Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 180

Meeting the retirement outcome challenge

For a while now, Jeremy Cooper (Chair of the Super System Review and now at Challenger) has been trying to remain both positive and patient with the super industry as it faces up to the retirement outcome challenge and securing retirement income streams for members. Jeremy has lamented about the ‘CIO Problem’ and suggests that super funds should think about appointing a ‘CRIO’ (Chief Retirement Income Officer). These views were formalised in a recent thought piece produced by Challenger and KPMG (linked here).

Harry Mitchell is the recently appointed CEO at superannuation fund, Mine Wealth + Wellbeing, while David Bell is the Chief Investment Officer (CIO).

GH: Harry, do you have a ‘CIO Problem’ at your fund?

HM: Is there something you know about David that I don’t know, Graham?

GH: Well I've worked with David on and off for well over a decade. I can tell you a few stories …

HM: The ‘CIO Problem’ is based on the premise that CIOs have historically, due to their analytical skillset, been heavily involved in ‘version 1’ retirement solutions. I call these ‘version 1’ solutions because they have generally been investment-based solutions. This can only get you so far. Jeremy is referring to the need for what we call ‘version 2’ and ‘version 3’ solutions. ‘Version 2’ is product based but accounts for investment and mortality risks. ‘Version 3’ is holistic. It would have a greater degree of personalisation hence brings in all capabilities of a super fund – from digital and analytics to communications and advice, to governance and administration capabilities that act as enablers.

GH: So what is the role of your CIO then?

HM: In our case David has two responsibilities. First he leads our investment activities. Managing risk to achieve investment outcomes will always be a crucial function of any leading super fund. A small amount of extra annual return delivered over time can have a significant impact on the retirement outcomes of our members.

However, David is also responsible for our retirement outcomes modelling unit. We established this area nearly two years ago. You know that David went back to uni six years ago to gain the research skills to meet the retirement outcome challenge. I think he initially thought that he would be building all the complex models himself, however he has matured (a little!) and realises that his role is to oversee this function. He has hired some great academic talent in this area. We have an agreed IT modelling platform (MATLAB) and have fully built out our modelling and testing environment.

GH: This is all starting to sound complex.

DB: It is. The complexity of the retirement outcome challenge cannot be denied. At a minimum you need the following: a stochastic framework that accounts for variability in investment and mortality outcomes and integration with Age Pension, and a clear set of objectives. From there you can begin to innovate. If a super fund can’t meet the complexity of the problem then they are likely to fail to meet the retirement outcome challenge.

GH: Surely the objectives are not that hard to land on?

DB: It is more complex than you think. The industry as a whole is only just now working out an objective (a recommendation of David Murray’s Financial System Inquiry). Think about income in retirement: people want higher income; they would prefer an income stream which is smooth and not bumpy; they would be upset if they outlived their retirement savings; and a bequest is worthwhile. We also know that people are generally risk averse – the pain of a lower outcome is larger than joy of an equivalent higher outcome.

Some of these features pull against each other: income level versus bumpiness, longevity risk versus bequest and so on. We have spent the last year working through all these issues with a collection of industry experts and academics and have packaged this up into a mathematical function. We now have what we call a ‘better scoreboard’ for assessing retirement outcome solutions and services.

GH: This sounds good but where does it place you in the super fund pack?

DB: Actually we will be sharing all of this work with everyone – industry, academia, regulators and policymakers. There is a bigger issue at play - nationwide retirement outcomes - and we want to contribute. We will make sure you get a media pass Graham when we release all this work.

GH: Won’t most people find this complex modelling a bit confronting? How do people know it is not just gobbledy-gook with some pretty pictures?

HM: I trust Dave and his team. They do a lot to test their models, including the use of external testers, and are active collaborators with the academic world which also acts as a control. Their commitment to education of our Board, our Investment Committee, our Executive team and our staff has really helped us along our journey.

GH: Well why don’t you call David your ‘CRIO’?

HM: We are uncomfortable with the concept of a dedicated CRIO. Delivering good retirement outcomes is at the heart of what we do as a firm. This makes me, in my role as CEO, effectively the CRIO that Jeremy refers to. It is my role to make sure that all my teams are collaborating, and that we engage with industry and regulators. It is my role to make sure we deliver the best possible retirement outcomes to our members. So my core responsibility is the delivery of retirement outcomes regardless of its complexities.

DB: I think you may see variations to this model. QSuper has a similar model to us. Some funds, particularly those with a defined benefit legacy such as UniSuper, have internal actuarial teams which could do the heavy lifting on the modelling side. Perhaps funds that don’t quite know where to start could create the role of a CRIO.

GH: I haven’t seen much evidence to suggest that other super funds are doing similar work. Do you think this will lead to further industry consolidation?

HM: Who knows what motives will drive the next wave of industry consolidation. We like the idea of merit-based mergers, and we hope that as the industry becomes aware of the work we are doing, they would like to collaborate and work with us in a variety of ways.


Harry Mitchell is Chief Executive Officer (the unofficial ‘CRIO’) at Mine Wealth + Wellbeing. David Bell is Chief Investment Officer at Mine Wealth + Wellbeing and is working towards a PhD at University of New South Wales. Both Mine Wealth + Wellbeing and Challenger/Accurium are sponsors of Cuffelinks.



Leave a Comment:



'Utility function' research wins Retirement Innovation Award

CIPRs are coming and that’s exciting

Has the FSI missed the elephant in the room?


Most viewed in recent weeks

How to enjoy your retirement

Amid thousands of comments, tips include developing interests to keep occupied, planning in advance to have enough money, staying connected with friends and communities ... should you defer retirement or just do it?

Results from our retirement experiences survey

Retirement is a good experience if you plan for it and manage your time, but freedom from money worries is key. Many retirees enjoy managing their money but SMSFs are not for everyone. Each retirement is different.

A tonic for turbulent times: my nine tips for investing

Investing is often portrayed as unapproachably complex. Can it be distilled into nine tips? An economist with 35 years of experience through numerous market cycles and events has given it a shot.

Rival standard for savings and incomes in retirement

A new standard argues the majority of Australians will never achieve the ASFA 'comfortable' level of retirement savings and it amounts to 'fearmongering' by vested interests. If comfortable is aspirational, so be it.

Dalio v Marks is common sense v uncommon sense

Billionaire fund manager standoff: Ray Dalio thinks investing is common sense and markets are simple, while Howard Marks says complex and convoluted 'second-level' thinking is needed for superior returns.

Fear is good if you are not part of the herd

If you feel fear when the market loses its head, you become part of the herd. Develop habits to embrace the fear. Identify the cause, decide if you need to take action and own the result without looking back. 

Latest Updates


The paradox of investment cycles

Now we're captivated by inflation and higher rates but only a year ago, investors were certain of the supremacy of US companies, the benign nature of inflation and the remoteness of tighter monetary policy.


Reporting Season will show cost control and pricing power

Companies have been slow to update guidance and we have yet to see the impact of inflation expectations in earnings and outlooks. Companies need to insulate costs from inflation while enjoying an uptick in revenue.


The early signals for August company earnings

Weaker share prices may have already discounted some bad news, but cost inflation is creating wide divergences inside and across sectors. Early results show some companies are strong enough to resist sector falls.


The compelling 20-year flight of SYD into private hands

In 2002, the share price of the company that became Sydney Airport (SYD) hit 80 cents from the $2 IPO price. After 20 years of astute investment driving revenue increases, it sold to private hands for $8.75 in 2022.

Investment strategies

Ethical investing responding to some short-term challenges

There are significant differences in the sector weightings of an ethical fund versus an index, and while this has caused some short-term headwinds recently, the tailwinds are expected to blow over the long term.

Investment strategies

If you are new to investing, avoid these 10 common mistakes

Many new investors make common mistakes while learning about markets. Losses are inevitable. Newbies should read more and develop a long-term focus while avoiding big mistakes and not aiming to be brilliant.

Investment strategies

RMBS today: rising rate-linked income with capital preservation

Lenders use Residential Mortgage-Backed Securities to finance mortgages and RMBS are available to retail investors through fund structures. They come with many layers of protection beyond movements in house prices. 



© 2022 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. Any general advice or ‘regulated financial advice’ under New Zealand law has been prepared by Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892) and/or Morningstar Research Ltd, subsidiaries of Morningstar, Inc, without reference to your objectives, financial situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide (AU) and Financial Advice Provider Disclosure Statement (NZ). You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.