Exploring behavioral barriers and interventions in retirement savings: Findings from online focus groups among university students
-
Received March 25, 2022;Accepted May 15, 2022;Published May 23, 2022
-
Author(s)Link to ORCID Index: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0938-2944
,
Link to ORCID Index: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1740-0663,
Link to ORCID Index: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1448-1936 -
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.21511/imfi.19(2).2022.13
-
Article InfoVolume 19 2022, Issue #2, pp. 154-166
- TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯ
-
Cited by2 articlesJournal title: Investment Management and Financial InnovationsArticle title: Unveiling individuals’ financial behavior patterns: The Polish-Ukrainian case study in the pre-war periodDOI: 10.21511/imfi.20(4).2023.20Volume: 20 / Issue: 4 / First page: 242 / Year: 2023Contributors: Yevheniia Polishchuk, Valentyna Maiurchenko, Oleg Tereshchenko, Maksym Budiaiev, Serhii OnikiienkoJournal title: Investment Management and Financial InnovationsArticle title: Role of behavioral biases in the investment decisions of Pakistan Stock Exchange investors: Moderating role of investment experienceDOI: 10.21511/imfi.21(1).2024.12Volume: 21 / Issue: 1 / First page: 146 / Year: 2024Contributors: Saima Aziz, Shahid Mehmood, Muhammad Asif Khan, Anita Tangl
- 848 Views
-
238 Downloads
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
In a number of countries around the world, population ageing raises concerns about the sustainability of pension systems. A younger generation has conventionally been least likely to save for retirement even if there is a need to take individual responsibility and start saving for their retirement as soon as possible. In this context, the aim of the paper is to identify behavioral barriers and interventions towards retirement savings ceiling to this part of the productive population. For this purpose, three online focus groups were deployed among 16 university students aged 23-24 years. Using the coding process, common categories, related codes and frequencies of responses were determined from the transcribed material. The results pointed at two crucial barriers related to retirement savings: behavioral (present bias, status quo bias, loss aversion, limited attention) and institutional (education, pension policy and trustworthiness of the state institutions). Additionally, three main categories of behavioral interventions were detected to overcome these barriers: simplification of decision-making (easy calculation of pension, default options), use of salience effects (information campaigns, visualization tools, personalized content) and minimizing feelings of loss (framing of messages, financial incentives, products with different types of liquidity). Based on findings, recommendations were formulated for three groups of stakeholders: government, industry (financial providers and pension funds) and employers. The results bring valuable insights to relevant stakeholders regarding behaviors and attitudes of the young generation on retirement savings issues.
Acknowledgments
This contribution was written with the support of the Technology Agency of the Czech Republic, project number TL03000737 titled as “Behavioral economics as a population activation targeted tool within use of financial security banking products.”
- Keywords
-
JEL Classification (Paper profile tab)G23, J26, J32
-
References50
-
Tables1
-
Figures2
-
- Figure 1. Conceptual map introducing results from online focus groups
- Figure 2. Framework of behavioral barriers and designed solutions
-
- Table 1. Characteristics of participants in each focus group
-
- Adams, G. A., & Rau, B. L. (2011). Putting off tomorrow to do what you want today: Planning for retirement. American Psychologist, 66(3), 180-192.
- Ariely, D., Kreisler, J., & Trower, M. R. (2017). Dollars and sense: How we misthink money and how to spend smarter. New York: Harper.
- Ashraf, N., Karlan, D., & Yin, W. (2006). Tying Odysseus to the Mast: Evidence from a Commitment Savings Product in the Philippines. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 121(2), 635-672.
- Benartzi, S., & Thaler, R. (2007). Heuristics and Biases in Retirement Savings Behavior. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 21(3), 81-104.
- Bijak, J., Kupiszewska, D., Kupiszewski, M., Saczuk, K., & Kicinger, A. (2007). Population and labour force projections for 27 European countries, 2002-052: Impact of international migration on population ageing. European Journal of Population/Revue Européenne de Démographie, 23(1), 1-31.
- Blanco, L. R., Duru, O. K, & Mangione, C. M. (2020). A Community-Based Randomized Controlled Trial of an Educational Intervention to Promote Retirement Saving Among Hispanics. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 41(2), 300-315.
- Boisclair, D., Lusardi, A., & Michaud, P. C. (2017). Financial literacy and retirement planning in Canada. Journal of Pension Economics and Finance, 16(3), 277-296.
- Brown, J. R., Kapteyn, A., & Mitchell, O. S. (2016). Framing and claiming: How information-framing affects expected social security claiming behavior. Journal of Risk and Insurance, 83(1), 139-162.
- Cappelletti, G., Guazzarotti, G., & Tommasino, P. (2014). The effect of age on portfolio choices: Evidence from an Italian pension fund. Journal of Pension Economics and Finance, 13(4), 389-419.
- Commission for Fair Pensions. (2019). Změny III. Pilíře důchodového systému. Návrhy Ministerstva práce a sociálních věcí. (In Czech).
- ČSOB Penzijní společnost. (2020). Press Relaease: Vzpomínky na stáří. Tisková konference ČSOB Penzijní společnosti. Prague. (In Czech).
- Deetlefs, A. M. J., Bateman, H., Dobrescu, L. I., Newell, B. R., Ortmann, A., & Thorp, S. (2019). Engagement with Retirement Savings: It Is a Matter of Trust. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 53(3), 917-945.
- Dimock, M. (2019). Defining generations: Where Millennials end and Generation Z begins. Pew Research Center, 17(1), 1-7.
- Dolls, M., Doerrenberg, P., Peichl, A., & Stichnoth, H. (2018). Do retirement savings increase in response to information about retirement and expected pensions? Journal of Public Economics, 158, 168-179.
- Fisher, P. J. (2010). Gender Differences in Personal Saving Behaviors. Journal of Financial Counseling and Planning, 21(1).
- Foster, L. (2017). Young People and Attitudes towards Pension Planning. Social Policy and Society, 16(1), 65-80.
- Foster, L., Henegham, M., Olchawski, J., & Trenow, P. (2016). Closing the Pension Gap: Understanding Women’s Attitudes to Pension Saving. The Fawcett Society.
- Foster, L., & Heneghan, M. (2017). Women´s attitudes and expectations towards pension saving for retirement in the UK. Innovation in Aging, 1, 185-185.
- Hauff, J. C., Carlander, A., Gärling, T., & Nicolini, G. (2020). Retirement Financial Behaviour: How Important Is Being Financially Literate? Journal of Consumer Policy, 43(3), 543-564.
- Holzman, R., Hinz, R. P., & Dorfman, M. (2008). Pension Systems and Reform Conceptual Framework. World Bank Discussion Paper, 824.
- Iyengar, S. S., & Kamenica, E. (2010). Choice proliferation, simplicity seeking, and asset allocation. Journal of Public Economics, 94(7-8), 530-539.
- Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263.
- Kane, M. M. (2014). Overcoming Obstacles to Retirement Plan Success: Inertia, Myopia, and Loss Aversion. Journal of Pension Benefits: Issues in Administration, 21(2), 23-57.
- Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2015). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research. SAGE Publications, Inc.
- Loewenstein, G., & Prelec, D. (1992). Anomalies in Intertemporal Choice: Evidence and an Interpretation. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 107(2), 573-597.
- Lusardi, A., & Mitchell, O. S. (2011). Financial literacy and retirement planning in the United States. Journal of Pension Economics and Finance, 10(4), 509-525.
- Lusardi, A., & Mitchell, O. S. (2017). How Ordinary Consumers Make Complex Economic Decisions: Financial Literacy and Retirement Readiness. Quarterly Journal of Finance, 7(03), 1750008.
- Madrian, B. (2012). Matching Contributions and Savings Outcomes: A Behavioral Economics Perspective (No. w18220). National Bureau of Economic Research.
- Madrian, B. C., & Shea, D. F. (2001). The Power of Suggestion: Inertia in 401(k) Participation and Savings Behavior. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116(4), 1149-1187.
- Marques, S., Mariano, J., Lima, M. L., & Abrams, D. (2018). Are you talking to the future me? The moderator role of future self-relevance on the effects of aging salience in retirement savings. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 48(7), 360-368.
- McConnell, M. (2013). Behavioral economics and aging. The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, 1-2, 83-89.
- Morgan, D. L. (1999). The focus group guidebook. Sage.
- Mullan, P. (2000). The imaginary time bomb: Why an ageing population is not a social problem. London: I.B. Tauris.
- O’Donoghue, T., & Rabin, M. (1999). Doing It Now or Later. American Economic Review, 89(1), 103-124.
- OECD. (2019). Pensions at a Glance 2019: OECD and G20 Indicators.
- Ricci, O., & Caratelli, M. (2017). Financial literacy, trust and retirement planning. Journal of Pension Economics and Finance, 16(1), 43-64.
- Robertson-Rose, L. (2020). “Because My Father Told Me To”: Exploratory Insights into Parental Influence on the Retirement Savings Behavior of Adult Children. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 41(2), 364-376.
- Rowlingson, K. (2002). Private Pension Planning: The Rhetoric of Responsibility, The Reality of Insecurity. Journal of Social Policy, 31(4), 623-642.
- Saez, E. (2009). Details Matter: The Impact of Presentation and Information on the Take-up of Financial Incentives for Retirement Saving. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 1(1), 204-228.
- Samuelson, W., & Zeckhauser, R. (1988). Status quo bias in decision making. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 1(1), 7-59.
- Smith, J. A. (Ed.). (2015). Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to research methods. Sage.
- Smyrnis, G., Bateman, H., Dobrescu, L. I., Newell, B. R., & Thorp, S. (2019). Motivated Saving: The Impact of Projections on Retirement Saving Intentions. SSRN Electronic Journal, 3464813.
- Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. M. (1997). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Sage.
- Team, B. I. (2014). EAST. Four Simple Ways to Apply Behavioural Insights.
- Thaler, R. H., & Benartzi, S. (2004). Save More Tomorrow TM: Using Behavioral Economics to Increase Employee Saving. Journal of Political Economy, 112(S1), S164-S187.
- Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2009). Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. London: Penguin Books.
- Tomar, S., Kent Baker, H., Kumar, S., & Hoffmann, A. O. I. (2021). Psychological determinants of retirement financial planning behavior. Journal of Business Research, 133, 432-449.
- Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1985). The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice. In G. Wright (Ed.), Behavioral Decision Making (pp. 25-41). Boston: Springer US.
- World Economic Forum (WEF). (2017). We’ll Live to 100 – How Can We Afford It? (White Paper. REF 020417 - case 00029250).
- Zandi, G., Torabi, R., Yu, O. T., Sivalingam, A. D., & Khong, T. T. (2021). Factors affecting the intention of generation Y in Malaysia to invest for retirement. Advances in Mathematics: Scientific Journal, 10(3), 1485-1507.
-
-
Conceptualization
Martin Horák, Soňa Kukučková
-
Data curation
Martin Horák, Soňa Kukučková
-
Formal Analysis
Martin Horák, Soňa Kukučková, Kamil Dobeš
-
Funding acquisition
Martin Horák, Soňa Kukučková, Kamil Dobeš
-
Investigation
Martin Horák, Soňa Kukučková
-
Methodology
Martin Horák, Soňa Kukučková
-
Project administration
Martin Horák, Soňa Kukučková, Kamil Dobeš
-
Resources
Martin Horák, Soňa Kukučková
-
Software
Martin Horák
-
Validation
Martin Horák, Soňa Kukučková, Kamil Dobeš
-
Visualization
Martin Horák
-
Writing – original draft
Martin Horák, Soňa Kukučková
-
Writing – review & editing
Martin Horák, Soňa Kukučková, Kamil Dobeš
-
Supervision
Kamil Dobeš
-
Conceptualization
-
Supply chain disruptions in the context of early stages of the global COVID-19 outbreak
Problems and Perspectives in Management Volume 18, 2020 Issue #2 pp. 490-500 Views: 3024 Downloads: 565 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯThe world finds itself facing unprecedented conditions as the global pandemic of the COVID-19 virus has led to fundamental changes in the global supply chains. This paper aims to assess the initial response undertaken by Central European companies in the early stages of the outbreak. The survey was conducted as a research method to collect data from a large number of companies. Since it takes time to assess long-term effects of the pandemic and related measures, various changes in supply chains are examined as the early results of the COVID-19 crisis and measures implemented by companies. The study examines how different economy sectors were changed due to this situation. The changes in operating volumes were identified as the most commonly used measures to accommodate new market developments. However, developing the new supply chain partnership was the most successful measure. This measure correlates with an increase in revenues and an increase in the number of customers. In some cases, disruptions in supply chains had positive effects on revenues as a reaction to the COVID-19 epidemic outbreak. Cross-country examinations found that all Polish companies implemented at least one new measure to tackle this crisis. Nearly 20% of Slovak companies and nearly 30% of Czech companies made no changes in their operations during the early stages of the crisis. However, overall, the supply chains in Central European countries turned out to be quite resilient, since most companies managed to survive the supply chain disruptions and in some cases even show signs of overcoming them completely.
Acknowledgement
This contribution was supported by the project No. 1/0757/18, “Consumer behavior in buying goods of daily consumption with an emphasis placed different contents of goods offered on markets of selected EU countries”. -
Individualism and self-reliance of Generations Y and Z and their impact on working environment: An empirical study across 5 European countries
Problems and Perspectives in Management Volume 19, 2021 Issue #1 pp. 39-52 Views: 1997 Downloads: 3608 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯIn recent years, numerous researches and studies confirm differences between Generations in their values, attitudes, or characteristics. However, the challenge is to get to know the Generation Z, whose individuals are currently entering the labor market for research and practical application. The presented paper aims to expand the knowledge of Generations Y and Z in the field of individualism and self-reliance. This issue is examined concerning independence regarding housing and financial independence to parental help. The aim of the study is an empirical verification of possible similarities and differences between Generations Y and Z. The study is based on an online questionnaire survey. Data were obtained from more than 1,500 respondents of these Generations (born in 1982–2005) in 5 European countries (Czech Republic, Denmark, the Netherlands, Poland, and Slovakia). Data are examined using a two-tailed t-test, Mann-Whitney U test, and regression analysis. The overall findings of the study indicate intergenerational differences in the issue of independence, with Generation Z, unlike Millennials, becoming more self-sufficient at a younger age. Research has also found that women leave the parental household earlier than men. The paper presents the possible influence of the outputs on the working environment and work motivation of the Generations Y and Z.
Acknowledgment
The paper was created with the support of the project SGS-2020-015 “Research in selected areas of management and marketing of organisations in the context of demographic and technological changes.” -
Ethics, resource rent, environment and petroleum policy: the case of a small open economy
Environmental Economics Volume 12, 2021 Issue #1 pp. 76-89 Views: 1926 Downloads: 590 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯThis paper contributes to the understanding of how the environment, ethics, values, and historical contingencies shape public policy. It explains the accomplishment of petroleum resource management in the small open economy of Norway. The study is conducted by mapping policy decisions and the arguments behind them regarding environmental and ethical issues. This is done by studying available governmental and parliamentary papers along with statements from politicians and central governmental officials. The paper also seeks to illuminate some of the decisions by quantitative measures.
The paper firstly describes a model of Ricardian resource rent. Secondly, it investigates the set of values that were in place before the petroleum production started in the 1970s, as described in public documents. An important argument was to build a “qualitatively better society” for the benefit of the people. Thirdly, it traces the historical roots of these values by examining historical sources.
The main findings are that success lies in understanding the ethics behind the environmental resource rent harvesting of this non-renewable natural resource. The paper concludes that the focus on the natural environment and resource rent management can be attributed to popular values built on historical traditions. According to them, the state and the trust between the state and its citizens played key roles in shaping the policy. The careful policy can be illustrated by the fact that Norway has managed to build one of the largest sovereign funds in the world worth USD 1,200 billion for use by future generations. Only 3% of its value, significantly less than its historical net profit, should be used annually.