkeeper dropped from 12% to just 7%.

Overall recordkeeper satisfaction scores dropped somewhat from 2015 (41%) to 2016 (36%). The key drivers of overall satisfaction were trust, education, and partnering.

New in this year’s study, trust in financial planners/advisers was only at 9%, meaning participants felt they could “just about always trust them to do the right thing”. Also new, trust in one’s employer registered at a level similar to that of the recordkeeper at 24%.

While still low, scores for satisfaction regarding the information they receive from their recordkeeper’s communication programs has gone up from 38% to 43% “very satisfied”. Factors such as “Information presented to me is always in my best interest” (48%), “Fee information is presented in a way that is easy to understand” (45%), and “the materials are relevant to my personal financial situation” (44%) received moderate scores, but are still below 50%. Only 28% of participants said materials provided by their recordkeeper “motivate me to take action.”

NEXT: Keys to increasing trust and information satisfaction

According to the study report, “Cracking the code on participant engagement in retirement planning,” recordkeeper trust among participants is created by a number of overlapping factors. Among these, communication style with the participant is pre-eminent.

Specifically, the single-most powerful driver of recordkeeper trust (four times stronger than the second most powerful driver) is presenting information to participants in a way that is perceived as being in their best interests. The second most powerful driver of recordkeeper trust is presenting information in a way that motivates people to take an action. Maintaining a positive message (i.e. messages that avoid a fearful or negative tones) is essential, NARPP says. Information such as low projections of retirement replacement ratios and probability of not running out of money may be eroding trust.

The third most important driver of recordkeeper trust is presenting fee information in a way that is easy to understand and is linked to feeling comfortable with financial planning for the future. These are both a function of communication styles and are completely within the control of the recordkeeper and plan sponsor. Lastly, recordkeeper trust has the potential to be lowered by materials containing complicated financial language. When participants don't understand what is being said to them, trust plummets.

The factors driving participants’ satisfaction with the information provided to them by recordkeepers, in order of impact, are:

  • The information presented to me is always in my best interest;
  • The materials are relevant to my personal financial situation;
  • Fee information is presented in a way that is easy to understand;
  • The materials motivate me to take action; and
  • The materials do not contain complicated financial language.
The 2016 study included responses from 5,092 randomly selected participants actively contributing to their defined contribution (DC) retirement plans.

Principal, Groom Law Explain New Fiduciary Rule

A new Q&A pinpoints changes in the final fiduciary regulation.

Principal Financial has partnered with Groom Law Group to publish a Q&A white paper on the new fiduciary rule. It answers such questions as: What is in the new fiduciary regulation and what’s changing? How does the regulation affect 401(k) plan provider selection? What should fiduciaries think about when selecting investments? What are the considerations when weighing active versus passive investments?

“Like advisers, our goal is to minimize disruption for plan sponsors as we work to understand the impact of the new fiduciary regulation,” says Greg Burrows, senior vice president of retirement and income solutions at Principal. “We want to help separate the facts from the myths in this changing environment.”

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

The white paper underscores the fact that the new rule does not directly change the fiduciary duty of a plan sponsor or retirement plan committee. Instead, plan sponsors will see changes in the way their advisers and service providers may exercise any discretionary authority over the plan’s assets, in addition to altering the way they deliver investment advice for compensation. Principal says that the new regulation “makes it substantially easier for a person to be deemed to be providing investment advice as a fiduciary. In fact, merely suggesting that a plan participant consider an investment could make an adviser a fiduciary.”

With respect to recommending a plan provider or recordkeeper that is not the lowest-cost provider, Principal says that it not a requirement of the new rule. Rather, advisers need to meticulously consider providers’ qualifications and the quality of the services offered—along with the reasonableness of fees charged, both direct and indirect.

NEXT: Investments managed by recordkeepers’ affiliates

As to whether the new rule precludes a sponsor from selecting investments managed by an affiliate of their recordkeeper, Principal says the new rule does not prohibit that. In fact, the courts have determined that bundling investment management and recordkeeper services through a single provider is a common industry practice, the company says.

Principal also says that an adviser can recommend a recordkeeper to a sponsor without being considered an ERISA fiduciary, as long as the sponsor is the one making the final decision.

As for whether the new rule favors actively versus passively managed investments, it favors neither, Principal says. As in every other aspect of managing a plan, fiduciaries must act in the best interest of the plan’s participants and act as a prudent person would act under the same circumstances, Principal says. In fact, “plan fiduciaries can reasonably conclude that a particular actively managed investment that they are selecting for the plan could be expected to outperform a comparable passively managed investment.” That said, Principal reminds advisers and sponsors that plan fiduciaries “who prudently select and monitor investments—whether active or passive—are not liable for the underperformance of the investments.”

A number of other providers have created products or services to help advisers and their plan sponsor clients navigate the new fiduciary rule, including Cetera Financial Group and a new partnership including Vertical Management Systems, Envestnet and United Retirement Plan Consultants.

The Principal/Groom Law Group white paper can be downloaded here.

«