AustralianSuper and BUSS(Q) super fund heads spoke yesterday about the difference scale makes to their operation and how big is too big in the world of superannuation.

Peter Curtis, senior investment manager for AustralianSuper spoke during a panel session about the impact of a super funds size at the Investment Administration Conference in Sydney.

"We are growing and will continue to grow because we can continue to deliver better outcomes for our members and that is purely the basis we go in with," said Curtis.

"We could just sit still and let the super levy come in and we are going to get bigger, that's one source of growth, but there are other sources we can pursue."

When asked what is the ultimate size for operational efficiency, Curtis said that there really isn't a number that fits.

"AustralianSuper has $43 billion and just under 3% of the Australian super market, but we are not huge."

Curtis said he recently spoke with the chief operating officer of US pension fund CalPERS who said that she didn't expect scale to kick in until they hit $500 billion, saying it was all a state of growth.

"We think that $40 billion we are doing things we wouldn't have done at $20 billion, and there are things we probably couldn't do until we hit $100 billion."

BUSS(Q) manages in excess of $2 billion and has over 90,000 members. Linda Vickers, BUSS(Q)'s compliance and operations manager, said there were pros and cons to scale for smaller funds, with partnerships with service providers to access scale the best alternative. 

"There is areas where scale would help and other areas I think we are better off buying scale with other funds, working with partnerships with service providers, and also making sure we have good user groups," said Vickers.

Chris Field, executive director and senior relationship manager, World Wide Services, JP Morgan Australian and New Zealand said that while the average fund last year was $3.8 billion approx, it is predicted that the average fund will be $53 billion by 2035.

"That in itself presents a number of challenges for the smaller funds as they grow," said Field.

"As they move through growth, I think there will be advantages for funds being associated-like communities, there are benefits for smaller funds to learn from the experiences of the larger funds."