Pity the poor superannuation administrator or manager at a dinner party who is sitting next to the golf pro or a stage actor — even an accountant. Personal experience shows superannuation administration is not a glamour job. All they’ll get is a few complaints about their fund’s investment performance or their member statements before the conversation moves on to someone’s chipping problem or what’s your favourite golf course or favourite movie.
Let me say, however, that today’s super administrator is an unsung hero — it’s a tough job and someone has to do it.
It’s not that long ago that all superannuation records were managed and updated manually, a slow and laborious method that produced its fair share of human error. We moved on to the early days of computers with a more automated approach, but still one reliant on individual punch cards and considerable manual involvement. Also, it may not be so easy to recall it was only specific companies and the public service that were providing superannuation to all or part of their staff.
Come 1983 with the arrival of the Hawke Government and things changed quickly — many rules regarding taxation treatment and accessibility of superannuation were implemented that changed the face of super. Soon after, with Accord between the Labor Party and the unions leading to limitation of wages claims, the union movement looked for new ways to increase their members’ benefits and saw compulsory superannuation payments made by employers as an attractive adjunct to their members’ remuneration packages. Successive governments dramatically concerned about the future affordability of age pension requirements embraced the compulsory superannuation ideal with gusto — the so-called superannuation guarantee charge starting out at 3 per cent of salary and increasing incrementally to the current 9 per cent of salary where it is currently frozen.
With the onset of the SGC, a whole new raft of rules and regulations were thrust upon us, covering all sorts of taxation, preservation and payment issues for superannuation funds. This, of course, resulted in a rapid complication of the whole superannuation administration process. New training was required, new systems needed to put in place. Upskilling of man and machine was paramount to deal with the expanding complexities of the industry.
All of a sudden, communication between super managers and their clients (employers and their employees) which may have been “haphazard” at times in past years became an essential requirement of the service required. Fund members who had little exposure or knowledge of their superannuation arrangements now had an expectation (quite rightly, I say) that they would be accurately and regularly informed of the workings and performance of their funds.
Administration staff right across Australia were faced with new challenges — an ongoing upgrade in their provision of service, performance and knowledge was an essential part of their job description. Not to mention the astronomic development in computer software and the associated Internet capability. Quality people and systems are required to run a modern day super fund! And of course, it’s a work in progress with new methods, approaches and techniques being put in front of us every day.
Clients are expecting better and more accurate service, more investment and insurance options. At the same time there is an expectation that fees won’t rise to any extent to accommodate the new standards that have been set. All of this means that the appropriate people must be in these key jobs. Of course, everyone has their own super experience — good or not so good — but my belief is that most of the main superannuation administration organisations are moving in the right direction and getting the right people and systems in place most of the time. Particularly important are people who can communicate and empathise with their clientele — and solve their problems, real or apparent with a minimum of fuss.
So what developments can we expect over the coming years? Choice legislation — if it ever happens — could lead to considerable upheaval, although most of the leading operators are very well prepared for this eventuality.
It will, however, require a new set of skills for admin staff to deal with the added complexities that would arise from a “clearing house” function for processing contributions, benefits and a burgeoning range of investment options.
An increasing use of electronic systems can also be envisaged, with an ultimate goal of end-to-end processing desired with a minimum of human intervention — probably an unachievable Utopian aim, in my opinion. But if there’s one certainty in the future, it will be that the leading super managers will be constantly pushing the limits of computer technology to arrive at more cost-effective, accurate and speedier methods of administration and service.
— Lee Frankish is corporate relationship manager, MLC Workplace Solutions
