Morris de Jong: It runs in the family

October 20, 2025

^{This article was originally written in Dutch. This is an English translation.}

The combination of fascinating content and relevance to society makes the pension sector the ideal environment for him. Financial Investigator spoke with pension fund director Morris de Jong.

By Lies van Rijssen

'Initially, I wanted to develop computer games, but my parents-in-law encouraged me to study Finance & Control. They ran a trust office and convinced me that I would enjoy working in the financial sector. I already became familiar with the trust sector during my studies, but I learned even more when I started observing their business. It was precisely at that time that new legislation imposed a large number of additional integrity and compliance requirements on the sector. How challenging do you want it to be? Because we served and guided multiple clients (mostly real estate companies or finance companies) on the overall picture of their business operations, this was an extremely educational period for me. I gained insight into all kinds of aspects of how a financial company operates.

At home, I talked about what I was learning at work. My mother has been a pension consultant since 2008, and after I entered the financial sector myself, I immediately felt a stronger connection to her profession. One of the commonalities we discussed was the DNB supervision that applies to both sectors. My interest in the pension sector grew rapidly. I came to realise that pensions were by no means a one-dimensional field of work, but rather a very diverse environment in which disciplines such as risk management, asset management, communication and legal affairs played a role. It was also my mother who pointed out to me that pension funds were looking for young people to strengthen their boards.

That set the ball rolling. The pension sector turned out to be a world that suited me. I sent an open application to the FNV trade union and was invited for an interview. Shortly afterwards, I was on the board of three different pension funds. Whereas the trust sector focuses primarily on wealthy individuals or large corporations, social issues are very important in the pension sector. Together, you provide pensions for a very large proportion of the working population in the Netherlands. That appeals to me.

I see the introduction of the Wtp as one of the most important recent developments in our sector. It is a major daily theme in my work. The introduction must be done carefully and requires a great deal of attention. Balance, the correct interpretation of the frameworks: the Wtp affects much more than just the pension sector. Actuaries, the asset management sector and the IT sector, which designs pension systems for pension administration with all the associated requirements for data quality, among other things, are also working on it. The transition to the new pension contract has been going on for a long time, yet we are still learning how exactly it should take shape. As a side effect, the introduction of the Wtp creates a kind of level playing field between directors. Young and old are discovering this new world. The Wtp has an enormous impact on the pensions of many people. The impact on pension funds also lies in the stricter regulations and the high costs involved in the transition.

To the outside world, a decision-making process may seem black and white. When you are in the middle of it, you see that very different perspectives are discussed before the decision is made.

The new system entails more regulatory pressure and reduces the freedom of boards to implement pension schemes. Regulators keep a close eye on developments, for example with regard to the interpretation of the concept of ‘balance’. Until now, this has been left to the fund boards. Sometimes the supervisory authority's vision clashes with that of a fund board. I understand the need for the new legislation and regulations, but an unintended effect is that the survival of smaller parties sometimes seems untenable. I think that's a shame. Scale has advantages, but consolidation alone creates a kind of oligopoly. Is that where we should be heading? I think being smaller also has advantages. At the time, I saw genuine attention to the customer at the small trust offices. Larger companies may be able to work more efficiently, but there is a risk that they will fall short in their personal relationships with their customers. This also applies to pension funds and their participants. Fund managers want to know who their participants are. Is that still possible when you serve a few million participants from many different sectors and industries?

In addition to the Wtp, risk management and asset management, and the regulations that have been and are being developed for this on the basis of IT and sustainability, are important themes in my work. How do we ensure that cybersecurity is in order at our pension funds? What do our members want us to implement in terms of sustainability, and how does that relate to the risks we see as directors? I believe that a pension fund board should not invest idealistically. We are here to provide good pensions for our members, naturally in a liveable world. It is important to listen carefully to our participants. What do they want? After all, it is their pension that is at stake. I recently read that the reductions in emissions in pension fund portfolios appear to be mainly due to exclusion and only 2% or 3% due to companies reducing their emissions. Are we on the right track with all these exclusions? Wouldn't it be better to seek cooperation with the companies we invest in and encourage them to adopt more sustainable business practices through engagement? I think participants find that more important than exclusions, which leave the real problem unaddressed. Boards are currently discussing this issue at length.

I think it is positive that diversity and inclusion are permanently high on the pension fund agenda. Without that focus, it is highly questionable whether I would have taken on this job at my age. But even more importantly, diversity and inclusion have been proven to lead to better decision-making, because more different insights are brought to the table. In a diverse and inclusive board, the likelihood of herd behaviour is reduced. Experience and knowledge are necessary, but ultimately it is about the complementarity of the board as a whole. It is also not healthy for board members to look for clones of themselves as their successors. Of course, continuity of knowledge is important. That is why I do not see much point in shortening the term of office of board members, as the Code advocates. It is disruptive for a board of eight people if a board member leaves every year.

Consolidation alone will result in a kind of oligopoly. Is that where we want to go?

Diversity and inclusion go hand in hand if you want to promote the participation of all board members in a diverse board. Because it's not just about being invited to the party, you also have to be allowed to join in the dancing. As chair of Pensioenlab, I have promoted this and I continue to do so within the boards on which I sit. I also believe that diversity based on character and thinking is important.

Everything needs to be considered in a nuanced way. That's an important insight I've gained from my work in the boardroom. To the outside world, a decision-making process can seem black and white. When you're in the middle of it, you see that very different perspectives are discussed before a decision is made.

There have been several moments in my career that I consider crucial. First, the moment when I was able to start doing this work. I have a special role and am grateful that I have been given the opportunity to fulfil it at my age. Then there was the moment when we were able to index pensions again. I felt it was a special responsibility to be able to help decide on something that directly affects people's wallets. I learned a lot from the decision-making process, which focused on balanced action as a board and required us to understand how the decision would affect the various groups. The introduction of the Wtp was and remains an important moment: it involves a huge change process that requires a very careful approach.

When I started this job, all my knowledge of pensions came from conversations I had had with my mother. The profession of director was completely new to me. It has been a great challenge to get my message across, participate actively in meetings and thus contribute my share, despite my lack of experience. Initially, that was very nerve-wracking. I also realise that I have been very lucky with the boards I have ended up on. Everyone was always accessible and understanding. They always took me seriously. I greatly appreciated that inclusive attitude, which gave me the confidence to take an active stance from day one.

Another challenge was having to learn about two pension systems at the same time – the old FTK world and the new world of the Wtp, which was still under development. But I feel at home. Perhaps it will later turn out to be an asset that there are still people who know the history.

Pension funds operate cyclically. The administrative support prepares well for these cycles. But at a certain point, you reach the peak moments and the board has to make all kinds of decisions. The balance between work and private life can be a sensitive issue at such times. Fortunately, I have the full support of my partner.

I have always found it inspiring to delve into the ins and outs of organisations, whether they are trust offices or pension funds. I was raised with a strong sense of justice and an eye for social issues. That combination helps me in my work, which I not only find very interesting, but which has also become my way of contributing to society.

I am currently reading a book about private equity. But I also recently bought two poetry collections. The author chose this form to write about her traumatic experiences. I am very interested in her subject matter. I also enjoy reading the work of Steve Cavanagh. This Irishman, a former solicitor, writes thrillers featuring a shady American solicitor who solves unusual murder cases. Fascinating plots, great humour. And last summer I finally read George Orwell's 1984, as an audiobook. Orwell wrote it shortly after the Second World War, and it is still extremely relevant today. The autocratic leadership he describes, which we seemed to have left behind, is unfortunately reappearing in various places around the world. As a society, we should guard and cherish our freedoms much better. If we don't, things could go terribly wrong.'