Insight

Data: the foundation for everything.

When we asked the audience, 74% listed data challenges as one of their top three reasons for slower transactions.

Closely behind (and related to legacy data issues) came GMP equalisation, with 59% citing it as a top-three factor.

When data is accurate, complete, and accessible, projects move more quickly, and insurers gain confidence more quickly. When it isn’t, every downstream step, from pricing to legal sign-off, becomes harder.

The lesson? Investing in data readiness early on is no longer optional. It’s a strategic necessity.

Multiple friction points, one outcome.

It’s rarely one major blocker that slows a transaction. More often, several smaller issues stack up:

• GMP equalisation – unavoidable, technical, and never quick.
• Legal and benefit issues – intricate, but manageable once surfaced.
• Benefit features such as underpins – where insurer appetite may be limited, making early engagement essential.

On their own, each is solvable. In combination, they stretch timelines significantly.

The human and resource dimension.

Schemes and advisers are also under capacity pressure.

Administrators juggle data projects and pensions dashboards. Actuaries, lawyers, and consultants balance transaction work with business-as-usual obligations.

Even simple tasks like verifying legacy files can take longer than expected, creating ripple effects across the transaction journey.

The good news? Automated solutions are emerging that reduce reliance on manual effort and help accelerate member journeys.

Insurer dynamics.

From the insurer’s perspective, two themes stood out:

• Market appetite – not all schemes will attract the same level of interest, particularly in a crowded market.
• Administration handovers – even post-transaction, transferring admin responsibilities can cause friction and add to the perception of “slowness.”

A shift in how trustees seek support.

One of the most interesting debates was around whether trustees should look beyond their “core” advisers for targeted help.

Two models stood out:

• Specialist data support (such as Intellica) – accelerating readiness and tackling data challenges head-on.
• Independent project management – consultancies not tied to the scheme actuary or administrator, providing bandwidth and coordination across workstreams.

These models don’t replace existing advisers but complement them, adding focus and capacity when it matters most.

Looking ahead.

The overarching takeaway? Slowing transactions are rarely about a single issue. They reflect a system under pressure: complex data, technical pension challenges, resource strain, and insurer capacity.

For trustees, the key is to:

• Diagnose likely bottlenecks early.
• Be realistic about the time and resources required.
• Bring in the right support when gaps appear.

At Intellica, we see time and again that tackling data readiness early is the single most effective way to de-risk timelines. Combined with clear project oversight, it can make the difference between hitting the market window or missing it.

I’d love to hear from others: where do you see the biggest gains being made in speeding up transactions?