@Pixabay.

This topic will be covered at Insurance Investor Live | Europe 2025 on September 24 and 25 in London. Find out more, and how to register, here.

In today’s highly competitive asset management landscape, companies are facing mounting pressure to make faster, more integrated decisions while maintaining robust operational frameworks. As investor expectations evolve and regulatory complexity increases, managers are seeking ways to connect decision-making across departments and functions to strengthen oversight, drive efficiency, and support long-term performance.

This shift has become increasingly relevant to institutional investors, who are scrutinising not only investment outcomes but also the quality of a firm’s internal controls. Managers that implement streamlined governance, integrated risk ownership, and agile operations are often better equipped to manage complexity, scale effectively, and maintain allocator confidence.

Building strong oversight frameworks

Maria Long, a partner at ORC — a operational due diligence consultancy for institutional allocators such as sovereign wealth funds and pension funds — said companies can enhance operational resilience and support smarter, more cohesive decision-making through relatively easy processes. Long will be speaking on this topic at the Insurance Investor Live | Europe 2025 conference in September.

A consistent issue Long observes across asset managers of all sizes is the lack of effective oversight frameworks. “Having strong organisational controls in place is something that we often see a gap in, across different sizes — from smaller managers right up to some of the larger ones,” she said.

“Structure drives effective cross-functional decision making

as the business evolves.”

Rather than viewing governance as a compliance box-ticking exercise, Long emphasises its role in enabling consistency, accountability, and risk-aware leadership. At the core of this approach are formal committees with standing agendas — mechanisms that help ensure oversight keeps pace with the increasing complexity of strategies and scale. “What works when you’re a smaller manager doesn’t necessarily work when you become mid-size — and definitely doesn’t work when you become a large asset manager,” Long said.

Former Chief Operating Officer and independent consultant, Russell Newman echoed this perspective and stresses the importance of intentionally designed decision-making structures that span functions and foster collective responsibility. “I frame organisational effectiveness around 4 pillars: governance, people, platform, and communication. “You need the right stakeholders at the table — Chief Investment Officer (CIO), Chief Operating Officer (COO), Chief Marketing Officer (CMO), Chief Financial Officer (CFO) and Chief Compliance Officer (CCO) — actively managing the day-to-day, supported by well-structured committees. That kind of architecture enables agile, cross-functional decision-making as the business evolves.” 

This shift includes recognising and empowering all functions within the firm — not just front-office roles. As one former senior data professional from a large investment manager noted, “Initially they would just look at the data team as an inputting team. If I didn’t punch a number into the system, then you’re not going to see the value.” But the reality is far more complex: entering data is not just a clerical task; it requires understanding the nature of each asset class, the impact of decimal placement, and the different ways that equity and bond data must be treated. This level of diligence is critical because even a small error in data entry can dramatically skew valuations and downstream analysis.

Moreover, assets often move through multiple systems, each requiring the data in different formats. For example, one asset might be entered into five different systems to meet various operational and reporting needs, creating potential for inconsistencies if teams are not aligned on definitions and processes. This fragmentation underscores the importance of close collaboration and a shared understanding of the data lifecycle.

Evolving governance should reflect this interconnected value of each team, ensuring that operational, technological, and data functions are fully integrated into the decision-making process. As companies grow, so too should their governance frameworks, to avoid fragmented decision-making and ensure alignment across teams. 

“Everyone should understand the data; what you’re doing,

why you’re doing it, the importance of it.”

Newman reinforces that alignment is cultural as much as structural: “Regular team meetings and town halls — whether monthly or quarterly — create transparency and a sense of shared purpose beyond individual roles. That’s how you drive alignment across the enterprise.” 

Building flexible risk frameworks

Beyond governance, a central concern for many companies is fragmented ownership of risk. Investment, operations, and compliance often operate in silos — each managing distinct aspects of risk without a firm-wide view. “Nobody owns risk overall,” Long said. “This lack of integration could leave firms vulnerable to oversight gaps that may affect performance, regulatory posture, or both.” To address this, Long advocated for establishing a centralised risk committee tasked with overseeing risk across all operational areas.

Importantly, risk teams serve a protective function that helps prevent shortcuts and errors. While some may perceive risk management as interference, it should be understood as a vital shield supporting the integrity of processes and data. When leveraged positively, risk teams can be a brilliant asset to any organisation.

This compartmentalisation not only fragments accountability but also obscures the data foundations underpinning these risks. As one industry expert put it, “Everyone should understand the data; what you’re doing, why you’re doing it, the importance of it. Without the data, technology will fail.”

Regular reviews of portfolio risks, operational incidents, and regulatory developments allow organisations to respond more cohesively to emerging issues, while strengthening both agility and accountability.

Communication and transparency are also essential to embedding a risk-conscious culture. Newman said, “If you don’t have a top-down risk and compliance culture, it’s hard to identify gaps—in process, tech, or workflow. Risk awareness has to be embedded into governance through committees like operational risk or trade error.”

Operational risk — especially non-financial risks — is another area where many firms fall short. Near-misses and incidents frequently go unreported due to a lack of clear frameworks. “For a framework to have operational incidents or events reported is often very weak, but it’s one of the things that proves most useful to senior management,” Long said. Documenting these events, even when they don’t result in immediate impact, allows organisations to learn, adjust, and prevent future disruptions. 

“Compliance that just meets regulatory requirements

is the bare minimum.”

As organisations scale, operational agility becomes harder to maintain. Complex internal structures, layered teams, and multiple approval cycles can slow the adoption of critical technologies, such as artificial intelligence. “The bigger a company gets, the harder it is to be flexible,” Long said.

Newman stressed that organisational flexibility must be built deliberately. “When selecting vendors or tech partners, you need to think not just about where your business is today, but where it’s heading. Build a platform that’s adaptable to regulatory changes, tech advancements, and strategic pivots.”

Valuing data as a strategic asset

But the issue isn’t just about technology adoption — it’s about how data is understood and valued within the organisation. Without a culture that treats data as a strategic asset, even the best technology implementations may underdeliver. Flexibility also depends on mentoring and cross-training, so when business move fast or team members are unavailable, others can step in seamlessly.

To remain responsive, organisations are increasingly turning to third-party vendors and platforms that provide continuous updates, reduce the burden on internal teams, and enable faster execution.

Whilst outsourcing is nothing new in the financial services space, its use is currently in fashion again. However, the regulatory landscape is also changing rapidly, with allocators demanding more than basic compliance, which could prove to be a headache for companies that are outsourcing massively.

“Compliance that just meets regulatory requirements is the bare minimum,” Long said. Instead, organisations need risk-based frameworks tailored to their specific exposures and business models — particularly in private markets, where operational risks may be hidden by lower transaction volumes. 

“Be patient and methodical when evaluating platforms,

processes, and risk.”

Common vulnerabilities, such as weak segregation of duties and poor conflict-of-interest monitoring, are drawing closer scrutiny. “Investors are demanding a lot more assurance that conflicts of interest are addressed because reputational damage can be even more costly than regulatory fines,” Long said.

Proactive compliance frameworks help organisations differentiate themselves by demonstrating credibility and long-term alignment with allocator priorities.

Newman said there was need for evolving skill sets within organisations to support these frameworks. “A modern operations team can’t just be about reconciliations," he said. "They need to understand risk, regulation, and data lineage. That shift is key to operational alpha.”

In turn, talent development and communication become strategic levers. “You build resilience not just with systems, but with people who know how to use them and why they matter,” said Newman. “That level of engagement helps firms react faster, and smarter.”

Ultimately, Long’s insights point to a broader truth: operational resilience is no longer just about minimising downside risk — it’s a strategic enabler of sustainable growth. Organisations that invest in strong governance, holistic risk ownership, and agile infrastructure are better positioned to scale with integrity and outperform in a crowded market.

This requires a cultural shift where every team member understands their impact. “A car can’t work without all components. Just because I sit over there doesn’t mean I’m less important than the person executing a deal that is going to make us millions," she said.

Companies that foster this level of cross-functional respect and clarity are more likely to build resilient, high-performing organisations in a competitive, data-driven future.

Newman added a final note on strategic leadership: “Be patient and methodical when evaluating platforms, processes, and risk. These aren’t things you rush. Understand the business holistically and involve everyone — especially the end users.”

As the bar continues to rise, asset managers that treat operational excellence as a core strategic priority — not just a support function — could be better equipped to earn allocator trust, respond to regulatory expectations, and deliver lasting results. In a fast-changing environment, these internal capabilities may be what separate future leaders from those left behind.

The answer to this question lies in building strong, integrated governance frameworks, fostering cross-functional collaboration, embedding risk awareness across the organisation, and treating data and operations as strategic assets. By aligning structure, culture, and technology, companies can enhance decision-making agility and operational resilience, positioning themselves for long-term success. 

Maria Long will be speaking at Insurance Investor Live | Europe 2025 on September 24 and 25 in London. Find out more, and how to register, here.

 

Please Sign In or Register to leave a Comment.