Lazard Asset Management, Edinburgh Partners Ltd. and ARGA Investment Management replace Hansberger Global Investors as sub-adviser to the Vanguard International Value Fund.
“After careful evaluation, we determined that the new
investment advisory arrangement will better serve shareholders over the long
term,” said Vanguard Chief Executive Bill McNabb. “We thank Hansberger and its
investment professionals for their dedication and commitment to our
shareholders over the last 12 years.”
Lazard will manage 39% of the fund’s assets, Edinburgh 34%
and ARGA 24%, with the remaining 3% of the fund’s assets in cash.
Mercer believes 2013 is a year for many defined
contribution (DC) plan sponsors to take a fresh look at objectives, investment
options and participant communications.
The firm suggests ten steps DC plan
sponsors should take in 2013:
Define success: Optimize each step
leading to “better” retirement outcomes and spend-down strategies—A successful DC plan hinges on four factors: increasing
participation, increasing the savings amount, investing appropriately and
spending wisely. Employers can optimize their plans through skillful,
intentional intervention based on the plan’s demographics and employee
behavior. Costs should be minimized where appropriate to increase the “value”
of each factor.
“In general, what we’ve seen is that
DC decisionmaking has focused on what competitors are doing. Plan sponsors have
been creating competitive programs without thinking about ultimate objections.
We are suggesting sponsors take a step back and recognize how different plan
elements played together can help participants move in the right direction,”
Amy Reynolds, a partner in Mercer’s Retirement business and U.S. Defined
Contribution Leader, explained to PLANADVISER. “When talking about
costs, we suggest plan sponsors try to manage costs borne by participants so
participants have the opportunity to maximize long-term results.”
Recalibrate your default option:
Enrollment, deferral escalation and investments—Reevaluate the level of auto-enrollment,
auto-escalation and re-enrollment in driving participant behavior, with
the goal of accumulating sufficient retirement assets. The default investment
option should provide a professionally managed, well-diversified, single-option
solution for participants who cannot or do not want to make asset allocation
and rebalancing decisions on their own. Review the appropriateness
of your default option for your unique participant population. If you
offer target-risk funds, consider switching to target-date funds (TDFs). If you
offer off-the-shelf target-date funds, re-evaluate the asset-allocation glide
path construction or consider offering customized target-date funds based
on your plan demographics.
White label your investment options:
Drive participant behavior—Many
participants build their portfolio based on an investment option’s name
recognition (manager selection) rather than focusing on asset allocation.
Consider “white labeling” your investment options—unbranded and custom—designed
for the plan. A custom approach allows you to offer fewer investment options by
building a well diversified portfolio that otherwise may be difficult to offer
on a standalone basis. You also have the flexibility to add or replace managers
without the communication and administrative headaches of a branded option.
“Plan sponsors should try to move participants away from
allegiance to specific fund managers and more to [the] types of funds in which
they invest,” Reynolds said. “Participants’ decisions should be driven by what
each fund will accomplish from an investment perspective.”
(Cont’d…)
Maximize the impact of your
communications strategy: Assess the right content and delivery—Many plan sponsors offer a tiered investment structure to
help participants make better investment allocation decisions. Make sure the
investment options are communicated by tier in the participant
education/enrollment materials and on the plan’s website/online tools.
Reynolds explained that the tier
structure Mercer is referring to is what the firm advocates for plan sponsors
to choose investment options that address each type of investor: one focused on
the investor who wants decisionmaking handled for them, i.e. target-date funds;
a second focused on participants that want investments to mirror the market;
and a third for active investors. “Some plan sponsors just list investment
vehicles without categorizing them for participants,” according to Reynolds.
“The same structure, applied to committee work, should lead to the way the plan
is presented to participants.”
In addition, Reynolds suggested DC
plan sponsors engage participants more in their plan decisions. She noted that
participant fee disclosure was a nonevent, and there was not much feedback from
participants, but plan sponsors need to educate participants about how such
information can help them make selections for the best retirement savings
strategy.
Help participants understand their retirement income:
Anticipate the impact of adding projections to participant statements—Participants cannot relate to large lump-sum amounts in the
distant future. Tell them how much monthly income, in today’s dollars, they can
expect in retirement given their current balance, contribution rate and years
to expected retirement. Educate participants about how actions they take now
may impact that outcome.
(Cont’d…)
Develop a spend-down strategy: Don’t
leave participants' retirements at risk—Handing
retirees a lump-sum check and wishing them “good luck” does not cut it. While
we would all like more developed retirement income tools and additional
regulatory guidance, we cannot put our near-retirement employees on hold
indefinitely. It’s time to start crafting real solutions for the spend-down
challenge.
Even offering a lump-sum
distribution option in a DC plan is providing participants with a spend-down
strategy—take it all or leave it in to accumulate earnings, Reynolds stated.
“We think it’s time for plan sponsors to think more strategically about that,”
she said. “Plan sponsors should help participants think about all of their
retirement income, including defined benefit (DB) plans and Social Security.
Offer installment options, an option to purchase annuity or an annuity option
in the DC plan. It all comes down to deciding the plan sponsor’s comfort level
from a fiduciary perspective and the level of educational support it can
provide to participants.”
Complete a compliance audit: The IRS
is knocking—With so much governance focus on
fees, many plans have gone for years without a compliance audit. With both the
Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and Department of Labor (DOL) increasing their
focus on compliance, now is a good time to remedy that. Best practice includes
checking all documentation and communications, as well as administration and
transactions.
“Plan sponsors should not only look
at their own processes, but that of third-party administrators [TPAs] and
recordkeepers,” Reynolds suggested. “They should revisit how the plan is being
administered to comply with plan provisions as well as regulations.”
Understand fiduciary responsibilities: Know the limitations
of your recordkeeper’s role and the responsibilities you retain—While it may be convenient to let your vendor “take charge”
of your plan, never forget that when the DOL, IRS or plan litigator comes
knocking, it will be at your door, not your recordkeeper’s. You need to take
control of your plan and ensure that decisions are made from an unbiased point
of view.
(Cont’d…)
Focus on fees: Investments,
recordkeeping and much more—New
fee disclosure regulations—408(b)(2) and 404(a)—have led to increased scrutiny
of all plan fees. Review and benchmark investment and recordkeeping fees
separately, rationalize the fee allocation methodology and document your review
process to support a strong governance framework and help defend against
excess-fee litigation. Evaluate moving from mutual funds to collective trusts
and/or separately managed accounts in order to reduce investment fees.
Assess a discretionary relationship:
It's not all or nothing—Appointing
an adviser to provide discretionary delegated solutions for a plan in its
entirety, or for select investment options within a plan, transfers more
fiduciary responsibility to the adviser and may result in time savings for
management as well as the potential for increased diversification, improved
performance and decreased costs. Determining which governance structure is
right for you is a critical component of the DC plan management process.
“We are starting to see plan
sponsors engage advisers more in decisionmaking and discretionary roles,”
Reynolds said. “For example, if the committee doesn’t have the expertise and/or
time to monitor investments and make changes as appropriate, it can engage the
adviser to do so.”
As defined contribution plans move
from supplemental retirement savings vehicles to primary vehicles, plan
sponsors are taking a more active management role with their plans, according
to Reynolds.
“It’s no longer a situation where DC plan sponsors can
simply ‘set it and forget it,’ ” she stated. “The trend is for plan sponsors to
regularly evaluate whether their DC plans are successful for both the organization
and its employees. As a result, plan sponsors are more active in reviewing plan
objectives, more prescriptive when it comes to investment options and more
invested in communicating with employees who want to understand how to achieve
their own retirement income goals.”