Pulling this together in a timely manner that allows processing and interpretation is a complex data management and workflow challenge. Customisation is a frequent bug-bear for managers, especially because it sounds like an expensive thing to implement. But it is systemised customisation that maximises your power to communicate with your clients and make lasting impressions that count. Some firms choose to outsource the standardised components such as monthly statements, however it is unusual for firms to outsource their investment reviews. We have found that over 80 per cent of managers would never consider outsourcing their investment reviews simply because of complexity and risk, and the potential client fall-out that could result from error.

Many firms still use internally developed systems based on Microsoft Office and other general reporting tools. These may have been cheap and quick to implement, but in most cases they are now a business constraint and cost far more than managers realise. In the last couple of years we have seen a number of new reporting system vendors enter the Australian market, which is good news both in terms of choice and competition. Specialised reporting systems enable controlled report customisation by the reporting teams without involving the IT department, and enable meticulous efficiency and maximum flexibility in communication and delivery.

The reporting burden is high in investment management. Most managers produce monthly statements five-to-eight business days after month-end, quarterly investment reviews eight-to-15 days after quarter-end, and an annual report with tax statements between July and September. Without implementing an efficient client reporting system, investment managers risk falling behind standard market practice, making embarrassing errors and, worst of all, losing mandates because they are simply not set up to deliver to a new benchmark for reporting standards. Is this the impression you wish to leave with your client? ’CRO ’ comes home to roost The position of ‘chief risk officer’ (CRO) has accelerated into the mainstream, with a survey of major global funds managers revealing that the role now almost always reports into the chief executive officer or the board, not merely into the chief operating officer as would once have been the case.

Global investment administration consultancy, Investit, surveyed its client base of funds managers and custodians, and found that in addition to this new prominence for the CRO, 95 per cent of respondents had either developed or purchased a risk management system. Investit’s Doug Neill recently returned from a London conference of the 27 surveyed clients, representing $9.5 trillion under management and $48 trillion under custody, and found that the UCITS IV directive and the Alternative Funds Manager directive were consuming the time of anybody seeking to do business in Europe. The latter directive will force OTC derivatives to be traded through a central counterparty, which according to Neill put ‘data management’ at the top of most attendees’ priority list.