Nevin's Data "Points"

  You might have missed it (I nearly did), but January has been declared “National Financial Wellness Month.” The designation (apparently, it’s been so designated since 2011 or thereabouts) is meant to create a time where we’re all encouraged to pay closer attention to our financial well-being. Which, considering that we’ve just emerged from a season of what for many is one of “overspending,” January seems either a good time — or perhaps two months too late. Seriously, while the numbers are modest, surveys (conducted primarily by those promoting or supported by promoters of those services) routinely show that some workers want [i]  —  and even expect —  financial wellness type support from their employers. Not surprisingly, there are employers willing to accommodate this assumption, though —  depending on employer size, location, and source —  fewer than half do, with larger employers notably more likely to do so. And that’s with a truly fluid definition of...

 The ROI for financial wellness has always been elusive—but a new survey suggests that it might not matter. Asked “Why are you creating or expanding your financial wellbeing program?”, respondents to Alight’s 17th edition of Hot Topics in Retirement & Financial Wellbeing  said that not only was financial wellness their top priority, more than half (56%) said that the importance of financial wellbeing has increased at their organization over the last two years, and none said the focused has decreased.  But—asked why they were creating or expanding their financial wellbeing program, the respondents largely ignored the traditional ROI metrics. The most common answer was nothing more concrete than to “enhance the overall employee experience (85%), and right behind that was the simple proposition that “we believe it is the right thing to do (84%). Even HR’s traditional favorite—“increase employee engagement”—at 72%—was well behind those arguably subjective gau...

The Plan Sponsor Council of America recently released its 62nd   Annual Survey of Profit-Sharing and 401(k) Plans ,  documenting a record high rate of savings, alongside an uptick in Roth contributions and other trends. However, sometimes the things that  don’t  change can be just as telling… Target-date trends (still) dominate, but…  Let’s face it – target-date funds are one of the most common items on a plan investment menu today ( the PSCA survey  noted that it’s the option in which assets are most frequently invested) and – in no small part due to their prevalence as a default investment alternative – continue to garner a lion’s share of new contribution dollars, if older savers (perhaps more precisely, longer-tenured savers) haven’t embraced (or more accurately, been defaulted into) the option with as much enthusiasm. That said, while more than two-thirds (68.6%) of respondents offer a target-date fund option, that’s actually down 5% in ...

Financial wellness – it remains a hot topic among advisors – but among plan sponsors? For all the coverage that the subject engenders – and it’s considerable in this space – it’s not unusual to find awareness gaps among plan sponsors, with perspectives ranging from ignorance to ambivalence to downright skepticism. About a year ago, the Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI) conducted a survey  of 250 large employers. At the time, the report claimed that while many employers were interested in offering financial wellness programs to their employees, there didn’t appear to be a consensus on the approach. So, what’s changed in in the past year? Well, as it turns out, not much. Once again EBRI surveyed  large plan sponsors – this time in June 2019, the online survey of 248 full-time benefits decision-makers from companies with at least 500 employees (17% had more than 10,000). Last year’s survey canvassed employers with an “expressed interest in financ...

It is customary when sharing (or reading) the portents of a survey to focus on the actions that respondents say they have, or will undertake. But what about the things they say they will not  do? Human beings gravitate toward “norms,” of course. Plan sponsors, certainly those conscious of the personal liability that accompanies those responsibilities, can hardly be blamed for seeking the behavioral norms of their profession, drawing comfort from the collective movement of the “pack,” particularly with new and/or controversial ideas. Large ‘Charge’ This past weekend I was reviewing Alight Solution’s 2019 Hot Topics in Retirement and Financial Wellbeing report . But, while the positive trendlines on things like financial wellness were interesting, what struck me in reviewing this particular survey were the (relatively) strong percentage weighing in on things they said they were not likely to do, including: evaluate phased retirement alternatives (66% not likely...

For all the buzz around financial wellness, a new survey suggests there is a long way to go. These days there’s not much argument against the premise behind pursuing financial wellness. The notion is that bad financial health contributes to (and/or causes) a bevy of workplace woes: stress, which can lead to things like lower productivity; bad health and higher absenteeism; and even a greater inclination toward workplace theft, not to mention deferred retirements by workers who tend to be higher paid and have higher health care costs. But if there is little argument that financial wellness is a worthwhile goal for workers – and one worth supporting by employers – the recent Financial Wellbeing Employer Survey from the Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI) suggests that we have a ways to go. Here are some key takeaways from that survey of 250 employers: 1. HR is leading the charge. The most commonly cited primary champion for financial wellness was Human R...

Several weeks back, I was invited to participate in a group conversation on retirement and the future. The group of 15 (they’re listed at the end of the document that summarized the conclusions) that  Politico pulled together was diverse, both in background and philosophies, and included academics, think tanks, advocacy groups, and the Hill. It was conducted under Chatham House rules, which means that while our comments might be shared, they wouldn’t be specifically attributed. That latter point was helpful to the openness of the discussion, where several individuals had opinions that they acknowledged wouldn’t be supported by the groups they represent. The conversation touched on a wide range of topics, everything from the key challenges to the current system, the private sector’s role in addressing these problems, the individual’s role (and responsibility) for securing their own retirement, government’s role and the potential for current congressional proposa...

The Plan Sponsor Council of America recently released its 60th Annual Survey of Profit-Sharing and 401(k) Plans , documenting increases in participation, deferral rates, target-date funds, automatic enrollment and advisor hiring, among other key trends. Here are five key trends highlighted in the survey that you may have missed. Automatic enrollment is still (mostly) a large plan thing. One of the most celebrated plan design features of the 401(k) era is automatic enrollment. Nearly as old as the 401(k) itself, once upon a time (when it wasn’t as popular) it was called a “negative election.” Regardless of the name, the concept has been extraordinarily effective at not only getting, but keeping, workers saving via their workplace retirement plans. However, adoption of the design, after a surge in the wake of the passage of the Pension Protection Act of 2006, now seems to have plateaued. A decade ago, only about a third (35.6%) of respondents to the PSCA su...

It has been heartening in recent weeks  to see a number of employers announce plans to expand and increase benefit programs, offer bonuses, and increase the employer match. Better still, a recent survey  indicates that more positive changes could lie ahead. A decade ago , the headlines were filled with stories about a number of large firms announcing that they were cutting, and in some cases eliminating altogether, the employer match. While the vast majority of employers didn’t reduce those matches, it was nonetheless a stark reminder that those defined contributions are “defined” annually, not in perpetuity. The Match Matters There are a number of things that we know about the importance of the employer match; there’s the obvious (though sometimes glossed over) impact that an employer contribution means in terms of retirement security in simple dollars, for one thing. Indeed, the nonpartisan Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI) has estimated th...

Several years back the concept of “wellness” crept into benefits planning. More recently, HR’s affinity for that wellness concept has been expanded upon by the concept of financial wellness. But as appealing as the notion is, a number of key questions linger. With regard to wellness generally, the notion was simple: Rather than just treating the symptoms of poor health with insurance-funded trips to the doctor (or the hospital) after the damage was done, we’d get ahead of things by emphasizing healthy habit steps (smoking cessation, weight loss, etc.) programs that would reduce doctor bills (and insurance premiums). As regards financial wellness, the notion is that bad financial health contributes to (and/or causes) a bevy of woes: stress, which can lead to things like lower productivity, bad health and higher absenteeism, and even a greater inclination toward workplace theft, not to mention deferred retirements by workers who tend to be higher salaried and who have higher health...

It’s obvious why participants have a vested interest (literally) in the retirement income — the outcome, really — of their retirement savings plans. Here are four reasons why plan sponsors should care about outcomes. You want your employees to appreciate your benefit plan(s). If you’re responsible for benefit plans in your organization, you have a very real interest in how your workforce (and management team) view those benefits. Plan sponsors have long used participation rate as the plan success metric — after all, what better measure of success in plan design, education and communication than the objective data as to how many employees have chosen to participate. But in a time when a growing number of plans have adopted automatic enrollment — well, while credit is certainly due plan sponsors who have taken that step, the resulting bump in participation rates owe more to the inertia of human behavior than innovative plan design. There is, however, little question that the bet...