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 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 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 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 EngagementSignificant variables Changed investmentsGender, financial literacy, gender*value Financial plannerAge Member statementFinancial literacy, gender*value Called super fundAge Accessed details onlineAge, financial literacy Know how fund performedFinancial literacy, gender*income Know valueFinancial literacy Read annual reportAge, financial literacy Read PDSAge, financial literacy Know feesAge, 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