John Graham: Inside the Fund Investing for 22 Million Canadians | Podcast | In Good Company
1300 segments
Hi everyone. I'm Nicolai Tangen, the CEO
of the Norwegian sovereign wealth fund.
And today I'm joined by John Graham, the
CEO of CPPIB,
which is the Canadian pension fund,
basically looking after the savings of
22 million Canadians.
Now, CPPIB is one of the most respected
pension funds in the world, and the
Canadian model has become a blueprint
globally.
Now, what makes John stand out is that
he is a scientist first who found his
way into one of the world's great
financial institutions.
And I'm really curious to dig in what
your scientific mindset brings to
investing, John. So, big thank you for
joining us.
>> Well, thank you for having me. Lot to
cover.
>> Absolutely. Now, first of all, um
could you help us understand just what
the Canadian pension plan is? Just how
is it different from a fund like ours?
>> Sure. So, uh CPPIB Investments were the
third-party asset manager for the Canada
Pension Plan.
The Canada Pension Plan is the uh
mandatory program that all working
Canadians contribute to. Um so, for it'd
be somewhat similar if you were in the
US to to to social security.
Um so, it's it's meant to provide a
inflation-protected
you know, defined benefit for for
working Canadians.
>> How big is it?
>> Today, the fund, the CPP fund, is around
$800 billion, but it's actually a a
hybrid plan. So, just one of the things
in that I think is important to to
appreciate cuz it really has a big
influence on how we manage the money,
is about 30 years ago, the Canadian
government realized that the CPP,
um at its current contributions and
benefit rates, was on a path to be
exhausted.
And this was because it was a
pay-as-you-go program, money comes in,
immediately goes out,
and demographics were changing. You
know, you you had a aging population,
you had people having fewer kids, people
living longer. And people living longer
is obviously a good thing.
Uh but the plan was on a path to being
exhausted. So, they restructured the
plan. They increased the contribution
rate, modified benefits, and they
created CPP Investments as
the money manager to invest the funds,
the surplus funds that aren't
immediately needed to pay out benefits.
Um and I think what's you when we
started out, that plan is it was about
15% funded. So, really it was still a
pay-as-you-go plan. And over time, our
very first check was $12 million.
So, we got a check for $12 million uh
uh about 27 years ago. Today, the plan
sits about 800 billion.
And the plan is partially funded,
meaning that
>> you are and you are independent from the
Canadian government?
>> Yeah.
>> How how how hard is that to protect that
independence?
>> Yeah, we were created to be independent
with respect to investment
decision-making, but we're still
accountable. We still have
accountabilities cuz we're accountable
to to all Canadians.
And I think this is something that the
Canadian government recognizes is
important um to have both
independence with investment
decision-making.
And that's enshrined in federal
legislation. So, when we were when we
were created, the CPPIB Act basically
enshrined our mandate to maximize return
without undue risk of loss. And you
asked the question, how do we differ
from, let's say, a sovereign wealth
fund?
And I think the big difference is we're
pension plan, which means that we have
liabilities.
>> So, when people when people try to
replicate the Canadian model, what do
you say that they get wrong?
>> What do they get wrong?
>> Yeah.
>> First I think the first important thing
is governance.
And pretty much all the Canadian plans
have some similar level of governance in
that there is independence around
investment decision-making, but
obviously accountability for to the key
stakeholders.
>> Mhm.
>> And that independence around investment
decision-making provides the flexibility
or to build a investment organization
that has a lot of levers to pull for
driving returns.
Public versus private, active versus
passive, domestic versus global. And I
think having I'm a big believer in
optionality and having those various
levers to pull over the long run drives
value.
>> And we will get back to to some of them,
but just in the meantime you got eight
pension funds in
in Canada, right? Sometimes called the
Maple Eight.
So how how did Canada develop this
approach?
>> Yeah, and I there's there's definitely
more than eight, but there is a term
term Maple Eight that uh really captures
probably the eight biggest. There's now
Maple Nine, so there's another plan kind
of kind of coming in to Maple Nine, and
sometimes it's Maple 10.
>> Is it good Is it good to have so many
pension funds?
>> It's good. It's good. And and you know,
I I I think the they're very well run.
They they have
uh have had good governance, good
performance.
I've never been a huge fan of the Maple
Eight concept because I think one thing
it does miss
is that we're all a little bit different
in that we all have different liability
streams. We're all pension plans.
So we all have liability streams. Like
at the end of the day, we're investing
the money
to meet the pension promise.
So in Canada, across 22 million
Canadians, a promise has been made,
right? So at every paycheck you have a
deduction that says CPP.
And what you get in return for that
deduction is a promise. A promise that
when you retire, you're going to get a a
pension.
>> Mhm.
>> And our job is to make sure that we meet
that promise. So
>> So in order to meet that promise, you
need to invest well, right? So, here you
are 800 billion.
Just how do you how do you decide where
the money goes? How do you decide how to
split the asset classes?
>> So, so we are very linked to our
our mandate. Max our mandate enshrined
in federal legislation
is to maximize return without undue risk
of loss accounting for the factors that
impact the funding of the plan.
That's our mandate. And so they you got
to invest the money
maximize return, try to grow the funding
ratio of the of the plan
and make sure that we can meet these
obligations or these promises that have
been made.
>> And you and you don't have like we have
a mandate where which the ministry gives
us which tells us, you know, how much
shares, how much bonds. You don't have
that.
>> We don't have that. Literally our
mandate is is maximize return without
undue risk of loss taking into account
the factors that impact the plan.
>> So, you know, here here you are John
Graham 800 billion.
Go and see what you can do with it.
>> What started as 12 million and now it's
800 billion. So, and of that 800 billion
550 billion is investment income. It it
does show the power of compounding,
right? So,
70% of the fund is
investment income.
And so we only, you know, quote unquote
own the entirety of the investment
process. So, to be a little bit
technical, we take that and think
there's kind of three big decisions we
make and
we take a total portfolio approach and
and fundamentally we try to maximize the
total return of the total portfolio. So,
the first big decision, what level of
risk are we going to take?
What level of risk will maximize return
without undue risk of loss? How do we
thread that needle of
taking our time horizon? So,
recognizing, and I think this is really
important,
we're pension plan, we're not a wealth
maximizing vehicle.
>> What's the difference between the two?
>> That we will at time, and I would
actually argue we may be in that time
right now with the concentration risk in
the markets,
there will be times when we are not
looking to fully participate in the
market in parts of the market where we
feel there might be an undue risk of
loss.
So,
we are
not always maximizing. When we think
about the upside and the downside,
there are times when we may give up a
little bit of upside to protect the
downside because we think at this moment
in time that's more important for
um thinking about the liability stream
or the liabilities we have uh to to
to meet.
So,
risk What level of risk are we going to
take? That's number one.
Two, asset classes. How are we going to
diversify? And you'll hear me say this
probably a few times, diversification is
an act of humility. We don't know.
And and and we do firmly believe in
diversifying across asset classes and
geographies
as ultimately a risk management tool.
Um the third decision is security
selection.
Um what which companies
which assets do we want in the
portfolio?
>> Now, you uh
you don't operate in asset silos, is
that right? Just how do you How do you
think about the various assets?
[clears throat]
>> Yeah, so in the total portfolio
approach, we we we definitely try to do
our best not to get totally siloed into
thinking about asset classes and having
fixed hard allocations into asset
classes or into geographies. We think in
factor space. We think about what's the
real economic exposure we're bringing
into the portfolio, whether it be, you
know, duration, inflation sensitivity,
whatever it may be,
um
knowing that asset class labels can be a
little bit misleading. I mean,
personally,
I don't view public equity and private
equity as as different asset classes.
I view them as different kind of
ownership structures within equities
and they have different
ways of behaving through
through through the cycle. So, we try
not to get hard allocations into asset
classes, hard allocations into countries
cuz that can lead to some strange
behavior when you're trying to rebalance
the portfolio, but think about what are
the correlations between the different
asset classes. That being said, we are
organized by asset class, so we do have
kind of soft allocations into asset
classes and we do ask people
into the execution side to really
understand their asset class, whether
that be real estate or infrastructure,
or credit, and to build portfolios in
their asset class.
>> What are the kind of things you don't
do?
>> We don't do.
>> Mhm.
>> Well, we don't do
um
There's very little we don't do uh at at
800 billion. And it's probably similar
for you, but there's but there's very
little we don't do in that we also
believe that we do not follow a path of
blanket divestment.
So, take oil and gas. We have continued
to invest in oil and gas. We have
continued to support the oil and gas
industry. We do not have a uh we never
take a path of blanket divestment. So,
there's no industry that that's off side
for us. Now, there's some things we make
a deliberate choice not to do. So, take
from a geography perspective. We're
really We We probably have exposure to
50 countries around the world, but we're
probably only really active in 12
because we just can't really be
experts in every country around the
world. So, we will prioritize and decide
that we're going to really focus maybe
in on 12.
With respect to asset classes, we've
chosen the big ones, but you know, one
thing we've never done is crypto. We've
never directly invested in crypto. And I
don't know how much money you want to
spend on that.
>> been that's been pretty good lately not
to be in that one.
But uh
um one asset class where you are where
we are not is uh private assets, so
private equity,
private credit. Um
Now, you are You have one of the largest
private market portfolios of anybody in
the world. And so, what is your view on
that asset class just now?
>> Yeah, so I think we take a long-term
view. And you know, private equity
undoubtedly has had a more challenging
couple years.
Um we can get into that. But if I look
over the past 10 15 years, it's been one
of the biggest drivers of return for the
for the portfolio. I personally continue
to be a believer in the in the pri- the
private governance model. I think for
certain companies at certain times in
their life cycle,
private ownership makes a lot of sense.
Um getting out of the scrutiny of the
public markets,
um hav- having the investors be very
actively engaged from a governance
perspective [clears throat]
on the board of directors. I think
there's at certain points in time,
private ownership makes a lot of sense.
So, we continue to be constructive on
private equity. Recognizing though that
right now, you know, the returns has
been well documented over the past
couple years have not been,
you know, at expectations. But if I look
over 10 15 years, it's it's been a big
driver of value for CPP Investments.
>> And you you measure your returns against
um
kind of a benchmark portfolio which
consists of Is it bonds and equities?
>> Yeah. So, we have a benchmark portfolio
that is basically matches kind of the
big asset classes that we invest in. So,
it's bonds and equities, but there is
also some sector specific indices in
there.
Whether it be real estate, credit,
uh infrastructure, energy.
And you know, I think right now, looking
at at private equity, I mean, one of the
challenges we have is the the public
markets, especially the broader markets,
are just very concentrated and very
concentrated into a a handful of
US-based technology stocks.
>> Yeah, which is not what our portfolio
looks like.
>> No, no. No, no.
Uh this is a a challenge for most active
[clears throat]
managers uh these days. Now, uh you
manage a lot of your uh private exposure
internally.
Uh how do you make the choice between
outsourcing that
uh versus uh actually managing it
yourself?
>> Yeah, and and uh the way I describe our
approach is it's a partnership model.
So, for take private equity, we we do
invest in um private equity managers
around the world who we think are the
best in and the best investors in their
space.
And then we do co-investing and
co-underwriting
with them.
Some other programs, like infrastructure
and energy, historically, we may have
been a little bit more direct, but we
certainly do have some kind of external
relationships. And here's a case for me
though
that uh
these are choices.
These are choices the organization
makes.
And I come back to what we're solving
for. We're solving to maximize the total
return of the total portfolio.
So, we are you know, we see value in
having direct and and fund
relationships.
Um exactly how much we have of each is
just going to be based on where we get
the best returns.
>> Who does better? Your external managers
or your guy your internal guys?
>> Well, you have to think about often why
you're doing the internal. So, the
the internal
you office often have co-investing and
co-writing underwriting at kind of
advantageous economics. So, you're not
paying the the the the
>> [laughter]
>> the full fee and promote or carry the
performance fee.
So, I think it's hard to say who does
better because
your internal teams are benefiting from
the origination and the asset management
of the external teams.
>> Mhm.
>> Um so, they're not totally separable,
right? Like
they don't compete with each other. The
internal teams are actually building off
of the uh
the external um
the external managers. So,
I actually think what's important is to
mash them together and look at the
blended returns of two as opposed to
thinking of them as two separate
competing
kind of investment strategies.
>> Absolutely. Now, John um Canada and
Norway compete in ice hockey. Um but but
let's not talk about that.
>> Oh, really? They do?
>> But no, well, I I saw you there. But we
also But more importantly, we we we we
compete in uh transparency, right?
Because there is just uh FYI for the for
the listeners, there is the World
Championship in transparency. And and uh
and you guys and us, we typically uh you
know, together are at the top of the the
the league table here.
>> Yeah.
>> So, why why in your mind why is
transparency important?
>> Yeah, and and and I and I I will concede
I think you've gotten the gold medal the
last couple years.
>> Well, I think we're doing
we're we're both doing really well here.
>> We're tied for two.
So, for for us at at CPP Investments,
transparency is something that we take
very seriously. And part of it comes
back to our purpose and and who we are.
We're a you know, mandatory retirement
program that all Canadians contribute
to. We manage $800 billion of what is
largely a
you know, public good here in in Canada.
So, we have taken an approach to
disclose at a level that isn't even
beyond what is required under um the
CPPIB Act.
With a view that Canadians should
understand how their money is being uh
how the money is being invested
and uh how the cost of base that we have
within within CPP Investments. So,
within our quarterly statements, we
release pretty much every
investment we make. So, we have
transparency there. And we provide a lot
of information on how we run the fund,
our various frameworks for running the
fund. And we think it's important
because of who we are.
>> Yeah. Yeah.
John, let's spend a few moments on the
geopolitics. How much of your
investments are are in Canada?
>> We have about 12% of the portfolio in
Canada.
>> Yeah. And what about the US?
>> We are it kind of ebbs and flows again.
We don't have hard allocations.
45% plus or minus a few percent. It It
can get up to 50, but
>> [clears throat]
>> you're probably you're probably similar
in that the US has been an incredible
market over the past 10 years.
>> Absolutely. Absolutely.
>> And And our one of our biggest
challenges is if if we don't manage it,
it'll just keep growing and growing and
growing as part of the portfolio. So, we
actually it's one area we do try to
manage around that 45 to 50-ish
percentage range.
>> Is there any
kind of political
what should we say not interference, but
any political
indications
in terms of trying to get you to reduce
your US exposure?
>> No. No. I mean, certainly I think the
people would like to see us invest more
domestically in in some areas,
especially right now. And I will say
from a Canadian perspective, Canada's
looking more interesting than it has in
in years. And And part of that
>> is that?
>> Yeah, and part of that is the ambition.
You know, there's an ambition at the
provincial level, at the federal level
to build things and to build big things.
And pension funds like us like
infrastructure. We like big assets that
are cash generative. So, there's
definitely a lot more kind of curiosity
about investing in Canada than it has
been in
in years. So,
people certainly would like to see us
invest more in Canada and and we're
actively looking at investment
opportunities, but we'll always do it
with our mandate in mind. You know, what
when we were created.
>> The the government is trying to attract
foreign investors.
Do you think you would always get kind
of the goodies?
The best bits?
>> No, I don't. I actually don't and I
think this this is
I think this
I look at the US.
The US is the most competitive
market in the world. It's most
competitive capital market in the world
and it's been delivering the best
returns.
Competitive capital is a good thing.
The ambition this country has in Canada
for building things, it's going to
require
domestic and foreign capital.
And we're a big advocate that that
we should seek competition for capital.
It'll drive the cost of capital down and
it'll ultimately lead to to better
investment opportunities. You'd ask
about the US. I mean, people appreciate
that
it's a it's from a market cap
perspective, I think it's what 70 65 70%
of the the global equity markets. So,
even at 45% there's an argument that
we're actually underweight the US.
>> What about China?
>> Yeah.
It's an interesting question and and
China is a market where we've been
active for quite a while. You know, my
my predecessors were incredibly
knowledgeable and well connected into in
into China.
Our exposure to China has declined over
the past few years.
Part of that is because the the rest of
the portfolio has grown around it. You
know, there there hasn't been a we
haven't been selling assets per se, but
the the rest of the portfolio has been
growing around it.
We maintain a a
reasonable I think allocation
into China. My personal view is and
if you want to be a long-term investor,
you have
you have to have some level of
investment in the world's second largest
economy.
Um, you also have to have a certain
amount of knowledge about the world's
second largest economy because it has
influence, uh,
real influence around the globe.
So, we've maintained our understanding,
our some of our relationships in the in
the market. Um,
I think for China it's always a case of
of how much
of the portfolio and then how. What
industries, um, what sectors do we want
to, uh, invest in? Knowing that there's
some areas like obviously be very
sensitive to get into defense or to get
into dual-use technologies. So, you have
to think about
how you want to invest.
>> Yeah.
Talking about, uh, that, how does AI
change the way that you run your
organization?
>> That's a good question. That's a good
question. I mean, I think we're I think
we're figuring it out like lots of
people.
Um, and and and probably go through lots
of
peaks and troughs in thinking about the
the impact of of AI.
As an organization,
we certainly have prioritized literacy
and fluency.
Certainly prioritized trying to have a
employee base that is very fluent in the
tools and the technologies.
So, we have rolled out multiple LLMs to
every single employee in the
organization.
And we have provided, uh, training.
We've provided courses and in fact, um,
we have these kind of bootcamps that
employees can can sign up for. So, we've
seen pretty good adoption, pretty good,
uh,
you know, I think actually very good
adoption on at the grassroots level of
from AI.
More senior level, there's probably half
a dozen processes we're thinking through
on where can we really embed AI to do it
more efficiently, more effectively, but
a little bit more from the operations
side.
Has AI made us a better investor?
Have we made better investment decisions
because of AI?
At this point, TBD. At this point,
unclear.
But we are dedicating a lot of time and
uh effort to
uh figuring that out.
>> When you see when you see 10 years out,
how do you think it will change the way
you work?
>> Yeah. That's the one thing, too, that um
as we think about AI, and I do believe
the organization has really tried to
adopt it, and we we've given people a
lot of license to to try to use in their
daily life, and encourage them to just
be more efficient.
And I don't know if this is AI or just
good old-fashioned process optimization,
but over the past 3-4 years,
we at CPP Investments,
we have fewer employees than we did 3
years ago. Not by a lot.
Let's call it basically flat, but we
have about 300 billion more of assets.
Um so, I think we're more efficient. And
And has AI contributed to that?
Probably. AI's been
contributed to that a little bit, or or
at least has kind of put a fire under
people's feet to to to think about
efficiency.
10 years from now, where my mind is,
like I'm not in the place of we we
should stop hiring juniors. I think it's
madness to stop hiring juniors, because
I think
>> I I agree. I agree.
>> Cuz 10 years from now, they're going to
be the future leaders of the
organization, and, you know,
unless I've made terrible life choices,
I won't be here 10-15 years from now.
So, so we're going to keep hiring
juniors.
What I think this allows us to do is
just get operational leverage. I don't
see the organization from a people
perspective being a lot smaller,
um
but what I do see is we can add hundreds
of billions of assets without really um
adding a huge amount of of cost or or or
people.
And will it help us make better
investment decisions?
I think I'm still TBD on that. I don't
know what your perspective is. I'm still
TBD as to
it'll help us make faster decisions,
yes. Will it help us make better
decisions?
TBD.
>> Yeah, no I
I would disagree with you. I would
disagree with you.
Let's spend a few minutes on you as a
leader.
Um, how do you think your scientific
background has formed you as a leader?
>> [snorts]
>> Yeah, and and probably formed as a in a
permanent investment perspective.
Wait a second.
There's not many things I know in life
with certainty.
But one of the things I know with
certainty is I'm not a scientist
anymore.
Investing is not science.
Even um
even though I'll see these incredibly
sophisticated models, these incredibly
quantitative approaches,
investing, I believe, is not science.
And And the reason I
>> If it's If it's not science, what is it?
>> It's a little bit of art and science.
It's a It's a quantitative art.
>> And what kind of art is it?
>> [laughter]
>> But
it's an art that requires judgment. It's
an art that requires experience and an
art that that actually does require, I
think, and that's a little bit of why
with AI that I'm I'm I'm I'm cautious on
whether it'll help us make better
decisions. I don't know. It may.
Is in science, and I I was an
experimental scientist, right?
We could do an experiment in
Toronto or in the States and someone
could replicate that in
uh
Japan and they could replicate it in 5
years from now and 10 years from now.
Investing is this living ecosystem
that's changing every day.
And our models for
which were were CBB Investments I
describe as a very evidence-based,
probably quite quantitative
organization.
And I believe it's the right approach
and that it helps us
think through it, but at the end of the
day they are just
they're our best guess at how the the
world is going to unfold and
until someone gives me data on the
future,
we are still trying to forecast out the
future with a a certain amount of
uncertainty.
>> And
>> [clears throat]
>> to run to run a company in
in that environment, what are the most
important leadership principles you
have?
>> Yeah, so one of the things I've learned
and probably learned the hard way
through my career,
um and I do believe this is
every leader has a certain
kind of call it a preferred habitat.
Every every leader has a style that is
really reflective of who they are and
how they want to approach a problem,
whether you're a
super empathetic leader, whether you're
a pacesetter, a taskmaster, whatever it
is.
I have learned that at certain times you
need to be situationally aware.
And whether it's the what's going on at
the time or whether it's and sometimes
the individual and being able to flex
the leadership style a little bit, not
losing sight of the of the mandate, not
losing sight of the mission and where
you want to go,
but being able to flex a little bit on
what you're
how you're going to approach it, you
know, I
>> Tell me tell tell me about tell me about
a time you really flexed it.
>> Sure, I'd say COVID.
Um
when
people were scared,
huge amount of uncertainty, people were
worried about their health,
worried about their um
jobs.
And
I think we needed to lean into empathy
at that time.
Um and and I think we did lean into
empathy.
>> Did that come na- Did that come
naturally to you?
>> Well,
I'm probably a little bit more of a
pacesetter. I'm probably someone who
also is a little bit more like even
coming back to COVID, I'm definitely
someone who is more of an in-office
person who believes that we need to be
in the in the office. And I've had to
you know, modify my approach a little
bit to make sure that um
we still give people agency and we still
give people a feeling that they have
that they're empowered to make decisions
around their around their careers.
>> Now, our uh listeners are
uh when we um when we kind of poll them
and ask them how they want to What do
What do they want to have more in the
poll calls? They say they want to hear
more about failures, you know? They only
talk about successes and everything is
so great and
uh you know, tell me about
some of your biggest mistakes in life.
>> So, my big failures?
>> Yeah.
>> Okay. Well, I think as you know, in when
in in investing, you you you do have the
opportunity to have failures.
>> How tough?
>> And you you you have the opportunity to
be humbled.
And any investor who says they haven't
been humbled um
is is probably not either taking a lot
of risk or is is not being overly
uh truthful.
So, certainly some of the investments
I've been actively engaged on um
have not turned out as as planned. So,
what have I learned from that?
One of the things and one of the things
I try to tell our our our younger
colleagues too, which I do believe, is
you
you can't diligence
a bad investment into a good investment.
Spending another week
is is not going to turn a fundamentally
bad investment into a good investment.
And in fact,
you you you may just convince yourself
that it is.
Um and sometimes
you have to know when to quit.
And you have to know when to back away
from uh an investment. If I think about
where
mistakes I made and failures I had,
just this belief that if you just did
more work, if you just structured it, or
you could take a bad investment, if you
could just structure it a little bit
more, you could turn it into a good
investment.
>> What's the worst one you had?
>> My worst I'm not going to name the name
of it.
>> [laughter]
>> What about What about on the personal
level? What about like your personal
mistake?
>> The biggest failure on the personal
level?
>> Yeah.
>> I think the one thing we all learned too
in
in in in in in leadership roles that
getting the right team around you is the
most important is one of the most
important things.
>> Mhm.
>> Having a senior team that is aligned to
where you want to go
that is as bought into the vision and
the mandate of the of the organization
and will truly act as team one. Will be
there to support each other and be there
to support the um
the organization.
And I think you also have to realize
that when it comes to hiring people,
when it comes to the teams,
you never get it perfectly right.
Uh and and
so I think one of the most important
things is to
make sure that you get your right team
in place.
>> And were you too slow in doing that?
>> I think like most people, you end up
being too slow.
>> Yeah.
>> You know, if if I ask leaders what are
some of their biggest regrets,
is that they waited too long to get
their team in place.
>> Mhm.
>> Um
and
guidance I give new CEOs is this is is
of the first things you should do.
Is when that one year anniversary hits,
you should be able to look around your
senior team and say this is exactly who
I want with me at this point. Because
one thing we've also found is I've been
in this role for over five years,
it has gone by in a blink of an eye.
>> Absolutely.
>> [sighs]
>> Uh same here. I've been close to six.
It's just like bang, as if we started
yesterday.
Now, um
tell me about the culture. What do you
How would you describe the culture?
>> Yeah, I would describe the culture of
CPPIB Investments as very
purpose-driven.
So, who we are, right? Like it's not
lost on anybody
the important work we do for for
Canadians.
And every time we do, which I'm sure you
do, employee engagement surveys and
various kind of
employee suggestion kind of uh surveys,
the one thing that always comes back
that is a pretty much always our highest
score
is that people
believe in and are are really motivated
by the purpose of the organization.
And I think the culture has largely
formed around that
the the kind of the purpose-driven
nature of the of the organization.
>> How do you set the expectations beyond
which you perform well above average
well above expectations and you know,
the proportion who you think needs to
improve? Just where you set it.
>> Yeah. Yeah. And and and I think this is
one of the challenges um for
organizations such as such as ours. The
we are ultimately investing as a
talent-based organization as a
talent-based business.
Um and so I think we have to be very
rigorous on talent.
One of the things that I will tell the
senior leadership in the organization is
at the end of the week you should be
able to look at yourself in the mirror
and and answer two questions. One, that
you helped drive performance, and two,
that you help develop the next
generation of leaders.
So, every single leader, that that
performance and people are two of the
the expectations to be a leader at CPP
Investments.
So, I think we take talent development
very seriously, ensuring that that we
really do
um
have the best people working here. I
think one of the needles we have to
thread
is
we're this enduring institution, similar
to you.
In that
we have to be here 50 years from now. We
have to be here 75 years from now.
We are almost by definition the exact
opposite of a founder organization.
We're almost the exact opposite of a
founder-led culture.
So
we have to actually, in some ways,
institutionalize the culture,
institutionalize
the uh investment process.
And it can never be about the
individual.
Um because that's not how you build a
durable, sustaining organization. It has
to be about the purpose. It has to be
about the mission. It has to be about
the mandate. But, investing is a lot
about individuals, right? And and
investing is a lot about, you know, you
these great investors.
Um so, what we can't have at CPP
Investments is a star culture. We
We can't build investment programs
around individuals. We have to build
investment programs around
organizational strengths and advantages.
>> What other part of the culture are you
trying to improve?
>> Trying to improve the
I would say a a a little bit on just
what I what I mentioned.
And
it's
ensuring that everybody really
understands
why we're here.
Um
we have one fund.
We have really kind of one mandate to
maximize return without undue risk of
loss.
So, how do we really embed that owner's
mindset into the organization? How do we
really embed that one fund mindset into
the organization to
ensure that everybody is thinking long
term and everybody is thinking about how
do we maximize
um
the long-term returns of the of the of
the portfolio. And
investing's an interesting
you know, it's an
it's a fascinating business to to be in.
Um
so, in a lot of organizations, it's very
much about the individual. They're
selling almost an individual's kind of
je ne sais quoi with investing.
And here at CPP Investments, saying,
"How do we get people to really buy into
that one fund mentality?"
And to really think about how do we
compound the value of the platform? How
do we make this organization a more
valuable platform 5 years from now than
it is today?
>> Do you think Do you think the culture is
a reflection of your own personality?
>> I actually don't. I actually don't.
>> And where is it different from you?
>> Well, well, I'm not sure if if it's
different because I don't think you can
lead this organization if if if if you
cuz I think the culture I set is very
purpose-driven.
So, Yeah, but you are you So, are you?
Yeah, exactly. So, I I think people who
aren't purpose-driven
will either self-select out or be
selected out. You know, I
I think when when people exit this
organization,
um it's often because that they're
they just aren't aligned to the purpose
of the of the organization and want to
do something else. We have a lot of
amazing uh ex-ex-colleagues. So,
I think from a from a culture
perspective, I think the I I I
you know, it's terrible to say, but I I
think you got to conform to what the the
CPPIB culture is if you want to be a
leader here. And one of the things I
find amazing, and I I do find this
amazing, we have seven offices outside
of Toronto, and and we all get it. We're
the We're the Canada Pension Plan. It's
in the name, right? Like Like
we we are managing
the
retirement savings of 22 million
Canadians.
But we have colleagues in London, in São
Paulo, in New York, in Hong Kong, in
Mumbai, and
the culture there is remarkably similar.
Remarkably similar. Like
they are I'm motivated by the purpose.
They get it. We spend a lot of time
talking about it, and
I bring people to our offices around the
world, and one of the common things they
say is like
wow. Like
we're in Mumbai, or we're in Hong Kong,
but you would have thought we were in
Toronto the way they were talking about
the purpose of the organization.
>> Mhm. How do you make sure it doesn't
become bureaucratic?
>> Well, that's a very good question, and I
would say that is a
constant and um
requires constant effort, cuz most
bureaucracy is is put in place for very
good reasons, and uh made sense at the
time, and then it just kind of takes on
a life of its own, like a
like a Frankenstein that grows over time
and gets fed and and becomes
unmanageable at uh at some point.
I am sure if you ask some of our
colleagues, they would give you very
different views on how bureaucratic we
are. Um
I think it's something that we try to
thread that needle.
Sometimes well, sometimes not as well as
How do we empower people
to
and delegate to people so they can make
decisions. I am a big believer that
decisions should be made by the people
who are closest to the information.
So, how do we delegate to people, let's
say on the investment side,
into the various geographies and asset
classes so they can make decisions,
but ensuring that they are aligned, you
know.
Delegation without alignment leads to
chaos. So, how do we make sure they're
aligned and they understand what we're
solving for?
And then, um,
I have to periodically,
you know,
I found in this job like once every so
many years, kind of hit a pause button
and do a decluttering of the of the
bureaucracy because
uh, I've also learned that it only goes
one way. It
>> Absolutely.
>> you will not naturally, you know,
de-bureaucratize. [laughter]
It'll just always add, always add, and
then every once in a while you got to
slam that pause button and just start
purging some of it out and then let it
to start accumulating again.
>> Yeah.
How do you switch off uh, outside work?
>> Yeah, probably not well. Probably not
well, but the
I think we we learn things about
ourselves. We learn what recharges our
batteries. It probably speaks to whether
we're introverts or extroverts
uh, at heart.
>> How do you charge?
>> How do I charge it? I I actually charge,
I have learned this and you can ask my
friends and my family.
I have three dogs.
I will
um,
put on my ear put in my earbuds,
take the dogs for like a 45-minute walk
at night, listen to podcasts, listen to
audiobooks,
and just in some ways kind of disconnect
a little bit. It's not the best way
when you have to recharge by basically
being alone for 45 minutes at the end of
the day, but I have found in this role
that it it's probably what charges the
battery the fastest.
>> Hm. What do you listen to?
>> What do I listen to? So, I don't listen
to fiction. I don't read fiction.
Um
I like to listen to podcasts on history,
a lot of podcasts on history.
I came across one recently that was an
older one called the history of Rome. I
think it had 170 episodes that I
listened to. I loved it. Um so a lot on
history and a lot on business, whether
it be the Financial Times or Bloomberg,
the various
business or investing podcasts.
>> Mhm.
Now, we have
a lot of young listeners. What would be
your advice to them?
>> So, yeah, I have two children. They're
23 and and 20. So,
um
I always give the the advice that I give
them. So, it's it's the [laughter] same
advice that I give my own
children who are really just starting
their professional career.
And the advice I give them both of them
is
keep learning.
Um
just always keep learning.
Yeah.
Keep learning about your job.
Um never stagnate. Uh this is one thing
I've seen in my career is it was people
going to cruise control and they become
complacent. And jobs evolve and jobs
will evolve away from them. So, keep
learning. Keep learning about your job.
Keep learning about other jobs that
people are doing
in your in your organization.
Don't be don't be complacent and you are
going to have to take some ownership of
your career. And
think about what you want to do and make
sure that you know, your value to the
company is only increasing.
>> Yeah.
Well, John, that seems like really sound
advice. It's been really great talking
to you.
Please keep up all the good work on
behalf of 22 million Canadians.
>> Great. Thank you very much. I really
appreciate the opportunity to share the
story.
>> Mhm.
Ask follow-up questions or revisit key timestamps.
Loading summary...
Videos recently processed by our community