This always-on approach to scheme governance has come to the fore as a way to proactively respond to the enforced challenges of Covid-19 and the resulting restrictions on travel and in-person contact. Although the approach evolved through absolute necessity, it should arguably be retained as the best practice model when it comes to scheme governance.
The stop-start predecessor to continuous governance was quarterly, and occasionally less frequent, face-to-face, four to five hour trustee meetings, punctuated by a buffet lunch and plenty of small talk. These resource and time heavy meetings were occasionally augmented by extra-ordinary conference calls, usually triggered by an unforeseen issue or the need for an inter-meeting decision backed-up with a quick response. Those present were largely individuals with day jobs other than pensions, whose busy and time-pressured schedules had to be synchronised and a time convenient for all identified, often some way off. Decision-making was an inefficient business.
This model no longer exists in its previous format. It is unlikely to return for some time, if at all. It has been replaced by an initial flurry of conference calls which have now morphed into an array of video-link virtual meetings, Zoom, WebEx, MTeams, Fuze, Skype, 8by8, Blue Jeans to name but a few. We didn’t rush to embrace this new dawn at first and wondered how scheme business would work without tortuous journeys to far-flung places across the UK and beyond. However we soon got to grips with the un-mute button and recognised that the virtual world can indeed lend itself to more efficient interaction by all relevant parties. And you could always supply your own tea and biscuits.
The new model also increasingly involves individuals whose day job focuses on pensions, in the form of Accredited Professional Trustees that can devote their time, experience and expertise to the continuous governance cause.
The lexicon of pensions governance has changed overnight but without the technology it relies on, continuous governance would have been “little or no governance”. Virtual meetings now last two to three hours and are punctuated by frequent and often efficient half hour Zoom calls aimed at keeping the governance, and current Covid-19 risk management, flowing continuously.
The necessity for continuous governance is heightened further still by the increasing prevalence of the cyber threat hovering like a vulture above the pensions administration machinery. Systems are being continuously bombarded by cyber criminals hell bent on prising open the numerous defensive layers put in place to shield sensitive information and data. The vigilance required should already be in place but the need to be continuously suspicious in this post Covid-19 IT-dominated governance world is new (and in some respects is counter to what pension trusts are actually all about). This, combined with the looming threat of scammers also waiting in the wings to swoop on members’ money (as well as their data) makes such governance as demanding as it has been.
Although time-consuming, continuous governance will permanently replace what went before but will be blended with in-person interaction once it is safe and once all involved decide the time is right. That time is not now, and may not be until well into 2021, but until then the new governance model is fit for purpose, working well for the benefit of the millions of scheme members but is very technology dependent. None of this remote-working continuous governance would have been possible in the pre-digital era. It is happening and will continue to happen provided the IT lights are kept on.
The continuous governance process has been borne out of necessity but is how it should be going forward. Arguably, it’s how it always should have been.
