Engagement in superannuation - is there really a gender gap? Dr Laura de Zwaan Assoc Prof Mark...
-
Upload
brianna-howard -
Category
Documents
-
view
218 -
download
0
Transcript of Engagement in superannuation - is there really a gender gap? Dr Laura de Zwaan Assoc Prof Mark...
Engagement in superannuation- is there really a gender gap?
Dr Laura de Zwaan
Assoc Prof Mark Brimble
Prof Jenny Stewart
Women and Superannuation
• Women are systematically disadvantaged under the current system– Earnings-based – Less time in the workforce– More conservative– Longer life expectancy
Gender and Engagement
• Super Attitudes Survey, 2012• Only 19% of women are engaged with
their superannuation • Less engagement means
– Default investment options and funds– Minimum contributions– Lower retirement savings outcomes
What is Engagement?
• Cooper Review, 2010• Chetty et al., 2012
• Super Attitudes Survey, 2012• Financial Services Council, 2013
Model – Dependent Variables
• I have changed my investments in the past• I have contacted a financial planner for help with superannuation• I read my member statement every year• I have called my superannuation fund within the last year• I have accessed my super details online within the last year• I know how my fund has performed compared to others• I know how much superannuation I have• I have read the annual report from my superannuation fund• I have read the PDS issued to me by my superannuation fund• I know how much in fees my superannuation fund charges
Model – Explanatory and Controls
• Gender is the explanatory variable• Control variables:
• Age• Household income• Value of superannuation• Financial literacy (self-rated)
• Potential Interactions:• Gender/Value of super• Gender/Income• Income/value of super
Sample
• Respondents sourced from general public and staff (general and academic) of a large university
• Received 551 responses• Women 58.8%; Men 41.2%• Even spread over groups for demographics
– exception is postgraduate degree holders (39.8%)
Findings
• Gender was found to be significant for whether a respondent had changed their investments in the past
• Men are 5.564 times more likely to have changed their investments in the past. (p = 0.041).
• The overall model is significant (p = 0.000). Predicts 69.8% of the responses correctly and has a Nagelkerke R Square of 0.287.
• Also a significant interaction for gender and value of super (p = 0.046). Males with super balances of between $250,000 and $500,000 are 11.254 times more likely to have changed their investments in the past.
Findings
• An interaction between gender and value of super is significant for whether a respondent reads their member statement (p = 0.017, R = 0.376)
• Interaction between gender and income for whether respondents know how their fund performed compared to others (p = 0.021, R = 0.400)
• There were no other significant findings for gender.
Findings
Measure of Engagement Significant variables
Changed investments Gender, financial literacy, gender*value
Financial planner Age
Member statement Financial literacy, gender*value
Called super fund Age
Accessed details online Age, financial literacy
Know how fund performed Financial literacy, gender*income
Know value Financial literacy
Read annual report Age, financial literacy
Read PDS Age, financial literacy
Know fees Age, financial literacy
Findings
• Gender is not a predictor of engagement for a range of engagement measures– It is significant for whether the respondent had
changed investment options– Could indicate risk aversion
• To target engagement, financial literacy is a better approach
• However, as the Cooper Review pointed out, the system should work regardless of the level of engagement
Limitations and Future Research
• Self selection bias• Measure of financial literacy• Relationship status (Gerrans and Clark-Murphy, 2004)• Household role• Level of risk aversion• Family tax benefit payments subject to super guarantee