Pensions Return to Boardroom Agendas

Pensions have returned to the boardroom as stronger funding positions and changing regulations transform the decisions and options facing corporate decision-makers, according to new research from Independent Governance Group (IGG), a leading provider of professional pensions trusteeship, governance and communications services.

IGG’s new report: The Pensions Balancing Act highlights the growing time and resource dedicated to pensions in the boardroom, as corporate decision-makers face the greater complexity of surplus and changing regulation.

The study, based on a survey of UK CEOs, CFOs and senior pension decision-makers, found that more than four in five (81%) say the amount of C-suite and board-level time devoted to pensions has increased over the past five years, with more than a third (37%) saying it has increased significantly. While improved funding conditions might have been expected to reduce the time spent on DB pensions, in reality this has been the case for just one in twenty CFOs.

With the UK’s aggregate DB scheme surplus now standing at £210bn on a low dependency basis, rather than focusing primarily on managing deficits and reducing risk, many organisations are now considering a broader range of strategic questions around surplus release and the long-term value their defined benefit (DB) pension schemes can create. For instance, IGG’s research found that nearly twice as many corporate decision-makers (40%) view their pensions scheme as a source of future value if it remains fully funded, as opposed to those who primarily view it as a risk to be removed (22%). Meanwhile, more than two in five (43%) describe their scheme primarily as a valuable way of rewarding current and former employees.

More complexity brings additional pressure and concern

However, a greater range of options brings more complexity, and this is creating an additional burden. Almost two-thirds of corporate decision-makers (62%) admit their pension responsibilities create pressure or concern within their role. Future legal or regulatory change is most commonly cited, identified by one in four (25%) decision-makers, while more than one in five senior decision-makers state they don’t have sufficient advisory or governance support, 15% do not have the time or capacity to get into the detail, and one in six don’t fully understand the organisation’s options.

There is also an emerging confidence gap among sponsors. Three in ten (29%) feel less equipped to assess how DB surplus could be used. The same proportion identify understanding regulatory expectations and changes as an area of uncertainty. Only 4% say there are no areas of pension scheme management they feel unequipped to assess.

David Farmer, Trustee Director and Head of Strategic Pension Solutions at IGG, said:

“For many years, pensions were something boards hoped would require less attention over time. The opposite is now happening.  Better funding has expanded the number of strategic options available to sponsors, but it has also created more difficult decisions.

“For years, the challenge for many CFOs was relatively easy to define, even if it was difficult to solve: fund the deficit, manage risk and work towards a long-term objective. Improved funding has changed that equation, and buyout as soon as possible is no longer the default option. Sponsors and trustees now have a wider range of credible options available to them, but that makes decision-making more complex rather than less. Success increasingly depends on strong governance, effective sponsor-trustee collaboration and access to the right expertise.”

The full report can be viewed here.

Methodology: IGG commissioned Censuswide to survey 100 UK CEOs, CFOs and pension decision-makers to assess their views, experience and strategies with regards to their current pension schemes. The data was collected between July 3^rd and July 7^th, 2026. DB-specific findings are based on the 73 respondents whose organisations are the sponsors of DB schemes. Censuswide is a member of the Market Research Society (MRS) and the British Polling Council (BPC), and a signatory of the Global Data Quality Pledge. It adheres to the MRS Code of Conduct and ESOMAR principles.

Key Contact