Why Are My 401(k) Fees So High?

BY: Victor Hicks, Managing Principal, Lumin Financial

 

Now, more than ever, employees are asking this question of their benefits manager.  In past years, this question was difficult for employers to answer, but with the adoption of the new 401(k) fee disclosure rules [sections 408(b)(2) and 404a-5], employers are now armed with the information to address this issue.

We’ve noticed that employers are unsure as to how to interpret the new disclosure information, or how to communicate it to their employees.  As you analyze the disclosure materials provided by your 401(k) service provider(s), consider these helpful tips…

1) SCHEDULE A MEETING (or conference call) WITH YOUR SERVICE PROVIDER
The disclosure materials include much detail, and typically use industry jargon.  In order to get a full understanding of “what” the services are, you might need your provider to translate for you.

2) SEEK INPUT FROM A TRUSTED PROFESSIONAL
Your CPA, benefits attorney, or independent investment advisor have a good working knowledge of these issues.  They’ll help you determine “reasonableness” of the services and fees, as well as a fee comparison.  (note: The DOL website provides a model template for 401(k) fee comparisons)

3) MEET WITH YOUR COMPANY’S LEADERSHIP TEAM
Once you’ve discovered the key issues, the leaders will know the best way to deliver this news to the employees, across the various departments.  Help everyone understand that this is a fee “disclosure”, not a fee “increase.”  For many, this will be there first exposure to the various layers of investment fees.

Victor Hicks II, CFP is the Managing Principal of Lumin Financial LLC.  Lumin is an independent RIA firm, specializing in 401(k) consulting for small and mid-sized companies.  He can be reached at vhicks@luminfinancial.com, or (248) 936-9480.

Are You Sure Your Company Uses Pay For Performance?

(This is the second in a series of three blog posts that recap learning sessions offered at the recently concluded annual SHRM conference. Social Media Director Joan Ginsberg gave HRAGD members the opportunity to choose session for Joan to attend and blog about. This session was chosen by Tanagra Weaver PHR, who has been an HRAGD member since October 2010.)

If there was one thing that presenter Jim Kochanski wanted attendees to take away from his session it was this:

Most companies think they have a pay for performance (P4P) system, but actually  do not. About 70% of companies who claim to, in fact, do not have a P4P system.

What they do have, according to Kochanski, is the alternative to a P4P system. They have an entitlement system. Kochanski then used several examples such as Big Foot, Elvis, and reality television to illustrate how there are differing perceptions of fake and reality, and how those perceptions create the corporate myth that it is using a P4P system.

Kochanski then spent the rest of his session explaining the nine drivers of a true P4P system that had been identified by his company.

1. Leadership articulates priorities for P4P, creating a value exchange. There are many possible business outcomes that leadership may be seeking – motivation, cost containment, employee attraction and/or retention, and others. The company can’t have them all, but identifying those that are a priority, and then explicitly communicating them to employees is the first step to keeping employee rewards from becoming entitlements.

2. A pay structure that defines pay opportunity. Kochanski called pay structure “the envelope that delivers P4P”. He claimed that the proper pay structure would be based on market and internal equity, and should be provided for each and every person and job. Pay competitiveness would inform pay structure, which in turn provides pay opportunity.

3. Goals must be set and aligned. About 1/2 of the employees make up his or her goals without input from managers, according to Kochanski. To properly align goals, companies must (a) improve visibility of goal setting, (b) document those goals, and (c) make them transparent. 78% of companies with the best P4P results have effective goal alignment.

4. There must be a norm of differentiation. In other words, there must be a ratings scale for employees, and there should be a target for how ratings will be distributed. It does not really matter how many levels of distribution exist, but the actual distribution should be visible to leaders and employees.

5. There should be calibration across managers. Instead of a single ratings by a single leader or manager, there should be a system of peer managers who meet to calibrate ratings and compensation decisions.

6. Merit must matter. Even when the budget for raises or other pay incentives is small, high achievers should be rewarded. Be sure to communicate to employees what will really happen, not what an employee wants to hear.

7.Make variable vary. When employees get the same percentage every year, the pay has become and entitlement and not a performance compensation. Annual incentive pay (AIP) for high performers or managers is often an indicator of true P4P.

8. Tie promotions to performance. True P4P promotions are (a) performance, not seniority, based, (b) budgeted, (c) tracked and reported, (d) calibrated, and (e) require multi-level approval.

9. Use metrics to track P4P. A sample compensation scorecard might include the average performance rating, the average merit increase by percentage, the promotion rate, and the percent of annual incentive target awarded, all compared or tracked by department.

In closing, Kochanski warned that the movement from an entitlement culture to P4P takes time and effort. He warned that it may take 3 full years before a company will see specific results.