This article was originally published in the print edition of Retirement Magazine Vol. 3

The linchpin in generating good retirement outcomes is selecting a suitable and high-quality retirement solution. Acknowledging this leads to the question of how retirees might find their way to suitable solutions given their specific circumstances, in particular how they may engage with retirement decisions. 

The Conexus Institute has discussed this issue multiple times under the “pathways” moniker: see the institute’s Retirement Explainer #6 for an overview. ^[1] This research outlines the spectrum of pathways through which a retiree might find their way to a suitable retirement solution. We also argue a solution could be identified by one of three parties: the member themselves (“self-direction”), a financial planner (“adviser-direction”) or a superannuation (super) fund (“trustee-direction”). 

In this article we focus on the role for super funds in assisting their members to access a suitable retirement solution. We outline five types of members based around differences in how they might engage with retirement decisions. We then discuss the range of decision support services that super funds need to have in place to support all these member types. We also highlight some missing foundations for an effective support service architecture. 

The bottom line is that, while there has been some progress by industry, there are many gaps to fill in industry’s decision support architecture if all members are to be supported. 

The figure below summarises the two dimensions considered in this article, highlighting the availability of the various services and their potential use by differing member types. Colours indicate the current state of the service being provided by industry.

Catering for a range of member types

Super fund members can differ substantially in how they may approach identifying a suitable retirement solution. Member types that super funds should be aiming to cater for include:

1. Self-directed – Members who want to construct or choose a solution for themselves.
2. Seeking financial planning – Members who desire financial advice from a financial planner for which they are willing to pay, probably due to higher wealth or complex circumstances. 
3. Willing to use trustee-provided advice services – Members who are willing to engage with some form of advice made available by trustees at a low or zero cost, but are unlikely to use a financial planner due to either low wealth, simple needs or aversion to the cost.
4. “Please do it for me” – Members who are overwhelmed and just want someone to “tell them what to do”, and thus would value being presented with a solution they can easily access.
5. Dormant – Members with high propensity to take no action out of inertia, confusion or high disengagement.

The last three member types include members who are either uncomfortable with self-direction or not willing to seek paid financial advice and thus would be best-served through trustee direction. In absence of clear direction from their super fund, these three member types may either take no action or make sub-optimal choices, including going with a salient option like an account-based pension (ABP) with minimum drawdowns regardless of its suitability, or alternatively remaining in accumulation.

“Catering for a member base that varies in how they engage with retirement decisions requires a super fund to have in place a range of services to assist members towards suitable retirement solutions.” 

Required decision support services 

Catering for a member base that varies in how they engage with retirement decisions requires a super fund to have in place a range of services to assist members towards suitable retirement solutions. Below we list the key components of a comprehensive decision support offering that can assist all member types. 

1. Information, education and tools – Most member types should benefit from having access to a combination of information on the fund’s offerings, educational services and tools such as calculators that project income and facilitate budgeting. 

State of play: Most funds provide at least some of these elements, although scope and quality can vary. There seems room to improve on breadth, ease of use and understandability of these services. 

• Standardised solutions for self-selection – Some members may be assisted through their super fund making available a set of standardised (or “default-style”) solutions designed for particular member types with which a member may self-identify – the so-called “persona” approach. This service may assist self-directed members (type (a)) by making it easier for them to identify a suitable solution. 

State of play: A couple of funds are currently using this approach. Whether it becomes more widespread may depend on whether other decision support services can be developed that adequately assist all members.

• Trustee-generated recommendations – This involves providing scalable financial advice services at low or zero cost that generate recommendations of a suitably tailored solution coupled with a Statement of Advice. These services would specifically cater for member type (c) who are willing to use trustee-provided advice services made available at a low or zero cost, although may also be used by self-directed members (type (a)). It is likely that these services would be provided digitally, possibly coupled with limited in-person support. 

State of play: A few super funds offer these services, but generally they are not yet broadly available. Many funds are developing their digital advice offerings, and we expect availability to expand and quality to improve over time. Importantly this type of service is currently accommodated under existing financial advice rules, provided it occurs under a financial advice relationship thus requiring either a related party licensee or a partnership with an external financial advice group. Progression of the “Advice through superannuation” component of the Delivering Better Financial Outcomes (DBFO) reforms should support further expansion of trustee recommendation services.

• Capacity to suggest solutions to members – The ability to suggest solutions is fundamental to cater for the “please do it for me” member type (d) who are overwhelmed but may respond if presented with a ready-made solution. This member type includes those who are unwilling or unable to engage with financial advice in any other form, perhaps because they may view a digital advice process as too daunting or financial advice as too expensive. We suspect this is a meaningful cohort in numbers, albeit skewed to members with lower balances and financial literacy. The ability to suggest solutions could also benefit other member types by providing a nudge that acts as a “call-to-action” coupled with scope to implant beneficial anchor points into the decision process, e.g. including more efficient drawdowns or a lifetime income stream in the suggested solution. 

State of play: The capacity to suggest retirement solutions outside of a financial advice process is currently unavailable, but would likely benefit many members as discussed in our Default retirement solutions report of November 2025. We understand that some funds are pushing for policy adjustments that would support the capability of super funds to make some form of solution suggestion or nudge. 

• Hard default mechanism – Hard defaults would cater for dormant members (type (e)) who have a high propensity towards inaction, but could be difficult to implement as discussed in our Default retirement solutionsreport.

State of play: Hard defaults are not currently supported, thus heightening the potential for worse outcomes for some members who take no action to transfer their assets into the retirement phase. We understand some parts of the industry are considering advocating for the introduction of hard defaults, particularly once a member reaches an older age (e.g. 75). 

• Human assistance with choosing a solution – Access to a real person that can provide personal assistance in choosing a suitable solution could be valuable for most member types, even if just to help navigate other services such as directing members towards information sources or a digital advice tool. Human contact can help members to better understand their options and boost their confidence to make choices. 

State of play: Some funds have staff, sometimes called “retirement concierges”, who can assist members with information and navigating calculators and tools, but cannot make a personal recommendation. Greater assistance in identifying a suitable retirement solution could be rendered if funds offered scoped advice services (service #3) or could suggest solutions (service #4). The proposal for a new class of adviser under DBFO reforms holds potential to expand the availability of in-person support, but faces significant uncertainty around whether it will proceed.

• Access to paid financial advice – Super funds should provide access to paid personal financial advice for member type (b). This advice could be provided by either a fund’s internal advice division and/or a referral relationship with external financial advisers.

State of play: Access to paid financial advice varies greatly across funds. Platform supers and retail master trusts have strong connections with the advice industry such that many of their members are advised, although they tend not to have their own advisers and some may have a cohort of unadvised and previously-advised members. Across the profit-for-member sector, internal advice teams vary in size and breadth of service and there is variability in the state of external adviser reference programs. 

• Triage service – Funds should have a mechanism to identify a member’s need for assistance and direct them to the appropriate services. This should include the capacity to identify potential type (b) members who would benefit from financial planning and refer them accordingly.

State of play: Due to this being an internal fund process, it is difficult to identify the current state. We suspect that for many funds this is a developing area. 

Two aspects are missing that are currently restricting the capacity of super funds to assist their members into a retirement solution. Both need to be addressed if the super industry is to achieve its full potential in supporting retirees.

Two missing foundations

Two aspects are missing that are currently restricting the capacity of super funds to assist their members into a retirement solution. Both need to be addressed if the super industry is to achieve its full potential in supporting retirees. 

1: Well-defined scope of what trustees may do

The first missing foundation is clarity around the scope of assistance that trustees can provide. This is in a large part because of uncertainty over what constitutes financial advice and thus invokes the associated requirements. We are seeing varying responses to this uncertainty across funds due to differences in legal interpretations and regulatory risk tolerance as well as access to a financial advice license. Some funds are pushing ahead with a range of trustee-provided decision support services, albeit often via a related party licensee or an external licensee partnership. Others are moving cautiously for fear of contravening the advice rules and attracting the ire of the regulator. Overall, the situation is holding back progress.

The “Advice through superannuation” component of DBFO Tranche 2 would help address this situation by clearly defining the personal information that may be collected and scope of advice that can be provided by trustees on a collectively-charged basis. Progressing these reforms would afford the industry an element of safe harbour and confidence to move forward, as well as making it clear what is out-of-scope and requires an alternative advice offering. Meanwhile, the targeted prompts component of DBFO Tranche 2 would make requirements around nudges clearer, but as it stands does not allow nudges around product (the nudges are more activity prompts) and hence rules out suggesting retirement solutions. 

2: Integration and implementation of solutions 

A further missing foundation is making it easy for members to access retirement solutions that are highlighted by decision support services. Two elements are required. The first is making available integrated retirement solutions comprising investments housed within an ABP, potentially a lifetime income stream and a drawdown strategy for the ABP to shape up total income while allowing for any Age Pension. Second, funds should then be able to implementthose solutions on behalf of members rather than expecting them to cobble together the components. We are not aware of any fund that offers both elements, although some are working hard and are edging closer to this outcome. Without addressing both integration and implementation the provision of decision support services to assist members in identifying a suitable solution won’t reach anywhere near full potential.

Much work to do

Delivering good member outcomes requires super funds to provide a suite of decision support services to assist members towards suitable retirement solutions in the manner that suits them. Without catering for a range of member types who approach retirement decisions in differing ways, many members will end up in sub-optimal solutions while others may be left wallowing. 

The main missing piece is the ability of trustees to present retirement solutions to members. This could be facilitated through some combination of the “Advice through superannuation” component of DBFO Tranche 2 and trustees being able to suggest a solution to the member as a type of nudge or first offer, perhaps supported by some capacity to default members who take no action. The lack of these mechanisms would leave many members stranded without meaningful assistance, resulting in them either pursuing unsuitable solutions or remaining in accumulation. 

There is more to be done in building out the decision support services architecture around the retirement phase. Each component required for a comprehensive decision support offering as listed in this article is either partially formed or missing entirely. All parts of the super system – including super funds, policymakers and regulators – have much work to do.