The backbone of a successful Wtp transition: cooperation between pension fund and pension administration organization

Meet Senior Manager Niels Kuipers and discover how he navigates between the pension fund and the pension administration organization. 

Could you tell us a bit about yourself? 

My name is Niels Kuipers, I am 33 years old and have been working at IG&H since 2019. Before that, I worked at another consultancy firm that merged with IG&H in 2019. I studied economics in Tilburg and completed my master’s internship at a pension insurer. From there, I entered the pension sector, and am now a Senior Manager at IG&H. Thus far, I have spent my entire career in the pension industry, starting at the administrative offices of several pension funds and later expanding my focus to pension administration organizations. 

In my recent assignments, I have been particularly active at the interface between pension funds and pension administration organizations. This relationship is especially important in the context of the transition to the Dutch Future Pension Act (Wet toekomst pensioen or Wtp). Having been at IG&H for many years now, I still find it a great place to work. My colleagues are intelligent and ambitious, and the atmosphere is open and pleasant. Collaborating with my colleagues both within IG&H and at clients makes me see myself continuing to work in the pension sector at IG&H for a long time to come. 

Why is the cooperation between pension fund and pension administration organization so crucial in the Wtp transition? 

Imagine a pension fund and a pension administration organization building a house together. Until now, they mainly carried out small renovations which were familiar, steady and always done in the same way. But now they must build a completely new house in a different location. That is extremely complex. The pension fund and social partners determine the design of the house. The pension administration organization must ensure it can be built within the limits of its systems and capabilities. 

If the two do not communicate properly, the pension fund may design something that the administration organization cannot build. Or the administration organization may build something the pension fund did not intend. That leads to problems, delays or rework. This is why cooperation is so vital. 

The Wtp requires something fundamentally different from the regular cooperation between pension funds and administration organizations. We are moving from years of stable cooperation, based on well‑known processes and agreements, into a complex transformation. This transformation demands intensive collaboration, clear agreements and well‑defined responsibilities. Social partners and pension funds make substantive decisions, and the administration organization outlines the implementation framework within the possibilities of its IT architecture. If this collaboration is not properly structured, unintended misunderstandings arise and the process is delayed. A well‑functioning collaboration is the foundation of the entire transition. 

Where do you see this collaboration coming under pressure in practice? 

The mutual dependency is significant. Choices made by the pension fund have a direct impact on the systems, processes and participant communication of the administration organization. And the administration organization can no longer limit itself to simply following along; it must actively contribute ideas about feasibility, planning and risks. 

At the same time, it is becoming clear that the administration organization cannot do everything anymore. Standardization is being introduced to manage this. On one hand, this is needed to make the Wtp transition feasible within legal deadlines. On the other hand, it helps keep costs under control. Instruments such as a product and service catalog are introduced to support standardization. The implementation frameworks outlined by the pension provider based on this tool may conflict with the wishes and interests of social partners and pension funds. This puts pressure on the relationship. 

What is needed to keep this collaboration workable? 

The relationship is the foundation. Clarity, structure and trust strengthen that foundation. Clear agreements on roles, responsibilities and milestones are essential. Everyone finds the Wtp transition somewhat nerve wracking, so it is important to honor agreements and achieve planned milestones. Discuss progress, risks and bottlenecks openly; this prevents surprises and ensures everyone works from the same understanding. It helps enormously if the pension fund’s Wtp transition is seen as a shared goal between the fund and the administration organization. Both want an honest and controlled Wtp transition and implementation. If challenges are seen as shared problems to be overcome together instead, much more becomes possible. 

How do you ensure that the pension administration organization is sufficiently involved in the pension fund’s decisions? 

You must involve all relevant departments within the administration organization early and consistently, not only after decisions are made but during the decision‑making process itself. This makes the consequences for the entire chain, from communication to IT, immediately visible. It reduces the risk of misinterpretations or uncertainties that could cause late‑stage blockers. 

The reverse also applies: a pension administration organization must properly inform a pension fund about its implementation framework and its product and service catalog. Elements of the pension scheme that are taken for granted now may no longer be possible under the Wtp. Communicating this actively and clearly strengthens the sense of a shared objective. 

What does this Wtp transition require of you? 

In my role as transition manager for one of our clients, I constantly switch between the pension fund and the administration organization. I need to understand what is happening at the board table, but also what is feasible in practice. That means listening carefully, recognizing interests and ensuring that discussions focus on what is needed to move forward. It also means connecting: ensuring that the right people speak with each other at the right time and arrive at solutions. I aim to help both parties see the Wtp transition as a shared goal, which strengthens the relationship. And if that connection enables us to achieve that shared goal and complete the transition to the Wtp on the planned date, it is a success that everyone involved can be proud of. 

What role does IG&H play in strengthening this collaboration? 

What makes IG&H unique is that we not only provide consultancy, but we also develop and implement IT products ourselves. We know the pension domain and understand how pension administration and IT operate. This enables us to support our clients beyond advisory work alone. For example, we provide transition and program management but also supervise IT implementations and business transformation initiatives. We can provide integrated support in designing cooperation, coordination and governance, enabling all parties to maintain joint control over the Wtp transition.