The introduction of Mandatory Service Standards will create something the superannuation industry has not previously experienced at scale: more transparent and comparable service performance. For years, investment returns and fees have shaped how funds are assessed. As the standards take effect, service outcomes will become more visible, bringing the quality and consistency of the member experience into sharper focus.
This is not simply another reporting change. It has the potential to reset the competitive landscape by making service performance a more prominent indicator of how effectively a fund delivers for its members. Claims processing, complaints handling, death benefit determinations, response times and transaction fulfilment will increasingly be viewed not as isolated operational metrics, but as evidence of whether members receive the outcomes they should expect.
The opportunity for funds is significant. So too is the cost of standing still.
A new basis for comparison
As service performance becomes more transparent, comparison will become unavoidable. Funds that consistently deliver clear, timely and reliable service may strengthen confidence in their ability to support members across the moments that matter. Service delivery will no longer sit only within operations. It will increasingly influence strategic positioning, board oversight, executive decision-making and the confidence members place in their fund.
Meeting the standard may demonstrate compliance but it will not necessarily demonstrate that a fund is delivering a good member outcome.
The cost of falling behind
Greater transparency also raises the consequences of poor service. A delayed claim, unresolved complaint, processing backlog or sustained service disruption rarely remains confined to one operational issue. It can quickly become a broader organisational challenge, affecting regulatory standing, service performance and member confidence at the same time.
Operational issues can often be corrected through remediation, additional investment and process change. Trust is harder to rebuild. Members increasingly expect responsiveness, transparency and ease of interaction. When those expectations are not met, the impact be the erosion of confidence and advocacy can decline.
Shift the focus from metrics to outcomes
At IQ Group we see the Mandatory Service Standards as a catalyst for a more fundamental change in how service performance is understood and managed across the industry.
The standards will introduce important measures, but the measure itself is not the outcome. A response-time target, for example, may show whether an activity was completed within a defined period. It does not, on its own, show whether the member received clarity, appropriate support or an effective resolution. Funds must look beyond individual metrics and understand the end-to-end outcome experienced by the member.
This requires a view of service delivery across people, processes, technology, and the broader services supply network involved in the member journey. Individual service metrics may be met while the overall member experience remains fragmented. Stronger service performance will depend on making accountability visible across those boundaries and assessing whether the combined service ecosystem is achieving the intended result.
The funds that lead in this will not treat the standards as the definition of good service. They will use them as a baseline, then define what good looks for their members and the moments that matter.
The question is not only whether the metric was met. It is whether the member received the outcome the metric was intended to support.
Understanding what good looks like
The pathway forward begins with an honest view of current performance. Funds need to understand how services operate today, where outcomes are inconsistent and where hand-offs, ownership or provider boundaries create friction for members.
From there, Funds can establish a clearer view of their current services and what good looks like. That means looking beyond minimum compliance and considering the quality, consistency, transparency and accountability of service across critical member journeys. It also means identifying the gap between current performance and the level of service the fund needs to achieve for its members.
Once the gaps are visible, change can be targeted where it will have the greatest impact. This will involve strengthening governance and oversight, clarifying service ownership, redesigning processes, improving data and reporting, or aligning providers around shared member outcomes. The purpose is not to create more reporting artefacts. It is to translate evidence into practical service improvement.
A strategic choice for funds
The Mandatory Service Standards will create a choice. Funds can respond narrowly, treating the reforms as another compliance requirement and focusing on whether required thresholds are met. Or they can use the change to build a clearer understanding of service performance, lift operational capability and create stronger outcomes for their members.
Those that take the second path will be better positioned to build trust and differentiate through the service excellence they provide. Those that focus only on minimum requirements risk discovering that the industry, regulators and members have moved beyond them.
Falling behind will not simply mean missing a metric. It may mean falling behind member expectations, stronger industry practice and the funds that have already been used to raise the bar.
The standards will make service performance more visible. The opportunity is to make better member outcomes more deliberate.
IQ Group | October 2026
