Managing the operational risks

Managing the operational risks

Managing the operational risks of insourced investment management

  • 01-August-2013
  • Australia, Melbourne

This article was published in the July 2013 edition of SuperReview

Matthew Heeney is a Principal in Mercer's specialist investment implementation advisory business, Sentinel.

For large and mid-size superannuation funds, investment management insourcing is now very much on the agenda. Some of the drivers of this trend are industry consolidation, growth in funds under management and the search for member value through cost control.

In our experience, there is some diversity in terms of how in-house capability is developed, but in general we think there are two broad categories of experience:

  • Funds that have ‘evolved’ in-house investment capability over time. Typically staff numbers, delegated authority and discretion have grown organically as the size of the fund and assets under management have increased.
  • Large funds that have historically outsourced investment management, but come to reconsider their preferred mix of investment management solutions as the value of assets under management has increased.

In step with the development of in-house investment decision making and implementation is the need for a control framework to manage operational and implementation risk. Mercer Sentinel has worked with a number of funds to manage the development of in-house investment capability, and we have identified some common implementation risk management challenges.

1.Governance. In an environment of increasing complexity, it can be hard for Trustees to be assured that investment implementation is undertaken in a safe and sound manner consistent with both the letter and spirit of the mandate. Good governance is a continuum starting with Board policy, which can be traced through to investment delegation and implementation; process and procedure; and finally validation and review.

A key challenge is a governance framework that ensures the Board maintains sight of risk mitigation strategies and comfort that they remain appropriate and within the appetite for risk.

2.Segregation of duties. Keeping clear lines of separation between strategy, implementation and control functions is well accepted as an important element of risk mitigation. However, appropriate segregation of duties, properly supported and reinforced by IT and business applications architecture, can be hard to achieve in small teams. Even in larger teams, there may be a separation of functions driven more by the skills of different team members rather than considerations of risk management. Often we see funds exposed to higher risks due to inappropriate segregation of duties.

3.Spreadsheets and databases. Spreadsheets and other similar business applications are powerful and flexible tools, which in the context of investment insourcing can be both a blessing and a curse. It is not uncommon to see reliance on spreadsheets that have embedded business rules and metrics defined by the user. Whilst potentially very effective as a business tool, and cost-effective in comparison to bespoke investment applications, they pose considerable risk management challenges.

Spreadsheets and databases specified by the user may lack validation by a third-party, and may be subject to change without proper controls or protocols. They can also have interdependencies that can lead to small, apparently unrelated events, having material unintended consequences. Spreadsheets and other similar business applications, if properly deployed and controlled, can be a considerable resource. The key is to have in place appropriate checks and balances on underlying data and formulae.

4.Processes and protocols. One of the most important goals for the investment management team is to translate the investment strategy into economic exposures that match its intentions. The key to achieving this is developing the right execution and implementation processes and protocols.

Funds that adopt a ‘best practice’ approach may find the standard they are seeking to meet either uncommercial on the basis of cost, or impractical to apply.However, adopting ‘market practice’ may mean applying a standard that doesn't adequately mitigate risk, and which exposes members to a higher risk of loss. In this context, trustees need to seek assurance that internal teams can execute and manage open positions appropriately, but also in a way that balances the often competing demands of cost, and the efficacy of risk mitigation controls.

5.Talent. Member experience is linked to the skills and calibre of the investment operations, implementation and risk management team. Identifying, sourcing and retaining the right people is critical to the long term success of insourced investment management.

Trustees and fund executives must ensure they have a clear talent management strategy in place, supplemented by a well-thought-out reward strategy. And while financial incentives are important, benefits such as flexible working options and career development are just as crucial in retaining the best staff.


The overarching reason for insourcing investment implementation is always maximising the benefit to members. To achieve that goal, funds need to properly manage the inherent risks of in-house investment implementation, ensure the control environment is effective and take a considered approach to structuring the investment operations function.


About Mercer

Mercer is a global leader in talent, health, retirement and investments. Mercer helps clients around the world advance the health, wealth and performance of their most vital asset – their people. Mercer’s 20,000 employees are based in 43 countries and the firm operates in over 140 countries. Mercer is a wholly owned subsidiary of Marsh & McLennan Companies (NYSE: MMC), a global team of professional services companies offering clients advice and solutions in the areas of risk, strategy and human capital. With 55,000 employees worldwide and annual revenue exceeding $12 billion, Marsh & McLennan Companies is also the parent company of Marsh, a global leader in insurance broking and risk management; Guy Carpenter, a global leader in providing risk and reinsurance intermediary services; and Oliver Wyman, a global leader in management consulting. Follow Mercer on Twitter @MercerAU @MercerInsights

This contains confidential and proprietary information of Mercer and is intended for the exclusive use of the parties to whom it was provided by Mercer Its content may not be modified, sold or otherwise provided, in whole or in part, to any other person or entity, without Mercer’s prior written permission.
The findings, ratings and/or opinions expressed herein are the intellectual property of Mercer and are subject to change without notice. They are not intended to convey any guarantees as to the future performance of the investment products, asset classes or capital markets discussed. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future performance. Mercer’s ratings do not constitute individualized investment advice.
This does not contain investment advice relating to your particular circumstances. No investment decision should be made based on this information without first obtaining appropriate professional advice and considering your circumstances.
Information contained herein has been obtained from a range of third party sources. While the information is believed to be reliable, Mercer has not sought to verify it independently. As such, Mercer makes no representations or warranties as to the accuracy of the information presented and takes no responsibility or liability (including for indirect, consequential or incidental damages), for any error, omission or inaccuracy in the data supplied by any third party.
This document has been produced by Mercer Investments (Australia) Limited (MIAL) ABN 66 008 612 397, Australian Financial Services Licence #244385.

‘MERCER’ is a registered trademark of Mercer (Australia) Pty Ltd ABN 32 005 315 917.

Copyright 2014 Mercer LLC. All rights reserved.