Financial Capability Strategy Savings Steering Group Minutes
Financial Capability Strategy Savings Steering Group Minutes Date: Time: Location: Chair:
Mon 16 Jan 2017 13.00-15.00 MAS office, 120 Holborn, London, EC1N 2TD Greg Davies, Centapse
Attendees Carl Packman, Toynbee Hall | | Greg Davies, Centapse | Stephanie Mestrallet, JP Morgan Chase Foundation (by phone) | Peter Brooks, Barclays (by phone) |
Money Advice Service Attendees Jake Eliot (Policy) | Helen Pitman (Insight & Evaluation) – for item 3 | Jackie Spencer (Policy) – for item 3 | Lizzie Jordan (Insight & Evaluation) – for item 1 | Fiona Hague (Secretariat) | Apologies Brian Morris, Building Societies Association | Charles McCready, TISA | Debbie Thomas, HSBC | Mark Lyonette, ABCUL 1.
Welcome
1.1.
The Chair welcomed the group and gave apologies from those unable to attend the meeting.
1.2
There was discussion about membership of the group, if there were other organisations that should be invited to join or if there were possible alternative approaches. Action: As the group’s work plan develops, MAS will put forward alternative models for how group meetings could run.
2.
Action Plan Workshop
2.1
FH introduced the item reminding the group of the intended purpose of the action plan; to record the priority areas of focus identified by the group to set a direction of travel for the work by identifying short-long term outcomes to identify and record more immediate outputs and tangible deliverables, and to record the activates underway (or required) to support and deliver the outputs
2.2
The plan sets out a direction of travel for the sector and enables organisations not involved in the steering group to understand what is happening and see how they might support the work by aligning their activity. The plan will be owned by the group but its delivery and the activities listed on it are not exclusively limited to members of the steering group.
Minutes, SSG 20170116
36
1
2.3
The group discussed how the plan could provide a collective focus and agreed that the priorities identified were broadly relevant to the market and felt like they would provide opportunities to engage with others.
The group discussed overlap between their focus and the FAMR working groups. The group will keep the priorities and direction under review to enable them to respond to other emerging areas. Action: JE to provide the group with an update on FAMR process at the next SG meeting 2.4
The group highlighted the challenges for larger organisations to disclose work of relevance to the Strategy and the group that they were undertaking due to commercial concerns.
2.5
The group confirmed that their immediate areas of focus were, understanding Life event triggers as prompts for savings Identifying opportunities for how technology can support savings
2.6
The group then discussed four questions: Was the framework and presentation of the action plans useful? Were there gaps or things missing from the plans that the group felt should be in the plans? Were there projects of organisations undertaking relevant work that should be approached to be on the plans? What could steering group members share or contribute to the delivery of the plans?
2.7
Priority 1 – Life events The group discussion covered: Life Events could be leveraged Conflicts between what people want to plan for and what a financial planner would want you to plan for. How can guidance and support bridge the two? Political drivers of Government policy makes it harder to clearly structure savings products by life stages or event. If existing research on life changing events had been mapped? Using the mapping to then extend a call for evidence or delivery that could contribute to filling gaps If there was learning from non-UK bodies to share? The challenges of evidencing and understanding informal savings behaviour: o extent savings can be evidenced when saved in physical cash or in currnet accounts. o Balance between active saving and disposable income / delayed expenditure by cutting back.
37
The Group discussion threw up examples of projects the work plan should learn from: The Money House, Developed by Hyde Housing and now run by MyBnk US CSFI Financial Innovation Lab winners, funded by JP Morgan Foundation. RBS Sustainable Banking project
Minutes, SSG 20170116
2
2.8
Priority 2 – Technology and savings The discussion covered: The breadth of this is a focus: this should not be limited to new fintech app-based propositions. The lack of evidence that technological advances were leading to changes in savings behaviours If technology made it too easy for people to transfer money back from their savings (did people see savings as an extension of their current account, should more friction be brought it) The role of accelerators and the sandbox as a route/filter into the fintech market How the group could influence fintech development If it would be possible to delineate the work – what are the themes (automation of flows, goals) and what are the categories of what is being tried?
2.9
The group discussed signing off the action plan the importance of the activities reflected within it. The wondered if it was possible to add more detail to the plan – fleshing out the activities, what was being tested/what might be learned from them.
2.10
The group also discussed reviewing the plan regularly at meetings and reviewing the priorities annually.
3.
Minutes of last meeting
3.1
The minutes were approved as an accurate record of the previous meeting.
4.
Savings Research
4.1
JE outlined MAS’s intention to undertake research into savings behaviour to better understand what consumers are doing at different life stages and the consumer experience of trading off different short/long term saving needs.
4.2
He asked the group for their views on the questions posed in the paper: i) Is there existing research or particular considerations (ie policy issues) the group are aware of that should be factored into scoping the work? ii) Which cohorts, life events or trade-offs would the group like to see prioritised within this research to ensure that the research is most useful for this group and the wider sector? iii) As the learning from the research emerges how can we ensure that the output is useful for this group and the wider sector?
4.3
The group discussed: Incentives (ie are people responding to incentives in the right way) and fear points Including insurance in the mix If longitudinal research could be completed to track changes or if big data sets such as ELSA or Understanding Society could be utilised?
Minutes, SSG 20170116
3
If the research might explore attitudes – what are the prompts that people remember, where do people recognise that they changed their behaviour The importance of ensuring the guidance market works effectively for consumers (ie improving the supporting system rather than focusing on the actions and skills of consumers) Learning from credit score campaigns: how did they achieve the levels of advocacy? Impact on short term resilience and buffers – does promoting one negatively impact another area Matched contributions: we are used to thinking about matching as a strong motivator to saving, but need to identify if consumers will save less if their contributions were matched The challenge of being able to say that a customer “did the right thing”, you need to know a lot of information about customers to make an objective assessment. Collectively, understand the behaviours you want people to adopt Understanding the % of savings in short/long term savings as people age, how does this differ for different cohorts? Most interesting cohort being those below median salary, paying basic tax – this is the group it is hardest to understand what ‘good’ looks like An output of the research being recommendations on how people can be guided to save Looking at the impact of packaged accounts on short term saving, d Understanding what the predictors of savings behaviours are for different cohorts (ie self employed) Research could draw on international examples: how do the Netherlands to create pooled funds for self employed Supporting/recommendations to housing associations and guidance providers on how they can talk to different groups about saving Understanding the experiences of those that have had negative shocks Understanding how policy changes have had an impact on what good looks like for consumers.
Action: As the work develops, MAS will share updates on Savings research it undertakes with the Savings SG to identify gaps the group and wider sector may wish to fill. 5.
Strategy Update
5.1
FH provided the group with a brief overview work underway to support the Strategy as a whole and across the other themes and invited questions from the group.
6.
Any Other Business
6.1
GD drew the attention of the group to the draft Savings Evidence Review and highlighted the lack of evidence and evaluation of activities.
Minutes, SSG 20170116
38
4
6.2
There was no more business and the chair brought the meeting to a close. Dates of next meetings: 24 Apr, 10.30-12.30 (MAS offices) 6 Jul, 10.30-12.30 (MAS offices)
Savings Steering Group Action Log
Ref 33
36
37
38
Action Further information on CACI mapping to be shared at a future meeting. As the group’s work plan develops, MAS will put forward alternative models for how group meetings could run.
Owner MAS
Date due tbc
Update
MAS
ongoing
Our proposal is that this will involve more project-based working, potentially with sub-groups involving other partners and relying less on quarterly meetings of the whole group.
JE to provide the group with an update on FAMR process at the next SG meeting As the work develops, MAS will share updates on Savings research it undertakes with the Savings SG to identify gaps the group and wider sector may wish to fill.
MAS
April
MAS
ongoing
Minutes, SSG 20170116
5
Mon 16 Jan 2017 13.00-15.00 MAS office, 120 Holborn, London, EC1N 2TD Greg Davies, Centapse
Attendees Carl Packman, Toynbee Hall | | Greg Davies, Centapse | Stephanie Mestrallet, JP Morgan Chase Foundation (by phone) | Peter Brooks, Barclays (by phone) |
Money Advice Service Attendees Jake Eliot (Policy) | Helen Pitman (Insight & Evaluation) – for item 3 | Jackie Spencer (Policy) – for item 3 | Lizzie Jordan (Insight & Evaluation) – for item 1 | Fiona Hague (Secretariat) | Apologies Brian Morris, Building Societies Association | Charles McCready, TISA | Debbie Thomas, HSBC | Mark Lyonette, ABCUL 1.
Welcome
1.1.
The Chair welcomed the group and gave apologies from those unable to attend the meeting.
1.2
There was discussion about membership of the group, if there were other organisations that should be invited to join or if there were possible alternative approaches. Action: As the group’s work plan develops, MAS will put forward alternative models for how group meetings could run.
2.
Action Plan Workshop
2.1
FH introduced the item reminding the group of the intended purpose of the action plan; to record the priority areas of focus identified by the group to set a direction of travel for the work by identifying short-long term outcomes to identify and record more immediate outputs and tangible deliverables, and to record the activates underway (or required) to support and deliver the outputs
2.2
The plan sets out a direction of travel for the sector and enables organisations not involved in the steering group to understand what is happening and see how they might support the work by aligning their activity. The plan will be owned by the group but its delivery and the activities listed on it are not exclusively limited to members of the steering group.
Minutes, SSG 20170116
36
1
2.3
The group discussed how the plan could provide a collective focus and agreed that the priorities identified were broadly relevant to the market and felt like they would provide opportunities to engage with others.
The group discussed overlap between their focus and the FAMR working groups. The group will keep the priorities and direction under review to enable them to respond to other emerging areas. Action: JE to provide the group with an update on FAMR process at the next SG meeting 2.4
The group highlighted the challenges for larger organisations to disclose work of relevance to the Strategy and the group that they were undertaking due to commercial concerns.
2.5
The group confirmed that their immediate areas of focus were, understanding Life event triggers as prompts for savings Identifying opportunities for how technology can support savings
2.6
The group then discussed four questions: Was the framework and presentation of the action plans useful? Were there gaps or things missing from the plans that the group felt should be in the plans? Were there projects of organisations undertaking relevant work that should be approached to be on the plans? What could steering group members share or contribute to the delivery of the plans?
2.7
Priority 1 – Life events The group discussion covered: Life Events could be leveraged Conflicts between what people want to plan for and what a financial planner would want you to plan for. How can guidance and support bridge the two? Political drivers of Government policy makes it harder to clearly structure savings products by life stages or event. If existing research on life changing events had been mapped? Using the mapping to then extend a call for evidence or delivery that could contribute to filling gaps If there was learning from non-UK bodies to share? The challenges of evidencing and understanding informal savings behaviour: o extent savings can be evidenced when saved in physical cash or in currnet accounts. o Balance between active saving and disposable income / delayed expenditure by cutting back.
37
The Group discussion threw up examples of projects the work plan should learn from: The Money House, Developed by Hyde Housing and now run by MyBnk US CSFI Financial Innovation Lab winners, funded by JP Morgan Foundation. RBS Sustainable Banking project
Minutes, SSG 20170116
2
2.8
Priority 2 – Technology and savings The discussion covered: The breadth of this is a focus: this should not be limited to new fintech app-based propositions. The lack of evidence that technological advances were leading to changes in savings behaviours If technology made it too easy for people to transfer money back from their savings (did people see savings as an extension of their current account, should more friction be brought it) The role of accelerators and the sandbox as a route/filter into the fintech market How the group could influence fintech development If it would be possible to delineate the work – what are the themes (automation of flows, goals) and what are the categories of what is being tried?
2.9
The group discussed signing off the action plan the importance of the activities reflected within it. The wondered if it was possible to add more detail to the plan – fleshing out the activities, what was being tested/what might be learned from them.
2.10
The group also discussed reviewing the plan regularly at meetings and reviewing the priorities annually.
3.
Minutes of last meeting
3.1
The minutes were approved as an accurate record of the previous meeting.
4.
Savings Research
4.1
JE outlined MAS’s intention to undertake research into savings behaviour to better understand what consumers are doing at different life stages and the consumer experience of trading off different short/long term saving needs.
4.2
He asked the group for their views on the questions posed in the paper: i) Is there existing research or particular considerations (ie policy issues) the group are aware of that should be factored into scoping the work? ii) Which cohorts, life events or trade-offs would the group like to see prioritised within this research to ensure that the research is most useful for this group and the wider sector? iii) As the learning from the research emerges how can we ensure that the output is useful for this group and the wider sector?
4.3
The group discussed: Incentives (ie are people responding to incentives in the right way) and fear points Including insurance in the mix If longitudinal research could be completed to track changes or if big data sets such as ELSA or Understanding Society could be utilised?
Minutes, SSG 20170116
3
If the research might explore attitudes – what are the prompts that people remember, where do people recognise that they changed their behaviour The importance of ensuring the guidance market works effectively for consumers (ie improving the supporting system rather than focusing on the actions and skills of consumers) Learning from credit score campaigns: how did they achieve the levels of advocacy? Impact on short term resilience and buffers – does promoting one negatively impact another area Matched contributions: we are used to thinking about matching as a strong motivator to saving, but need to identify if consumers will save less if their contributions were matched The challenge of being able to say that a customer “did the right thing”, you need to know a lot of information about customers to make an objective assessment. Collectively, understand the behaviours you want people to adopt Understanding the % of savings in short/long term savings as people age, how does this differ for different cohorts? Most interesting cohort being those below median salary, paying basic tax – this is the group it is hardest to understand what ‘good’ looks like An output of the research being recommendations on how people can be guided to save Looking at the impact of packaged accounts on short term saving, d Understanding what the predictors of savings behaviours are for different cohorts (ie self employed) Research could draw on international examples: how do the Netherlands to create pooled funds for self employed Supporting/recommendations to housing associations and guidance providers on how they can talk to different groups about saving Understanding the experiences of those that have had negative shocks Understanding how policy changes have had an impact on what good looks like for consumers.
Action: As the work develops, MAS will share updates on Savings research it undertakes with the Savings SG to identify gaps the group and wider sector may wish to fill. 5.
Strategy Update
5.1
FH provided the group with a brief overview work underway to support the Strategy as a whole and across the other themes and invited questions from the group.
6.
Any Other Business
6.1
GD drew the attention of the group to the draft Savings Evidence Review and highlighted the lack of evidence and evaluation of activities.
Minutes, SSG 20170116
38
4
6.2
There was no more business and the chair brought the meeting to a close. Dates of next meetings: 24 Apr, 10.30-12.30 (MAS offices) 6 Jul, 10.30-12.30 (MAS offices)
Savings Steering Group Action Log
Ref 33
36
37
38
Action Further information on CACI mapping to be shared at a future meeting. As the group’s work plan develops, MAS will put forward alternative models for how group meetings could run.
Owner MAS
Date due tbc
Update
MAS
ongoing
Our proposal is that this will involve more project-based working, potentially with sub-groups involving other partners and relying less on quarterly meetings of the whole group.
JE to provide the group with an update on FAMR process at the next SG meeting As the work develops, MAS will share updates on Savings research it undertakes with the Savings SG to identify gaps the group and wider sector may wish to fill.
MAS
April
MAS
ongoing
Minutes, SSG 20170116
5
