Skip to main content

Best Practices for Setting Up An Investment Committee for Corporate Retirement Plans

In our 2014 Retirement Survey Report, about 79% of survey participants said they have an investment committee. Given a complex environment of regulatory scrutiny and fiduciary liability exposure, a committee specifically charged with investment oversight is a sound risk management strategy for plans and organizations of all types and sizes.

Although they will differ from one organization to the next, best practices suggest an investment committee’s responsibilities and duties include:
  • developing an investment policy statement;
  • establishing a formal process to manage the plan’s investment strategy;
  • determining and implementing investment decisions;
  • establishing procedures for selecting and monitoring investment options;
  • selecting and removing fund managers and evaluating their performance; and
  • reviewing investment management fees.
As these duties suggest, it is also a best practice to ensure that an investment committee is appropriately empowered to make and carry out relevant investment decisions. A committee that is purely advisory in nature may result in unnecessary delays in making and implementing critical retirement plan decisions and policy. An “advice only” committee may also discourage qualified prospective members who may only wish to serve on a committee with real authority.

Broad representation is another best practice to help ensure effective investment committee activity. More than 37% of survey participants said their investment committee was comprised of a combination of senior staff and members of their board of directors. Roughly 13% of respondents said their committee consisted of board members exclusively, while an additional 29% said their committee was comprised exclusively of senior staff. A remaining 21% answered “other” when asked about the composition of their investment committee.

One compelling reason to compile a diverse committee is the inherent risks of limited thinking and outlook. An unduly narrow perspective can influence a committee’s thinking. Best practices suggest that effective committees should be comprised of members who have a good understanding of financial and/or investment matters, and incorporate people with diverse backgrounds, including financial, legal, human resources, and other disciplines. Not only does this approach allow for input from a broad array of perspectives, it can also mitigate the risk of a committee being dominated by a single person or point of view.

If you have any questions about establishing an investment committee, or would like to speak with an advisor, please get in touch by calling (800) 388-1963 or via e-mail at

Popular posts from this blog

SECURE 2.0 Discussion Series: Session One

SECURE 2.0 provisions: What we know and what’s still up in the air The SECURE 2.0 Act, signed into law in late December 2022, has factored heavily in retirement industry discourse since the final legislation was published. As with any legislation of this depth and breadth, there’s a lot to digest and the industry takes time to adjust. Our team of experienced advisors recently met to discuss some of the more nuanced provisions of the legislation, such as changes to Roth contributions, and what they could mean for plan sponsors. Panel participants included the following HBS team members: Noah Buck, Christina Bauer-Dobias, Sean Bayne, Vincent Bocchinfuso and Kathleen Coonan. Highlights of our panel’s conversation below should serve to help guide plan sponsor thinking. On Roth employer contributions NB – In addition to deferring pre-tax or Roth, plan sponsors can now allow employer contributions to be classified as Roth, is that right? VB – Correct. This is immediately available to plan s

COVID-19: Retirement and Benefit Plan Resources

As the COVID-19 crisis continues to unfold, we are closely monitoring news and updates from top sources. We’ll be updating this section as new developments unfold. Here are several key articles and links to help plan sponsors and administrators navigate the COVID-19 impact to retirement and benefit plans: Retirement Plans 4 Key CARES Act Provisions for Retirement Plan Sponsors Markets React to Coronavirus   Important Considerations for Retirement Plan Sponsors during the Coronavirus Pandemic In Fed We Trust Participant Education Services: Timely Help from a Safe Distance CRDs 100% Taxable for New York State and Local Income Tax Purposes in 2020 IRS Permits Remote Notarization of Participant Elections   Employee Benefits CARES Act Expands Health Coverage Rules Understanding the Historic $2 Trillion Stimulus Package Employee Compensation and Benefits During Closures and Furloughs DOL Clarifies Exemptions to Coronavirus Paid Leave Laws Small Business Exemption to

SECURE 2.0 Discussion Series: Session Two

The retirement industry has been buzzing since the SECURE 2.0 Act was signed into law last December. This new, comprehensive legislation has sparked a lot of discussion. As with any major reform, it will take time for the industry to fully adapt and understand all its implications. Following our April 11 webinar on the first three months of the industry’s response, our team reconvened to discuss some of what we have heard from our client and vendor partners and to respond to some of the great questions we heard from attendees. Panel participants included the following HBS team members: Noah Buck, Christina Bauer-Dobias, Sean Bayne, Vincent Bocchinfuso and Kathleen Coonan. The Discussion SB – Throughout the webinar, I wanted to stress two things: 1) confusion about where to start and what is expected from plan sponsors is normal; and 2) even more than three months in, this is a developing situation and people should expect changes as time goes on. With those in mind, engagement through