The invaren decision is one of the most consequential choices a pension fund board faces. It affects member security, fund solvency, and organizational structure for decades. Yet boards often navigate this complexity without dedicated strategic guidance—caught between actuarial analysis and governance requirements.
We bridge that gap. Our advisory role sits alongside your actuary and legal counsel, translating complexity into structured, defensible decisions.
First session: structured landscape assessment, no commitment required.
This engagement includes:Invaren—the conditional transfer of pension accrued liabilities—is both a technical and governance challenge. The decision involves:
Most boards approach invaren by handing actuarial analysis to legal counsel or governance committees. The result: board members struggle to translate numbers into strategy, councils feel unheard, and decisions appear reactive rather than deliberate.
Our advisory role fills this gap. We don't replace your actuary or lawyer. We sit alongside them, ensure the board understands the full range of options, and structure a defensible decision process that satisfies governance, regulatory, and stakeholder requirements.
In collaboration with your actuary, we map all feasible invaren scenarios—full transfer, partial by cohort, deferred phasing. We frame each against member outcomes, fund solvency, and board risk appetite.
Actuarial models produce data; boards need insight. We convert impact tables into narrative board papers, member FAQs, and council briefings that make the consequences clear.
We structure a deliberate go/no-go process: landscape assessment → options development → scenario testing → council consultation → final board decision. Each phase has clear deliverables and decision gates.
Councils must be heard. We help design consultation sessions, develop briefing materials, and synthesize feedback in ways that inform (not hijack) board deliberation.
Supervisory submissions must demonstrate robust governance. We ensure your decision file includes landscape assessment, options analysis, risk mitigation, and council engagement records—the complete supervisory narrative.
We follow a four-phase methodology designed to move from landscape clarity to defensible decision in 3–6 months.
Audit your fund's current position: solvency, member profile, actuary relationships, DNB expectations. Map regulatory constraints, member communication posture, and board decision-making preferences. Deliverable: landscape briefing and phase plan.
Work with your actuary to define scenario parameters. We facilitate workshops where board members challenge assumptions, stress-test outcomes, and evaluate trade-offs. Deliverable: options briefing with scenario comparisons.
Design participant council consultation. Prepare member FAQs, council briefings, and feedback synthesis templates. Coach the board on deliberation structure. Deliverable: decision-ready governance framework.
Synthesize landscape assessment, options analysis, council feedback, and final board decision into supervisory submissions. Ensure DNB receives clear narrative of robust governance. Deliverable: complete decision file, supervisory submission, stakeholder communications.
This advisory is designed for pension fund boards that:
If your board is early-stage exploring—or if invaren remains speculative—a single landscape assessment may be sufficient. But if you're committed to a serious decision process, this advisory is built for you.
We don't conduct actuarial analysis—your actuary does. We sit at the intersection: we facilitate conversations between your actuary and board, translate technical outputs into strategic narratives, stress-test assumptions, and help the board ask better questions. We speak both languages (actuarial and governance), which allows us to move insight from spreadsheets into decisions. Your actuary remains the technical authority; we become the strategic translator.
That's a fully legitimate outcome. In fact, our role is to ensure the board reaches whatever decision is right for your fund—invaren or no invaren. The engagement produces a defensible landscape assessment and options analysis regardless of which option the board ultimately chooses. If invaren is rejected, the fund still benefits from clarity on its solvency strategy, member communication, and medium-term governance roadmap. DNB supervisors respect boards that evaluate invaren seriously and decide it's not the right move.
Absolutely. Some boards move faster; others need more time for council consultation or DNB pre-engagement. The 3–6 month estimate assumes a standard decision cadence. If your board meets quarterly and participant councils require extended feedback loops, the engagement might extend. Conversely, if decision gates are clear and stakeholder alignment is high, you could compress the timeline. We flex resource commitment and phasing to your board's rhythm.
We treat council engagement as integral to the decision process, not a compliance checkbox. We help design briefing materials and consultation sessions where councils have genuine voice in shaping the board's final options. We also synthesize council feedback into structured input for board deliberation. Our goal: councils feel heard, boards have clear insight into member sentiment, and the final decision reflects authentic dialogue. This transparency strengthens supervisory standing and member buy-in.
The first step is a single landscape assessment session with your board—no long-term commitment, just clarity on your situation and the way forward.
Schedule a Consultation