View more on these topics

Can incentive models work for drawdown?

Vitality’s methods are well established in the protection market, but can they succeed for retirement savings?

 

We can all relate to being rewarded for something we have achieved, going right back to primary school. It is inbuilt in our society as a motivating force that gets the results we want. With this in mind, the recent launch of Vitality Invest provides food for thought.

As a protection provider, Vitality is well known for rewarding policyholders for healthy lifestyles. With Vitality Invest, it applies its incentive concept to investments, including retirement savings.

Clients in its Retirement Plan are encouraged to invest for retirement earlier and for longer, to maintain a healthy lifestyle and refrain from withdrawing too much too quickly through financial incentives such as bonuses. Those who also have a Vitality life or health product, which rewards efforts to stay healthy with things like cinema tickets and discounted air fares, can also benefit from discounted platform fees.

Complexity holds back advice on hybrid decumulation products

There is no denying that incentives fit nicely with the accumulation stage of retirement planning, where everyone essentially has the same aim of building up their retirement pot. But do they have a place at the decumulation stage, where individuals’ needs can vary greatly?

Vitality Life chief executive Herschel Mayers says the point of an incentive model is to change people’s behaviour in a positive way.

“We want people to be able to manage their money well in retirement and be healthier both pre and post retirement,” he says.

Mayers adds the Vitality concept is a shared value model: saving more in Vitality’s funds and staying invested for longer will generate additional fees for the firm, which it shares with clients in the form of incentives. 

So what is the market verdict: much-needed innovation or gimmick?

Behavioural nudge

Former pensions minister Ros Altmann thinks any ideas to help people retain more of their pension for later in their retirement and improve their health are worthwhile.

She says: “Some may see it as a gimmick, but I would see it as serving the customer’s best interests. More people will live longer and need money for their advanced old age, so encouraging them to keep it for later rather than spend it sooner is a sensible behavioural nudge.”

Mattioli Woods consultant Steve Eggleton sees clear health and financial benefits for clients in an incentive model like Vitality’s. 

But he imagines it will take some getting used to. “Frustration could occur with getting to grips with complicated point systems, regular uploading of data online and the need for ongoing health checks.

“For most us come February our new year’s resolutions are a distant memory and we’ve settled back into our default settings,” he says.

“This means when advisers consider the suitability of such products it’s important for them to have an open and frank discussion around the client’s previous track records of adopting healthier lifestyle choices.

“Otherwise, we need to be prepared to have some difficult conversations where engagement in the programme has been less than satisfactory and the underlying plan costs begin to creep up.”

Unintended consequences

Few can argue against the aim to bring about better health and retirement outcomes. However, many see a problem with a “one size fits all” approach of incentivising people to withdraw less at the decumulation stage.

Is default drawdown a realistic proposition?

Encouraging people to live healthily when they are taking out protection policies makes perfect sense to Royal London director of policy Steve Webb, but he says it is less obvious how this type of incentive structure links to investment products. 

“The right strategy for income drawdown should be based on an informed conversation with an adviser, not short-term, ad-hoc product features with terms that could presumably be altered at any time,” he says.

Zurich head of product development Rod McKie saysthere is a risk that monetising rules of thumb could lead to unintended consequences. 

“There is a clear moral hazard if an incentive is at odds with what is best for a client and their individual circumstances,” he says.

“For example, if a customer needed to access drawdown savings to bridge an income shortfall until a final salary pension kicks in, the forfeit of the incentive may appear more of a penalty than the loss of a reward.”

“Decumulation is far more complicated than accumulation – any nudges or incentives need to be personalised to an individual’s circumstances and financial goals, as well as being flexible enough to cope with changes in a client’s situation without forcing them to transfer to a more appropriate plan.”

Financial plan

Many commentators have suggested it is financial planning, not product-based incentives, that will ensure people in drawdown enjoy a sustainable income in retirement.

“If people took proper financial planning they wouldn’t need product incentives,” says Ovation Finance chairman Chris Budd.

“With a bit of coaching to clarify what their future might look like and proper planning to create a path to that future, they will have clarity over what they can spend and when. No gimmicks on charges necessary.”

“I think clients would prefer a competitive charging structure rather than one which is loaded to be able to give discounts,” adds Mowatt Financial Planning director Will Mowatt.

He regards Vitality’s incentives as too complicated and feels they are not driven by more fundamental client needs, such as how much they need to support their plans.

“Sustainability will be about all their assets, not just a pension,” he says.

FCA could ask IGCs to scrutinise drawdown

Vitality’s Mayers agrees with Mowatt’s latter point and says the firm is working with advisers to encourage the right behaviour among clients, whose ability to meet the targets for the tiered “retirement booster” bonuses depend on whether they have other sources of income.

Mayers believes Vitality’s charges are competitive even without the discount for holding one of its health or life policies, but he concedes the criteria for achieving the highest level of bonus – 50 per cent of the annual withdrawal amount – is tough.

To achieve this level of booster clients must withdraw no more than 1 per cent a year and attain the highest level, Platinum, on Vitality’s healthy living programme.

Mayers says this does not mean it is focused only on wealthier drawdown clients who can afford to delay drawing an income to reap the highest financial reward.

“The more achievable targets of drawing 2 or 3 per cent also provide a significant boost,” he says. Clients who withdraw 2 to 3 per cent a year qualify for bonuses of 6 to 20 per cent, depending on their healthy living status.

Time will tell if incentivising drawdown members to restrict annual withdrawals can work. In the meantime, Eggleton says it should be viewed with some scepticism.

“A well-considered financial plan will keep sustainability of pension income under review,” he says.

Adviser view: Lesley James, director, Simplified Money

In principle, it’s a good idea. I really like the use of incentives to try and persuade good behaviour. I’m not convinced this is a game-changer, but we do know that nudge theory works. Aside from auto-enrolment, it is good to see others starting to use such tactics. The drawdown version looks very interesting, but how well that 1 per cent Platinum level will go down is open to question. Incentives need to be achievable for them to work. This might have the unintended consequence of allowing the already very well off to benefit rather more than “Average Joe” who really needs it. But we shall see – this doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be tested.

Adviser view: Fiona Tait, technical director, Intelligent Pensions

Anything that draws attention to the importance of not overspending is to be welcomed and Vitality’s approach is a good thing. That said, where people
need their pension to provide an income for life, a more robust approach is called for, including cashflow modelling, which would provide a much better result. Simply encouraging people not to spend does not take into account their individual needs or give them any idea of how much their fund could provide for themselves and their families.

Recommended

3

FCA: New guidance body must boost profile of FSCS

The new single financial guidance body should prioritise informing consumers about the protection the Financial Services Compensation Scheme provides on pensions, the FCA says. In a roundtable discussion today on pensions and choices for retirement income products, FCA strategy and competition director Christopher Woolard cited research published by the lifeboat fund in March. The research […]

1

Savers wary of Brexit impact on pensions

Nearly half of savers believe Brexit is bad news for their pension pot, according to Aegon research. Findings from the Aegon Retirement Confidence Survey show 42 per cent of those polled think the value of their pension fund will fall as a result of Brexit. Of the 964 people surveyed, just 5 per cent think Brexit […]

File image of a pension savings pot

Regulator hands out £15,000 fine for pension contributions bungle

The Pensions Regulator has fined a trustee £15,000 for failing to report unpaid pension contributions. Smart Pension, which runs the autoenrolment.co.uk master trust, did not tell TPR that nearly 500 employers had not paid nealry £900,000 of contributions that were due. Smart Pension also did not tell members about the problem. TPR suspends trustee after […]

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 2 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. We try to get our clients to remember they live in the present and not the past, nor the future.
    They can’t correct what they didn’t save for if they coem to us first in their 50’s. They’ve either got enough or they haven’t by then and little they do will change that by 55.
    If they have enough and don;t realise it,the improtance of planning si to show them what the future might be so they can stop worrying about the future and concentrate more on the present.
    I spend as much tie trying to persuade my clienst to SPEND trheir money wisely once they reach their late 50’s as save it wisely. We come in to this world with nothing and we leave it with nothing, just as Alexander the Great showed us with his funeral rights. He left a marvellous historcial record,but it was what he DID during his life which IS the legacy not any gold trinkets he passed to his successors.

  2. Christopher Pitt 29th June 2018 at 10:07 am

    @Phil Castle. You make a great point. Whilst the majority of consumers don’t save enough for their old-age some are afraid of spending what they’ve already saved. My mother in-law was a good case in-point. She was saving deep into her later years and denied herself treats that she could clearly afford and always made comments like “I can’t afford that”. So, I have nothing against behavioural nudges BUT they need to be appropriate to the individual. In my mother in-law’s case she need to be nudged to SPEND more rather than less. A blanket approach that assumes everyone is a spend-thrift is frankly a little patronising.

Leave a comment

Close

Why register with Money Marketing ?

Providing trusted insight for professional advisers.  Since 1985 Money Marketing has helped promote and analyse the financial adviser community in the UK and continues to be the trusted industry brand for independent insight and advice.

News & analysis delivered directly to your inbox
Register today to receive our range of news alerts including daily and weekly briefings

Money Marketing Events
Be the first to hear about our industry leading conferences, awards, roundtables and more.

Research and insight
Take part in and see the results of Money Marketing's flagship investigations into industry trends.

Have your say
Only registered users can post comments. As the voice of the adviser community, our content generates robust debate. Sign up today and make your voice heard.

Register now

Having problems?

Contact us on +44 (0)20 7292 3712

Lines are open Monday to Friday 9:00am -5.00pm

Email: customerservices@moneymarketing.com