Value for Members


What does TPR say?

  • Trustees of DC schemes have a legal duty to produce a Value for Members (VFM) assessment and include findings in their annual Chair statement;
  • The VFM assessment can have a significant impact on members’ savings and help safeguard positive member outcomes;
  • When compiling the VFM assessment, trustees should adopt a proportionate approach, based on the characteristics of their scheme; and
  • It is strongly recommended that DB schemes assess value for members to help ensure good member outcomes.

Read the guidance here.

What do we think?

TPR has rightly identified that charges and transaction costs have a significant impact on member outcomes. We agree with TPR that value is more than 'low cost', and trustees should adopt a proportionate approach. However, there is still a danger the assessment becomes a ‘tick-box’ exercise, which doesn’t look beyond the most readily identifiable costs. We have summarised below some trustee considerations for four areas highlighted by TPR. Some of these require qualitative rather than quantitative assessments, but are important for a holistic value assessment.*

Scheme management and governance

  • Do you have a clearly defined strategy and objectives for defined contribution (DC) benefits? If not, it will be difficult to establish whether they are being delivered effectively and value obtained.
  • Do DC matters get sufficient airtime at trustee meetings, and is there sufficient focus on DC matters as part of the trustee training plan?
  • Does the in-house management team have the skills to manage the DC arrangements? Where teams have been scaled back, the needs of any legacy DB benefits often dominate available resource.
  • Are your advisers and providers fit for purpose? DC work was often provided as an add-on, but some firms have developed strong DC practices that may be better suited to your needs.
  • Do you understand what members actually want from the scheme in terms of outcomes and support? To judge the effectiveness of expenditure, it can be helpful to seek members’ views. Indeed, TPR’s DC code states that trustees should actively seek out the views of members and take this into consideration when assessing VFM.

Administration

  • In addition to costs and turnaround times, trustees should consider other measures of administration quality. For example, when mistakes are made, how proactive is the supplier in putting things right and how transparent are they about what has happened? Is the root cause of issues addressed or do the same errors crop up repeatedly? Is the MI adequate to enable effective trustee oversight? How strong is project and change management support? Is there a named contract manager?
  • Is your contract and the governance of the contract fit for purpose? Having an up to date contract and knowing who is making sure that the right things happen at the right time will help to support the management of the service.
  • With an ever-increasing spotlight on data and cyber security, trustees must be confident in their provider’s relevant processes and controls, to ensure members are adequately protected.

Investment governance

  • For schemes with mixed member demographics and legacy benefits, there may be a need to have alternative lifestyle options, even if this costs more. So, in addition to a default lifestyle option that targets drawdown at retirement, an option that targets cash might also be offered.
  • Low fund management charges do not necessarily imply good value, as factors such as performance and volatility can impact member outcomes too.  A recent industry survey of diversified growth funds (a common choice for member defaults in recent years), showed a difference between the best and worst 3-year performance in excess of 6% p.a.
  • When assessing value, trustees should interpret transaction charges with care, and consider those that are beneficial, versus those that are not. The regulations require that transaction costs are explicitly disclosed, but it is challenging to understand what the numbers mean, and it is important to consider which costs are incurred to drive performance and take advantage of market opportunities, against those that are generating revenue through ‘churn’.
  • Many schemes provide members with additional fund choices that can be used alongside or instead of the default option. Whilst a scheme offering a wider choice might be seen as better value, research demonstrates that the larger the choice, the more likely members are to disengage and make no choice. A smaller and more thoughtfully selected range of funds will often be of greater value to members.  
  • It is difficult to assess value across the whole area unless you have an up to date set of trustee investment beliefs.

Communications

  • To derive maximum value, members must engage with the scheme and make decisions to suit their own circumstances, particularly on investment choices and contributions. Trustees should therefore investigate how best to engage members, so that they are equipped to make key decisions.  This may require more expenditure, rather than less. 

*As the legal obligation currently relates to defined contribution (DC) benefits, the examples provided are DC related. However, trustees should be aware that TPR recommends that similar assessments are undertaken for defined benefit schemes.

What do others do?

What is the right DC scheme for you?

The sponsor’s governance committee wanted to consider their DC provision and asked us to support them through the process. We talked them through their options to find potential solutions.

Read more

The challenge

The sponsor had put in place a contract based scheme early in the 2000s, and had changed provider in 2007. As the scheme had grown and become the main scheme for employees, and the governance committee had taken a more active role in the scheme, it was becoming clear that the solution was not matching the needs of the sponsor nor the scheme members.

They had been speaking to existing advisers, that weren’t independent from a potential solution, and the advice they were getting would vary and was open to conflict. Should they stick with a contract based scheme as the right solution for the future, or should they consider switching to a Master Trust, or even setting up their own Trust based scheme on either a bundled or unbundled basis?

Muse was appointed to support the review as a result of our independence from the potential solutions – we were able to comment on the merits and drawbacks of each approach, as opposed to focusing on the one that allows us to recommend our own solution.

The approach

We suggested running a workshop that included both sponsor and governance committee representatives to consider the options available to them. In advance we shared key information about each of the options, as well as a number of questions for the attendees to consider. The aim was to capture and agree the objectives for the pension scheme. What would make the scheme a success for the sponsor, and what additional objectives would make the scheme successful from a member’s point of view?

The outcome

The workshop was a great opportunity for all parties to share their views and whilst, as always in these meetings, there were some disagreements, a common ground was found, and a set of objectives was agreed. Each of the options was considered against the objectives, and the conclusion as to the right type of arrangement was made.

Key learnings

  • Beware the conflicts of interest in the DC space. It is likely that at least one of your existing advisers can ‘take the problem away’, but if it is not the right solution, then your problems could multiply.
  • The differences between contract-based and trust-based schemes are diminishing. Governance requirements for contract-based schemes are rightly increasing, but they are also increasingly flexible, meaning the need to have an own-trust solution is reducing.
  • An agreed set of objectives that capture both the sponsor and member needs, can help direct you to the single solution that works best for all.

Moving to a Master Trust

We helped our client to review their DC arrangements who later decided that a Master Trust might be right for them. But they needed our support and independence to test the waters.

Read more

The challenge

The company had recently undertaken a strategic review of its DC arrangements and concluded that there were efficiencies to be made in the DC running costs. A Master Trust might provide the most cost efficient means of providing the DC benefits, but as their DC adviser also runs a Master Trust, the company recognised that the adviser would be conflicted.

We were appointed as a result of our independence and ability to objectively assess and comment on the market, as well as helping to capture our client’s requirements. We led an independent review of options, which subsequently developed into a selection exercise, once it became clear that a Master Trust was most appropriate for the company.

The approach

We developed a request for proposal (RfP) built around the company’s requirements for cutting costs, reducing the governance burden and providing all its DC arrangements under one umbrella. Working with the company, we short-listed a selection of five different Master Trust providers (covering different approaches) and asked them for a response. Based on these responses, we were able to choose three providers that could best meet the company’s requirements.

Having decided that a Master Trust was the best option, the client agreed to proceed with a selection exercise. We then developed a more detailed RfP focusing on the investment product, services to members, transition costs and implementation process. Each provider was given the opportunity to meet the company and ask questions about its requirements. We summarised the responses for the company focusing on what was most important to make a decision and providing independent commentary. The providers presented their propositions to the company in a day of face to face meetings. The company assessed each provider using a selection criteria matrix, prepared by Muse, with criteria weighted by importance.

Following the presentations, it became clear that one of the providers could be discounted leaving the choice between one of two providers. As each provider offered a good product, with good service, at a competitive price, we were asked to build a business case for each to aid the company’s decision making.

The business case set out a side-by-side comparison of the costs to move to a Master Trust for the company and members, and the value that could be added to members through the investment strategy, administration, communications strategy, guidance/ advice and options for members to take their benefits flexibly at retirement.

The outcome

The Master Trust providers were compared in light of their services, product and value to the company and members. A conclusion was made to move the DC arrangements to the provider that the company felt would best meet its and the members’ needs.

The Master Trust market is laden with conflicts, and it is often the case that advisers could move their client into their own Master Trust solution. This might be an easy option, but not necessarily the right one for members.

We were able to support our client, provide an independent assessment of the Master Trust market, and help them make an appropriate decision. We have no commercial ties or vested interests with any supplier, and our objective input was invaluable in helping the client reach a decision.

Key learnings

  • The Master Trust market is rapidly developing. A time will come for consolidation. It is important to know that assets are secure and that discontinuance and exit provisions are clearly understood.
  • Costs vary by provider and can include AMCs, monthly administration charges, implementation fees, annual governance charges, at-retirement costs to members and advice charges. Be clear on all the costs and extra charges before making the decision to move to a Master Trust.
  • New providers are coming to an already saturated market and are unknown in respect of their quality and capabilities, and their ability to achieve scale. Consider all the risks.
  • Understand the member experience and how the provider will engage and educate members on your behalf and the additional costs to tailor communications.
  • Be comfortable in the governance structure and independence of the Master Trust’s Trustee Board.

Resourcing the Pensions Department

Our client asked us to conduct a benchmarking exercise investigating in-house company pension teams. During a series of interviews, 10 companies shared their current resourcing structures, activities, challenges and drivers.

Read more

How do you know if you are resourced effectively?

Our client asked us to conduct a benchmarking exercise investigating in-house company pension teams. During a series of interviews, 10 companies shared their current resourcing structures, activities, challenges and drivers.

We gained valuable insights covering schemes with a membership range of 15,000 to 130,000 and scheme assets from £1.5bn to £10bn (with other clients, the schemes approached have been smaller as they have to be relevant to the client's scheme size). We openly and confidentially discussed how their pension teams are resourced, what drives their decisions and the challenges they face in a continually changing environment.

Same challenges, different answers

Pensions departments face a number of challenges and influencers. Some are common and familiar: complexity of benefit design and investment strategy, and pensions within a total reward strategy.

It is those that are less familiar and only now growing in prominence that challenge accepted roles and structures. For example, the level of member engagement, Trustee and corporate approaches to governance, de-risking journey plans, data issues, liability management exercises, auto-enrolment and the increasing importance of a strong communications strategy.

We also noted significant changes in the demands on pensions departments and the skill sets required to meet them. The pensions team is increasingly expected to be involved in strategic and journey planning.

No two pensions departments are alike and each is rising to these challenges in their own way.

New skills

There is an increasing need for specialist skills within the team. Financial controls and investment expertise are becoming highly valued skills. Relationship management is fast becoming a ‘must-have', including contract management and facilitation skills as well as the ability to balance the demands of a number of stakeholders.

Working in such a rapidly changing environment is arguably having the most noticeable impact on the role played by the Pensions Manager and the skills required to fulfil that role effectively. It is commonly asserted that the role of the Pensions Manager is evolving, but the big question is ‘Will the role exist in ten years, and if the answer is yes, what will it look like?'!

Everybody knows that one size does not fit all...

It goes without saying that there is no universally applicable solution or magic formula, but neither is there a widely-accepted starting point. It is crucial that companies develop the solution that best fits their circumstances and culture and make sure it is adaptable to changes.

Given likely resource and headcount constraints, the changing requirements and the increasing conflicts, a number of companies are reviewing their resourcing against the challenges they face, the demands on their team and the priorities of all stakeholders.

Key learnings

  • Evolution of the Pensions Manager role is driven by an increasing demand for new skills to confront the challenges now facing sponsoring employers and Trustee Boards of pension schemes.
  • In facing these challenges, Pensions departments are finding different answers.
  • There is no easily identifiable key driver of change or solution. It is important to consider resourcing within the full context.
  • It is crucial to find the solution that fits your circumstances best. Priorities should be determined with input from key stakeholders.

DC Processes and SLAs

Understanding the different roles and responsibilities, ensuring appropriate SLAs are in place for all steps, and managing risks in the handover is crucial to ensuring effective administration and a positive member experience. 

Read more

Setting the scene

Pension administration processes often involve a number of interactions between different parties.  Understanding the different roles and responsibilities, ensuring appropriate SLAs are in place for all steps, and managing risks in the hand over is crucial to ensuring effective administration and a positive member experience. It’s important that as technology evolves and the parties involved change, the processes are revisited to ensure they continue to meet Trustee requirements.

Our client was implementing a new DC platform provider. The existing DB administration remained in-house. The new provider had proposed their standard SLAs, and the client wanted to ensure they were fit for purpose and in-line with good practice. We were appointed to use our experience and expertise to assess the SLAs and DC processes.

How do you determine an appropriate SLA?

To understand whether the proposed SLAs were appropriate, we undertook a review of the new DC processes and the interfaces between payroll, finance and the in-house administrator to:

  • Ensure all activities were encapsulated within the SLA.
  • Assess whether are any risks were present in the processes, particularly in the exchanges between parties.
  • Understand how the activities completed by the platform provider sat within the whole end-to-end process, which is ultimately upon what the member experience is based.  

We met openly with the programme manager and business analysts responsible for developing the new processes to ensure we had a full understanding, and to identify any constraints.

We also reviewed the SLAs proposed by the platform provider against what we would expect to see based on our experience of the market and client projects. We undertook an analysis of the number of DC administration transactions the client could expect to perform in the subsequent years using historic client data to help test whether the SLAs felt appropriate.

We reported to the client on our findings and gave our reassurance on the effectiveness of the processes, highlighting key risks and providing guidance on the proposed SLAs.

We also provided the client with a detailed end-to-end DC SLA for the DC processes encapsulating steps performed by all parties, and enabling the client to truly understand and measure the member experience.

The results

With our support, the client was able to negotiate alterations and reach a level of comfort with the SLAs proposed by their new provider (not only that these were in line with market practice, but also that they were appropriate for the volumes of work expected to be undertaken).

By reviewing the DC processes, we were able to help our client put in place an end-to-end SLA, which covers each step in the process, including internal parties like payroll and HR. Our review has helped the client, platform provider and in-house administration team mitigate risk inherent in the processes and develop detailed work instructions, with clear demarcation of responsibilities between the parties.

Each party has now signed up to these SLAs and they are an effective tool for monitoring the efficiency of a process. However, it is equally important that the aim to hit an SLA target doesn’t sacrifice process and output quality. It is about striking the right balance between timeliness of a process, and the quality of the member experience.

Key learnings

  • Understanding the processes is critical to ensuring all activities are captured in provider SLAs and any risks are being appropriately managed by the provider before entering into a contractual arrangement.
  • End-to-end SLAs that belong to the provider can help the Trustee see through the full process and where each activity is undertaken.
  • SLAs help to monitor the effectiveness, efficiency and timeliness of a process. But they cannot measure quality. Putting in the wrong SLA, can damage quality service delivery, so the right balance needs to be struck.

How can we help?

    TPR has stated that where a VFM exercise reveals areas of poor value, trustees must identify what can be done to improve things. We have significant experience of helping trustees address VFM related shortcomings and using the annual process to add value rather than merely assess value.

     

    Scheme management and governance

    • We can assist the trustee board to develop or refresh its DC strategy and objectives, and draw up a business plan to support implementation.
    • We can assess the effectiveness of the existing DC governance structure and propose any changes necessary. For example, in a mixed benefits trust, you might decide to establish a dedicated DC Committee and document roles and responsibilities for key stakeholders.
    • We can fill key resource gaps such as secretariat support, specialist DC pensions management skills, or project management.
    • We can review as to whether it makes sense to continue providing defined contribution benefits through the existing trust arrangement, or whether an alternative route (GPP, Master Trust, or Sole Trusteeship) might be more suitable.
    • We can assess the value of projects using a value for members framework and provide principles for assessing value; the output of which will be a reasonable judgement of value. Learnings from project deemed to be either good value or not, will derive considerations for future projects.

    Administration

    • We can benchmark the charges, services, technology and control environment offered by your existing provider. We use the output from this process to agree what should be changed, and can help ensure this is documented and implemented.
    • If it is necessary to look at alternative providers, we can conduct a market review ensuring potential providers are well‑aware of and able to meet your requirements, and if a decision is made to move to another provider, assist with the transition.
    • We can use our market knowledge to provide input to support your legal adviser when drawing up key contractual terms.
    • Where legacy problems are identified that require rectification, we can oversee the process on behalf of the trustee and provide regular reporting.

    Investment governance

    • We can facilitate the trustee board in articulating their investment beliefs and strategy for defined contribution benefits. This can then be implemented by the scheme’s DC investment adviser.
    • We can benchmark the cost and support provided by your existing DC investment adviser. If necessary, we can facilitate an adviser review and selection process.

    Communications

    • We can benchmark the cost and support provided by your existing communications adviser, and/ or conduct a market review and selection process.

Who to contact

Image of Barry Mack

Barry Mack

I specialise in governance, trustee effectiveness, pension management (including administration) strategy and large change management projects.

View Profile

What do you do?

I am a Director of Muse Advisory and specialise in DB & DC pensions, governance (especially funding, investment and risk management), trustee effectiveness, outsourced pensions management, pension management (including administration) strategy and large pension change management projects. I particularly enjoy facilitating trustees to fully articulate their objectives and beliefs and, consequently, to be as effective as they can be.

What is your background?

I’m an actuary and have worked in governance, administration consulting and DC arenas at Mercer and Hymans Robertson. At Hymans Robertson I was a partner, Head of Governance, Risk Group chairman and DC Governance Committee chairman.

What do you bring to Muse?

More than 30 years of financial, pensions and business experience supported with strategic, technical and commercial skill, and a heavy dose of pragmatism.

What do you do for fun?

Bellringing, photography, Lego! And watching F1 with my two (now grown up) sons.

Email Barry Mack
Image of Ian McQuade

Ian McQuade

I have 30 years’ experience across pension scheme management and administration, governance, project management and review, selection and implementation work.

View Profile

What do you do?

I help our clients run their pension schemes more effectively. That might be leading projects to improve the administration, advisory services, or management of their pension schemes, supporting them in setting the Scheme’s strategy, or just helping them deliver complex projects. As a Director, I also do a lot to promote the business to new prospects and support the day to day management.

What is your background?

There have been three themes to my life in pensions. Firstly, the administration and management of pension schemes – in the dim and distant past I ran the operations for a large Third Party Administrator. Secondly, all things DC – I first got involved in Money Purchase schemes when contracting out was introduced in 1988 so I have seen it grow into Defined Contribution. And finally, Project and Programme Management – I have led all sorts of projects covering administration, valuation and investment aspects of pensions, as well as many wider change and HR projects.

What do you bring to Muse?

A lot of practical experience from having run and been involved in the running of pension schemes, from the very largest in the country to some of the smallest that exist, for over three decades! An ability to engage with stakeholders at all levels, a ‘get-it-done’ attitude, and underneath the playful exterior, a deep understanding of the market. 

What do you do for fun?

It’s not always fun, but I run occasionally, and am one of the legion of MAMILs that plague the countryside. For the uninitiated, that’s Middle Aged Man In Lycra. Sorry for that image! I tend to enjoy the rides up to about 50 miles, but it gets much harder after that. The upside is the lovely countryside, the great company and the fabulous coffee and cakes!

Email Ian McQuade
Image of Jo Fellowes

Jo Fellowes

My expertise spans project and change management, pensions governance, administrator and adviser reviews and data integrity.

View Profile

What do you do?

I joined Muse in 2015 as a Senior Associate and became part of the employee team as a Senior Consultant in 2017. My responsibilities and role is varied, which I love. I can find myself supporting a client with an administration provider review at one moment and consulting on pension management effectiveness and Trustee governance the next.

What is your background?

I started my career in the Pensions and Reward industry in 2000, progressing through various roles in administration, project management and client service management. Simultaneously I gained my BSc in Economics and Mathematical Sciences, along with various other vocational qualifications including certificates in natural sciences, interior design and I also became an NVQ assessor.

I have also worked at British American Tobacco as a Pensions Project Manager, with responsibilities across provider management, risk reduction, data rectification, communications and governance. After covering maternity leave for the UK Pensions Manager, I also became involved in HR projects and was later promoted into HR as the UK Talent and Organisation Effectiveness Manager.

Of course during this time I continued to study, completing my MBA and CIPD. I left BAT in 2014 and travelled and volunteered overseas as a Teacher of English as a Foreign Language, before joining Muse early in 2015.

What do you bring to Muse?

My experience has spanned both provider and in-house management on behalf of Trustee and the employer, giving me insight of the different agendas and challenges facing each. As a life-long learner, I am also adept at assimilating and analysing information quickly. But my real passion lies in helping clients identify, design and implement project and change management solutions.

What do you do for fun?

I absolutely love to travel, explore new places and try new and adventurous activities. My most extreme adventures were tornado chasing in the USA, and a skeleton bob in Lillehammer. I am a runner, albeit perhaps a little too prone to injury, and when I’m fit I also enjoy hiking and generally being outdoors. And of course, I’m still planning on more study!

Email Jo Fellowes
Image of Lindsay Hawkins

Lindsay Hawkins

My expertise is in Trustee governance and risk management. I help Trustee Boards and sponsoring employers ensure their governance is top-quality.

View Profile

What do you do?

I specialise in outsourced pensions management, trustee governance and effectiveness projects and help Trustees evaluate their executive resource needs.

What is your background?

I’m a Fellow of the Pensions Management Institute and been involved in managing pension funds for almost 20 years. Most recently as Head of Pensions & Benefits for Rexam PLC (a FTSE 100 company recently acquired by a US competitor, Ball Corp). Prior to that I held a pensions management roles in-house for Fujitsu Services and was Pensions Manager for Société Générale Corporate & Investment Bank. Going back even further, I worked in the consulting environment, primarily in outsourced pensions management roles.

What do you bring to Muse?

A lot of practical experience of how to run a pension fund well and get things done. Most of my in-house roles have involved dual aspects being both Head of Pensions/Pensions Manager for the sponsoring employer but also Secretary to the Trustee Board. I therefore understand, in depth, the business drivers for both sides and how to reach solutions which work for everyone. I work best by building good relationships, so enjoy creating teams where everyone understands the pension arrangements’ objectives as well as the strategy for getting there – which really helps Trustee Boards measure success.

What do you do for fun?

It may not be everyone’s idea of fun but my husband and I help out in our local church. Community is important to us both plus it’s great to have lots of friends locally when you lose your keys. Having a desk job means I like to be active whenever I have some free time so I’m a regular at my local gym, I love street dance, weights and yoga - but not all at once. I’ve also been on a lifelong quest to become a wine connoisseur but require much more practice.

Email Lindsay Hawkins
Image of Rosanne Corbett

Rosanne Corbett

I specialise in pensions and benefits governance, trustee effectiveness, workshop facilitation, change projects and risk management.

View Profile

What do you do?

My work is varied; from trustee board effectiveness reviews, implementation and embedding of risk management frameworks, advising on trustee objectives and long-term strategy and providing executive pensions support on an in-house interim or fully outsourced basis to reviews of the DC market and provider selection exercises, including master trusts. I’ve found being able to implement and embed the advice I provide from working in-house as an interim pensions/ governance manager to be challenging yet very enjoyable. I have provided corporate support in periods of change where no in-house pensions expertise existed and have integrated into existing in-house teams to provide hands-on support for business as usual activities and strategic projects. I have managed large-scale change projects on both sides of the fence, giving me a good perspective on trustee and company drivers and what success looks like.

What is your background?

I have worked in pensions and employee benefits since 1999. The majority of my career to date has been spent advising and supporting trustee boards and companies on good governance and how to manage risk. I started my career as an international employee benefits consultant at Mercer, helping multinational companies design and implement benefit structures. From there I moved to corporate strategy and developed a penchant for governance. I have worked with multinationals to introduce global governance frameworks and review how they manage benefit-related financial and operational risk globally.

From global, I moved to local and became heavily involved in UK-specific pensions and trustee governance and board effectiveness as the Pensions Act 2004 came into force. This then led me in 2010 to Muse Advisory. My passion is really about working with people and making things happen, be that trustees understanding their objectives and implementing a strategy to achieve them, to pension teams being able to deliver an excellent service, working in partnership with their trustee boards and advisers.

What do you bring to Muse?

My get up and go. I am quite a driven person and like to learn new things. I like to bring new ideas to my colleagues, clients and Muse. Mostly, I bring energy and passion - I genuinely love what I do.

What do you do for fun?

I love the outdoors, where you'll find me horse riding or walking my dog. My other passions are amateur astronomy and art, but I never seem to have the time to fit everything in.

I've also spent seven years as vice chair of a school governing body. Being a governor has made me appreciate the time and energy that trustees need to commit to do a good job!

Email Rosanne Corbett
Image of Emma Beard

Emma Beard

I specialise in adviser review and selection, trustee board and committee effectiveness, pension department and Trustee Board resourcing and pensions management.

View Profile

What do you do?

As a Consultant I work as part of the project teams to deliver quality solutions to clients. I have worked on a variety of pension projects at Muse, and have built expertise in pensions management, adviser selection and trustee governance.

Recently I have worked with trustees to manage succession planning and facilitated a survey on trustee remuneration practices. The majority of my work has involved the selection of outsourced providers, be that pensions management, secretarial or investment consultants.

What is your background?

My work at Muse Advisory has evolved, alongside with the business, over the last ten years! I hold a BSC in Psychology, and started my career within human resources gaining CIPD along the way.

My time in HR and Reward has meant I have been able to develop my interpersonal and facilitation skills, and have learnt to navigate the vast cultural chasms between companies! I have a wide range of experience from a building society merger to the implementation of a global performance management system.

My appointment as Pensions Governance Manager came as a baptism of fire following an acquisition, but it definitely stoked my interest in the pensions industry.

What do you bring to Muse?

Resourcing and performance management remain of particular interest to me. The skills I built in these roles means I have seen what works well, or not so well. I bring strong organisational skills and a fresh perspective to projects. To me, success is to find practical solutions to the challenges that UK pension schemes face.

What do you do for fun?

When I have free time at home I can usually be found in the green house or walking the dog. I also like to spend time in Cornwall or Spain with my family – relaxing with a Cornish ice cream or una cerveza!

I frequently consider promoting myself to team umpire, but can still be found hurling a hockey stick around the field! There are a few goals to be scored yet!

Email Emma Beard

Muse Advisory helps trustees and companies to better govern and manage their pension schemes. We believe that good governance leads to improved outcomes for members; through better fund performance, effective and proportionate management of risk, value for money and cost efficiencies and strategic and dynamic decision making.

think independently...act effectively