PLANSPONSOR - February/March 2018 - 32

2017 Defined Contribution Survey: Providers
to [answer]. "
Still, the DC Survey remains a valued
way for plan sponsors to evaluate providers
based on peer reviews. This year, we
present our findings in a more accessible
way. The data includes six market
segments, and providers are included in
each where they earned enough feedback
to receive a score. A plan sponsor looking
for information supplied by plan sponsors
of the same size can simply turn to the
segment that correlates to its plan. -PS
Methodology
T
he following pages summarize plan
sponsor satisfaction with defined contribution
(DC) plan recordkeeper offerings
in 23 areas of participant/sponsor
services covering five broad categories:
technology, education, plan administration,
fees and investments, and account/
client service teams.
Results were compiled from the 2017
PLANSPONSOR DC Survey-which
distributed more than 50,000 questionnaires
to DC plan sponsors listed
in the PLANSPONSOR database-as
well as from client lists supplied by DC
recordkeepers; a total of 3,750 responses
were received by the close of the survey,
November 14, 2017.
To qualify for inclusion in the
published results, a provider had to meet
specific quotas in each of six asset-based
markets (see charts for details). A total of
24 providers qualified for listing; additional
details on these and other providers
can be found in our 2017 Recordkeeping
Survey (available at plansponsor.com/
research).
Sponsor satisfaction within a given
area of service was derived from the
percentage of respondents " completely
satisfied " less those that were " neutral " or
" dissatisfied. "
The three highest-scoring providers
in each service category earned a " Best
in Class " Award, as did those providers
with a net satisfaction rate above the asset
group's benchmark score (also listed in
each chart). A " Service Commendation "
was given to each recordkeeper that did not
receive a Best in Class honor but exhibited
strong client satisfaction within a service
attribute-i.e., more than 50% of clients
were " completely " satisfied with the service
offering.
Results also include the percentage of
Average Service Ratings
Plan Administration
Plan transaction processing
Loan/Withdrawal processing
Beneficiary administration
Plan design flexibility
Payroll integration
Technology
Participant call centers
Participant website
Mobile apps/offerings
Sponsor website
Plan reporting
Plan analytics/benchmarking
Participant Education
Participant statements
Enrollment materials/support
Print/Digital campaigns
On-site meetings/support
Advice/Guidance tools
Financial education offerings
Sponsor Services
Plan/industry knowledge
Responsiveness and consistency
Regulatory/Compliance support
Investments/Fees
Range of Investment options
Fee clarity/transparency
Cost to value of plan fees
Min Mean Max 1 = Poor; 7 = Excellent
5.50 6.34 6.71
5.50 6.41 6.83
5.00 6.22 6.77
5.44 6.20 6.71
5.25 6.18 6.78
4
5.00 6.39 6.93
4.50 6.16 6.61
4.00 5.93 6.88
5.50 6.20 6.55
5.25 6.05 6.51
5.50 6.03 6.52
4
5.00 6.38 6.79
4.00 6.19 6.86
4.00 5.96 6.50
4.33 5.87 6.67
4.50 6.13 6.64
5.00 5.93 6.48
4
5.62 6.42 6.79
5.33 6.30 6.86
5.75 6.49 6.85
4
5.00 6.16 6.61
5.50 6.11
6.60
5.50 6.17 6.75
4
5
6
7
completely satisfied ratings received across
all categories in each major area of service
and the provider's net recommendation
rate, based on Satmetrix Systems' Net
Promoter ScoreSM
.* For more information,
contact brian.okeefe@strategic-i.com.
*Net Recommendation/Promoter Score represents the percentage of respondents " very likely
to recommend " the provider (i.e., giving it a score of 9 or 10 on a 10-point scale) minus the
percentage of scores of 6 or below (i.e., " neutrals " and those " likely to recommend against " ).
32 PLANSPONSOR.com February-March 2018
5
6
7
5
6
7
5
6
7
5
6
7
http://www.plansponsor.com/research http://www.plansponsor.com/research http://www.PLANSPONSOR.com
PLANSPONSOR - February/March 2018

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of PLANSPONSOR - February/March 2018
