Words are funny things. They can entertain, elucidate, inform — and yes, sometimes mislead.
It is, of course, one of the reasons that I have long sought to see the actual questions asked in surveys that purport to convey opinions, not to mention the actual data/results behind those assertions, which can hide behind other malleable labels like “some,” “many,” or even “most.” They can also be a result of what I’ll term “malleable” opinion/assessment labels, such as “might” or “somewhat” or “it depends.”
For example, a recent survey claiming that participants[i] were enthusiastic about gaining access to private markets contained the following statement: "Many believe private markets can provide potential growth and diversification in their portfolios…"
However, in this case (looking at the actual findings) “many” appears to be…36%.[ii]
The report continues to explain that “…while others are interested but want more information… here the number actually is half — 50%. Though neither of those numbers appear in the sentence that conveys those sentiments. Mind you, the numbers aren’t tucked away in an obscure footnote (as some do). But the coverage of those findings — certainly those that just scrape the press release — carry a message that, to my eyes, anyway, puts a positive “spin” on the actual conclusion(s).
Now, I’ve commented previously on the likelihood that “regular” participants (much less plan fiduciaries) are really up to speed on what’s involved in these markets.[iii] The survey got into this a bit, finding that a plurality — 43% — self-classified into a category labeled “somewhat[iv] familiar, understand them a little bit.” But then the report lumps that in with the 29% who claimed to be “very familiar, understand them very well” to create an assertion that 72% “are at least somewhat familiar.” Which, of course, is technically speaking an accurate statement…
But then, apparently building on that grouping (those now determined to be at least somewhat familiar), that same report comments that while “Most participants are familiar with private market investments but many still mix up terminology or lack solid understanding.” Which might well mean that while “most” claim to be familiar — and let’s remember how we got to that result — even though they actually…aren’t (remembering how many said they understood these “a little bit”).
The report then focused on what were termed “moderate” investors — which comprised nearly two-thirds (63%) of the sample, and when asked if they believed private markets should be part of a long-term retirement portfolio — more than half (55%) said “possibly” — depending on risk and cost factors. But then that was “transformed” along with another grouping (31% who simply said “yes” to the question) to be characterized as “a combined 86% said they are either “definitely interested” or “maybe interested” — a level of interest the report characterized as “encouraging for plan sponsors who are considering adding private investments.” Once again, the statement on which the conclusion is based is, admittedly, technically accurate.
In fairness, those “malleable” descriptors provide just enough squishiness to allow pretty much anyone to infer levels of interest and/or acceptance to those who are inclined to see them. And let’s face it, we human beings are inclined to see what we want to see in pretty much any area of life.
Regardless, it should remind us all again of the importance of looking deeper than the summaries and press releases — not to mention the click-baiting headlines and hurriedly crafted news reports from those materials — to understand what the actual data — regardless of source[v] — is actually telling us.
And those looking to forecast future behaviors (or regulatory changes) might want to keep in mind that “might”…might also mean “might not.”
- Nevin E. Adams, JD
[i] I’ll acknowledge right off the bat that this seems to be an engaged group of participants — 26% self-identified as “do-it-myself” investors, and another 72% said they wanted at least some level of involvement in how their retirement plan savings was invested. That could certainly explain some of the results.
[ii] A dictionary definition suggests that “many” is consisting of or amounting to a large but indefinite number.
[iii] See Talking Points: (Just Because) Survey Says?
[iv] Italics mine.
[v] This report happens to originate from a provider with an interest in private market adoption.
No comments:
Post a Comment