Why pension scheme events test your communication strategy

Most pension schemes have a communication strategy. It covers annual statements, regulatory notices and the routine cycle of member updates. For the most part, it works well enough.

But every scheme eventually faces moments where "well enough" isn't enough. A buyout exercise that needs members to respond within a window. A GMP equalisation project that changes what people are owed. McCloud remedy communications that ask members to understand choices they never expected to face. These are the events where the quality of your communication approach is genuinely tested, and where the gap between information sent and information understood becomes a real operational problem.

Scheme events don't wait for members to catch up

The challenge with scheme events is that they're often complex, time-sensitive and unfamiliar. Members haven't encountered them before and may not encounter them again. There's no opportunity to learn through repetition.

Consider what's being asked of members across different types of scheme activity. A pension increase exchange requires members to weigh a one-off lump sum against a permanent reduction in annual income. A transfer value exercise involves understanding projections, tax implications and the trade-off between guaranteed and flexible benefits. McCloud remedy communications ask affected public service scheme members to compare benefits under two different scheme structures for a specific period of service, often involving tax considerations they've never had to think about.

Each of these is different. Each uses different terminology. And each demands a level of understanding that standard scheme communications, designed for annual cycles and routine updates, were never built to support. That’s before we even begin to try and decode any acronyms and jargon.

When members don't understand what's being asked of them - or even what they’re being told - schemes feel the consequences. Low response rates, a surge in helpline queries, extended timelines and the risk that members make decisions they don't fully grasp or, more commonly, make no decision at all.

The compound effect of routine communication

Here's where it gets interesting. How members respond to a one-off scheme event isn't just a function of how well that specific communication is written. It depends on the relationship the scheme has already built through its everyday communications.

If members have spent years receiving statements they don't read, letters they don't understand, and updates that feel like they were written for someone else, they've learned to disengage. When a genuinely important communication arrives, it lands in the same pile. The scheme may know this is different. The member doesn't.

This is the argument for thinking about communication as something more than a compliance function. A scheme that consistently helps members understand their pension, not just at critical moments but through routine touchpoints like annual statements, builds a foundation of familiarity and trust. Members who are used to engaging with clear, relevant communications are more likely to engage when it really counts.

This is what a communication strategy of understanding looks like. Not a one-off effort for high-stakes events, but a consistent approach that means members are already paying attention when something important arrives.

Adding in a data dimension

There's a practical layer to this that's easy to overlook. Scheme events depend on accurate member data, and data quality across the industry remains a significant challenge.

Heywood's Pension Pulse report, which analysed approximately 3 million member records across nearly 70 UK pension schemes, found that 9.44% of member addresses are wrong on average. For a scheme running a time-sensitive exercise, that means nearly one in ten members may never receive the communication at all.

Wrong addresses aren't just an operational inconvenience. They represent a data privacy risk and, with pensions dashboards set to expose data quality issues in real time, they're becoming harder to ignore.

Digital communication channels help address this in a way that print simply can't. When members engage with their pension information through a secure online channel, they have a natural opportunity to check and update their personal details. That feedback loop, where communication and data maintenance happen in the same interaction, is quietly one of the most practical benefits of moving beyond paper-based approaches.

Schemes that have already built this kind of digital engagement into their routine communications will be in a materially stronger position when a scheme event requires accurate, timely contact with the full membership.

What pension and financial regulators increasingly expect

The regulatory backdrop reinforces this shift. TPR's updated administration guidance sets clear expectations around member communications and data management, positioning high-quality administration as fundamental to good saver outcomes. Communication is no longer treated as separate from scheme governance. It's part of it.

The FCA's Consumer Duty continues to raise the bar for member understanding, and the targeted support framework expected from April 2026 requires firms to demonstrate that consumers are in a "better position" after receiving support. While this primarily applies to FCA-regulated firms, the underlying principle reflects a direction of travel that trust-based schemes should take seriously: providing information is no longer sufficient. There needs to be evidence that it's been understood.

Building understanding before you need it

The schemes that handle major events most smoothly are rarely the ones that scramble to improve their communications at the point of need. They're the ones that have already invested in making routine communications clearer, more relevant and more engaging.

When members are used to receiving information that makes sense to them, personalised to their circumstances and presented in a format they can absorb, they're better prepared for the moments that matter. Fewer queries. Faster response rates. Cleaner data. Better decisions.

Pension communication members actually understand explored the evidence behind this and how personalised approaches are already shifting member comprehension. The principle carries through directly to scheme events: clarity builds confidence, and confidence supports better outcomes, for members and for schemes.

If your scheme is approaching a significant event, or simply looking at how everyday communications could better prepare your membership for what's ahead, it's worth considering whether your current approach is built for compliance or built for understanding.