Superannuation funds seem today to be in the vice-like grip of two major impulses: one, to maximise investment returns; and two, to drive down costs.

Maximising after-fee returns to members has become a mantra recited ad nauseum; the consolidation of funds currently underway is part of a mania to maximise economies of scale, even though there’s mixed evidence that greater scale automatically leads to improved outcomes for members.

But the urge to consolidate, to drive up member numbers and to turbocharge assets undermanagement may simply be setting funds up for failure – or at least for disappointing members – later.

When you’ve amassed a body of members roughly the size of an Australian capital city, and you’ve squeezed costs to within a basis point of their lives serving members in accumulation phase, how do you then deliver a bespoke, personalised and individualised service to all or even some of those members as they transition to retirement?