Ideas & musings about consumer behaviour

Superannuation websites aren’t delivering on the customers’ top needs

Written by Justin van Vliet

When asking prospective superannuation customers to rate the most important features while researching for a superannuation provider, the top three responses all revolved around information; information about account fees and charges, information that is easy to understand, and information about investment fee and charges. However, not all superannuation websites are delivering on these needs.

Most important elements on a website when researching superannuation online

important superannuation information

Despite the highest rated information feature being around account fees and charges, Australian superannuation providers are only averaging a score of 38% when it comes to displaying this information on their websites. Of the brands measured, only CareSuper and Equipsuper scored above 40% for this area.

Benchmark scores for feature and functions around fees/charges information

fees and charges scores

The reason why the industry scores significantly low within this area comes down to the use of oversimplified tables used to present fees and charges information. As a result, there is vital information that is missing. The most commonly missing information from company websites are; information on how fees are charged, the frequency and amount of the charges, and basic explanations around the fees. This lack of information presented on their website is the only area that the lowest scoring companies have in common.

Of the brands measured,the companies scoring lower than industry average here are BT, ANZ Super and ING Direct.

So what is it that these companies are lacking and what can they do to improve?

BT, who only scored 10% for fees and charges information, is missing out on at least two features. Firstly, fees and charges are not as clearly labelled as “fees” etc. – meaning that consumers have to work harder to find this information. Secondly, the home/landing page does not have content or a link around ongoing monthly/yearly fees.  BT is the only company that was benchmarked that is currently missing this feature on their webpage.

Whilst ANZ Super and ING Direct have all the features mentioned above, they still have areas where they are lacking and therefore pulling down their scores. Even though ING Direct is the best overall performer within this industry, the website does not score well regarding information on account fees & charges. When comparing ING and ANZ Super in displaying information about fees and charges, their content is similar, but their presentation differs.

ANZ Super – fees and charges informationanz-feesING Direct – fees and charges information ing-direct-super-fees

ING Direct and ANZ Super both scored 30% thanks to both including the same features on their sites. The difference between the two, however, is the way in which they display the information. ING Direct has opted for an accordion approach, which when all the sections are open, result in a longer page using a lot of space, meanwhile ANZ Super uses less space by condensing, and missing out on, critical fee information.

A company that is doing well regarding displaying information about both account and investment fees and charges is CareSuper. CareSuper scored 60%, 22% higher than the industry average for this area. The driver behind the higher score lies within the added content that is presented within the fees and charges table on their website. The table explains the type of fee, the amount, and the frequency of the fee charges. Furthermore, the page also provides an explanation above the table, and a call to action for help if needed. The page also indicates how account fees are charged along with the capability to compare fees to other superannuation funds, the date of when fees/charges are effective, and the terms and conditions surrounding the fees.

CareSuper – fees and charges information

CareSuper

Two companies that are new to the Global Reviews Digital Effectiveness Benchmark study are EquipSuper and Cbus, both of which scored higher than the industry average for the area around fees and charges information. Equipsuper scored 50% and Cbus 40% for their fees and charges information. The features that cause these strong positive scores for EquipSuper is the inclusion of contextual FAQS/a link to FAQs relevant to account fees, in addition to contextual contact details relevant to account fees.

As with BT, Cbus fails to clearly label the fees/charges and display the information ‘above the fold’. However, their score is held up by features that most other companies do not include on their account detail page which is the inclusion of content or link around how fees are charged, and the display of terms/conditions relating to the fees.

Although the majority of the companies within this industry are unfortunately scoring 40% or below for information around fees and charges, there are some quick wins that can help boost the industry average. By making minor changes such as adding more context and detail, this would help to drastically increase the score, the industry average, and ultimately help satisfy more customer needs.

0 Comments

Leave a Reply

Latest Buzz

    Sorry, no Tweets were found.

Office Numbers

Australasia
+61 3 9982 3400

United Kingdom
+44 (0) 203 725 8260

Ireland
+353 (0) 21 601 9274

Request a call back