AMP Sydney Project Catalyst | Real Estate & ABW Analysis Draft | February 2012

1. AMP Sydney Project Catalyst | Real Estate & ABW Analysis Draft | February 2012

2. Contents • Executive Summary • Meeting Objectives • Key Conclusions • Methodology • Scoring & Financials • Key Assumptions • Evaluation Scorecards • Summary Metrics • Cashflows • High-level Timeline • Options in Detail • CQ Options (1-4) • Redeveloped AC Options (5-9) • Appendices • Benefits • Four Key Measures • Case Studies • Impact By Group • ABW Change Management Road Map • ABWTypcial Environments • ABW Case Studies • ABW Design Partners Selection • ABW Organisation Benchmarking • ABW Strategies Introduction • Assumed Key Data

3. Executive Summary

4. AMP Real Estate & ABW Analysis | Executive Summary • Key Conclusions • A total of 9 options have been considered, which divide into two groups: those involving CQ-only, and those which involve CQ plus the redeveloped AC building. • The objective to date has been to assess the relative merits of the identified options, on both a financial and non-financial basis. CQ-only options all score better than the options which involve moving into the redeveloped AC building. • Financial benefits are weak, cashflow is negative for a minimum 2 years, and breakeven is year 6 even in best case. • The financials are sufficient to conclude that the project needs to be approached as one whose benefits are cultural / intangible rather than property portfolio cost savings. • The most successful ABW projects are the ones where the business leadership takes hold of the change process and drive the intangible business benefits. A measuring strategy should be agreed and tracked from the outset. • In order to achieve a pilot by Q4 2013, decisions will need to be made quickly as timeline is tight. • Meeting Objectives • Provide progress update and present conclusions to date. • Seek to eliminate some options and agree the go-forward options to progress further. • Identify any new options/refinements that may present themselves. • Seek guidance around the situation with AC redevelopment and whether staying in it during redevelopment is viable or not. • Confirm next steps / timeline.

5. AMP Real Estate & ABW Analysis | Executive Summary • Methodology • Each high-level option identified by Project Catalyst work in Q4 2012 was planned on a headcount basis to determine the timing of people moves, the potential release of surplus space to market, and the level of effort required. • This people plan was then converted to a corresponding financial plan, for comparison of merits relative to an ‘As Is’ base case scenario (retaining all current CQ and AC accommodation). Cost assumptions underpinning the model are detailed later. • Options are expressed financially as delivering a saving (or cost increase) over the base case scenario. These cost differences are shown as both discounted (15% discount rate) and non discounted cash flows. • The options have also been evaluated and ranked on the following dimensions: • Culture and ABW: The extent to which the options implement ABW, Change Management and Cultural consistency & value across the total AMP population (CQ and AC staff), and the timeframe in which they are implemented. A subjective assessment ranks the options. • Real-estate outcome: the extent to which personnel are co-located and distributed across different buildings. • Breakeven: Time taken to achieve breakeven is calculated in the standard manner of the period required for cumulative net cashflows to turn positive. A quantitative assessment. • Capexrequirement : Lower capital outlay requirement is considered better than a higher capital requirement. Options are quantitatively assessed in this way to derive relative ranking. • Number of people moves : The options have differing change impacts in terms of how many people moves are required to achieve the end-state. The options are ranked quantitatively on the basis of fewer moves being desirable. • Time to completion: The options have differing change impacts in terms of time horizon before they are completed. The options are ranked subjectively on the basis of earlier completion being desirable. • Ease of sublet : This is a subjective assessment of the relative achievability of subletting vacated space. The assessment is driven by assumptions that having less space to sublet is better, and higher floors are more attractive to sublet than lower floors.

6. Scoring & Financials

7. AMP Real Estate & ABW Analysis | Scoring & Financials • Rental Costs. Rental costs for CQ and AC are based on the current leases and annual rent increases have been applied to rental costs in accordance with lease terms. • Rental Income. Rates per floor are based on the market evaluation of CQ conducted by external consultants, CBRE. Rental income is expressed as income net of rental expense e.g. we pay $1m rental per annum, and sublet for $1.1m so net rental income is $100k per annum. • Sublet Costs: Based on typical 20% of annual rent as fee, averages to around $200,000 per CQ floor sublet. • AC Post-Redevelopment: gross rental rate of $1,400 as advised by AMPCI for mid-rise space, less an assumed 20% rental incentive for a net $1,120 per square metre. Annual increases at 4%. • IT costs: Virtual desktop implementation costs are assumed to be budgeted elsewhere and are not included. Provision of laptops, screens, and peripherals to 50% of workstations is included. We are now engaged with IT teams to discuss the IT requirements to support ABW. • Key Assumptions • Headcount assumed constant: the single most key assumption is that headcount will remain level through the period, at 3090 personnel across current CQ and AC premises. • ABW Sharing Ratio. 0.8, or 8 desks for 10 people. An industry benchmark ABW share ratio for the introduction of ABW as advised by AECOM. It is assumed that AMP will be able to achieve a ratio of 0.8 but further detailed work is required to confirm this. • ABW Implementation Costs. $1.95m cost per floor in CQ. This is based on a cost per square metre advised by external building consultants to achieve a mid-level fit-out in Sydney CBD. Examples of this standard can be seen in the appendix. • Team Adjacency Requirements: The accommodation planning for this stage of analysis does not take into account team adjacencies, blocking or stacking requirements. It is a purely mathematical exercise to calculate space requirements. • Moving Cost. $200 cost per move per person. Internal Workspace budgeting figure. • Overspill space required: Given CQ/AC are currently at full capacity, there is a need to lease space on a temporary basis to move people into while re-fits take place in CQ.

8. AMP Real Estate & ABW Analysis | Scoring & Financials • Combined Evaluation Scorecard The CQ-only options rank highest • The options have been ranked 1 to 9 on each key dimension in order to come up with an overall score for each option (lower total score is better). • The CQ-only options(1-4)* also rank 1-4 on both a discounted and non-discounted basis. • Options involving redevelopment of AC perform relatively badly for a number of reasons: • A large proportion of benefits are delivered from year 8 onwards and so are heavily discounted back to today’s value in financial evaluation. • Capex requirements are considerably higher since there is fit-out required of both CQ and redeveloped AC in these scenarios. • Number of personnel moves is generally higher. • * Option 3 involves AMP Capital moving out of AC and into CQ in line with current AC lease expiry at end Q1 2016 but this is considered a CQ-only option as they are not moved back into AC post-redevelopment.

9. AMP Real Estate & ABW Analysis | Scoring & Financials • Summary Metrics that underpin Evaluation Scorecard • On a non-discounted basis, the options range from weakly positive to strongly positive ($4m-$47m), with the exception of options 8 and 9 which have substantial capex for redeveloped AC fit-out and as a result are negative even on a non-discounted basis. • However, on a discounted basis even the best performing option has a benefit of only ~$6m over 10 years (amounts are cumulative benefits, not annual). • The business case for the change is therefore the non-financial/cultural benefits as financial benefits are not significant at ~$600k/annum even in best case.

10. AMP Real Estate & ABW Analysis | Scoring & Financials Summary Cashflows • Cashflows are shown relative to base case i.e. a positive number represents a saving versus base case cashflow whereas a negative number indicates a higher level of expenditure than base case. • Cashflows are negative until year 3 for CQ-only options, from which point savings relative to base case are made. • However, it is year 6 before break-even is achieved in the best case (green above indicates breakeven point)

11. AMP Real Estate & ABW Analysis | Scoring & Financials • High-level ABW & Change Management Pilot Timeline Now Start Pilot Go Live ABW Roll-out • Jan’13 • Q1wks 0 • Jan’14 • Q1wks 41-44 • May’13 • Q2wks 6-9 • Jun’13 • Q2wks 10-13 • Jul’13 • Q3wks 14-18 • Aug’13 • Q3wks 19-22 • Sep’13 • Q3wks 23-27 • Nov’13 • Q4wks 32-35 Feb’13 Q1wks 0 • Mar’13 • Q1wks 0 Apr’13 Q2wks 1-5 • Oct’13 • Q4wks 28-31 • Dec’13 • Q4wks 36-40 Go or No Go ABW– 31 March Discover – wks 1 to 10 Prepare – wks 8 to 16 Implement – wks 14 to 28 Embed – Go Live + 12 wks • Q2Key Activities • ABW Pilot • Start ABWpilot research & Change management strategy in CQ • Select ABWpilot group, leaders & champions • Sign-off ABW pilot business case • Prepare pilot group for ABW & Change • Move ‘over spill’ people out of CQ • Interior designer selection process • Q3Key Activities • ABW Pilot • Sign-off pilot ABW model, workstyles & neighbourhoods • Sign-off ABW workplace protocols • Finalise ABW pilot fit-out design • Landlord approval & fit-out procurement • Change management engagement, events and training with pilot group • Complete ABW fit-out in CQ • Q4Key Activities • ABW Pilot • ABW pilot ‘Go Live’ on one level in CQ • Repopulate released CQ levels ABW from Pilot group • ABW & Change management health checks/POE • Embed ABW into BAU • Refine ABW and Change management model for future roll-out Q1 Key Activities ABW Pilot Go or No Go decision Identify CQ level for ABW pilot Identify available space for extra people outside CQ ABW Governance Secure AMP senior buyin and support towards ABW& change Agree AMP ABWproject sponsor & steering group Identify AMP ABWproject streams, managers and teams ABWGovernance Initiate ABW & Change management and communication frameworks Finalise ABWpilot streams planning, programming & roadmaps • ABWGovernance • Finalise Change management roadmaps and training frameworks • Sign-off new AMP ABWIT, HR and Workspace policies • ABWGovernance • Review & update AMP ABW IT, HR and Workspace policies • Review & refine AMP ABW Governance & project streams

12. Options in Detail

13. AMP Real Estate & ABW Analysis | CQOption 1 Sub-let 4 Low-rise levels at CQ by beginning of 2015, through implementing ABW in CQ High-rise levels No changes to AC 4th Place – Score 31/72 9 52%AMP Culture & ABWValue • 9 CQ2B. AC1BReal Estate Outcome • 5 +$13.8mCash Benefit (Non-DCF) • 4 2020 Q2 Breakeven (Non-DCF) • 1 -$21.4mCapex Required • 1 2,758 hc No of People Moves • 1 2020 Q1 Time to Completion • 14CQ.0ACEase of Sub-letting Pro’s • Future potential to release one additional Low-rise level through improved ABW sharing in CQ High-rise • Lowest Capex required at -$21.4m • Lowest number of people moves and disruption • AC no changes, staff remain in AC throughout • No CQABW fit-out loss through future sub-leases • Shortest time to completion, 2020 Q1 Con’s • Very tight ABW, Change Mgmt. & fit-out programme and sequencing – high risk • Inconsistent AMP working cultures in CQ and AC, non-ABW and ABWenvironments • Off-site space needed until 2014 Q3 • Sub-lease financial loss, 2020 Q1 onwards, CQ levels 2,3,4 • Split AMP real estate portfolio, AC & CQ Yr1 Q4 Yr3 Q1 Year 1 Q4 - 2013 Year 3 Q1- 2015 3090Total Headcount 2064 CQ 922 AC 104 Off-site 3090Total Headcount 2168 CQ 922 AC 0 Off-site Colour Key ABW Levels, Max Capacity Non ABW Levels, Max Capacity Sub-let Levels Released Levels Out of Scope Levels

14. AMP Real Estate & ABW Analysis | CQ Option 2 Sub-let 6 Low-rise levels at CQ by mid-2015, through implementing ABW in CQ High & Low-rise levels No changes to AC 2nd Place – Score 28/72 670%AMPCulture & ABWValue • 4CQ1B. AC1BReal Estate Outcome • 4 +$20.7mCash Benefit (Non-DCF) • 3 2020 Q1 Breakeven (Non-DCF) • 3 -$29.2mCapex Required • 4 3,665hc No of People Moves • 2 2015 Q2 Time to Completion • 26CQ, 0AC Ease of Sub-letting Pro’s • Consistent working culture and ABWenvironments in CQ • Future potential to release one additional Low-rise level through improved ABWsharing in CQ • AC no changes, staff remain in AC throughout Con’s • Very tight ABW, Change Mgmt. & fit-out programme and sequencing – high risk • Inconsistent AMP working cultures in CQ and AC, non-ABW and ABWenvironments • Off-site space needed until 2015 Q2 • Split AMP real estate portfolio, AC & CQ Yr1 Q4 Yr3 Q2 Year 1 Q4 - 2013 Year 3 Q2- 2015 3090Total Headcount 2064 CQ 922 AC 104 Off-site 3090Total Headcount 2168 CQ 922 AC 0 Off-site Colour Key ABW Levels, Max Capacity Non ABW Levels, Max Capacity Sub-let Levels Released Levels Out of Scope Levels

15. AMP Real Estate & ABW Analysis | CQ Option 3 Release AC by lease expiry in Q1 2016, through implementing ABW in CQ on 19 levels 3rdPlace – Score 30/72 293%AMPCulture & ABWValue • 3CQ1BReal Estate Outcome • 1+$47m Cash Benefit (Non-DCF) • 2 2019 Q3 Breakeven (Non-DCF) • 6 -$37mCapex Required • 7 4,797 hc No of People Moves • 4 2016 Q1 Time to Completion • 50CQ, 9AC Ease of Sub-letting Pro’s • 93% consistent working culture and ABW environments across AMP in CQ • Future potential to ABW last 2 Low-rise and absorb extra headcount at CQthrough improved ABW sharing • AC staff collocated in CQ, improved connectivity • Single AMP real estate portfolio to manage • Strongest cash benefit (Non-DCF) at +$47m • Short breakeven point (Non-DCF), 2019 Q3 Con’s • Tight ABW, Change Mgmt. & fit-out programme and sequencing – medium/high risk • High Capex required at -$37m • High number of people moves and disruption • Off-site space needed until 2014 Q4 Yr1 Q4 Yr4 Q1 Year 1 Q4 - 2013 Year 4 Q1- 2016 3090Total Headcount 2126 CQ 922 AC 42 Off-site 3090Total Headcount 3090 CQ 0 New AC 0 Off-site Colour Key ABW Levels, Max Capacity Non ABW Levels, Max Capacity Sub-let Levels Released Levels Out of Scope Levels

16. AMP Real Estate & ABW Analysis | CQ Option 4 Sub-let 7 High-rise levels at CQ by mid-2015, through implementing ABW in CQ High & Low-rise levels No changes to AC Pro’s • Consistent working culture and ABWenvironments in CQ • Low capexrequired at -$27.3m • Future potential to release one additional High-rise level through improved ABW sharing in CQLow-rise • Sub-leasing CQ High-rise provides strongest real estate savings • Strong cash benefit (Non-DCF) at +$39.3m • Shortest breakeven point (Non-DCF), 2018 Q4 1stPlace – Score 26/72 570%AMPCulture & ABWValue • 8CQ2B. AC1Real Estate Outcome • 2 +$39.3mCash Benefit (Non-DCF) • 1 2018 Q4 Breakeven (Non-DCF) • 2 -$27.3mCapex Required • 3 3,568 hc No of People Moves • 2 2015 Q12 Time to Completion • 3 7CQ, 0ACEase of Sub-letting Con’s • Very tight ABW, Change Mgmt. & fit-out programme and sequencing – high risk • Inconsistent AMP working cultures in CQ and AC, non-ABW and ABWenvironments • People and culture disconnect in CQ between High and Low-rise • Sandwich sub-let tenant in CQbetween High and Low-rise • Split AMP real estate portfolio, AC & CQ Yr1 Q4 Yr3 Q2 Year 1 Q4 - 2013 Year 3 Q2- 2015 3090Total Headcount 2082 CQ 922 AC 86 Off-site 3090Total Headcount 2168 CQ 922 New AC 0 Off-site Colour Key ABW Levels, Max Capacity Non ABW Levels, Max Capacity Sub-let Levels Released Levels Out of Scope Levels

17. AMP Real Estate & ABW Analysis | CQ & AC Option 5 Sub-let 4 Low-rise levels at CQ by beginning of 2015, through implementing ABW in CQ High-rise levels Sub-let all Low-rise levels at CQin 2020 by transferring remaining non-ABW people from CQ to new AC 7th Place – Score 46/72 7 70%AMP Culture & ABWValue • 5CQ1B. AC1BReal Estate Outcome • 7 +$4.1mCash Benefit (Non-DCF) • 7 2022 Q1 Breakeven (Non-DCF) • 5 -$32.5mCapex Required • 2 3,310 hc No of People Moves • 7 2020 Q1 Time to Completion • 610CQ.0ACEase of Sub-letting Pro’s • Consistent working culture and ABWenvironments in CQ High-rise • Future potential to release one additional Low-rise level through improved ABW sharing in CQ High-rise • Sub-lease entire CQ Low-rise in 2020+ • Low number of people moves and disruption • AC no changes, staff remain in AC throughout • No CQABW fit-out loss through future sub-leases Con’s • Very tight ABW, Change Mgmt. & fit-out programme and sequencing – high risk • Inconsistent AMP working cultures in CQ and AC, non-ABW and ABWenvironments • Low cash benefit (Non-DCF) at +$4.1m • Sub-lease financial loss, 2020 Q1 onwards, CQ levels 2,3,4 • Split AMP real estate portfolio, AC & CQ Yr1 Q4 Yr3 Q1 Yr8 Q1 Year 1 Q4 - 2013 Year 3 Q1- 2015 Year 8Q1- 2020 3090Total Headcount 2064 CQ 922 AC 104 Off-site 3090Total Headcount 2168 CQ 922 AC 0 Off-site 3090Total Headcount 1616 CQ 1474 New AC 0 Off-site Colour Key ABW Levels, Max Capacity Non ABW Levels, Max Capacity Sub-let Levels Released Levels Out of Scope Levels

18. AMP Real Estate & ABW Analysis | CQ & AC Option 6 Release AC by lease expiry in Q1 2016, through implementing ABW in CQ on 19 levels Sub-let 7 Low-rise levels at CQ in 2019 by transferring Low-rise people from CQ to new AC 5th Place – Score 42/72 3100%AMP Culture & ABWValue • 7 CQ2B. AC1BReal Estate Outcome • 3 +$30.8mCash Benefit (Non-DCF) • 5 2020 Q3 Breakeven (Non-DCF) • 7 -$48.3mCapex Required • 8 5,761 hc No of People Moves • 5 2019 Q1 Time to Completion • 47CQ, 0ACEase of Sub-letting Pro’s • Consistent working culture and ABW environments in CQHigh-rise • Future potential to release one additional Low-rise level through improved ABW sharing in CQ High-rise • New AC building delivery 1 year ahead in 2019 Con’s • Tight ABW, Change Mgmt. & fit-out programme and sequencing – medium/high risk • Inconsistent AMP working cultures in CQ and AC • Large fit-out financial loss with 5 ABWCQ Low-rise levels when sub-lease starts in 2019 • High Capex required at -$48.3m • High number of people moves and disruption • Split AMP real estate portfolio/stacks, AC & CQ Yr1 Q4 Yr4 Q1 Yr7 Q1 Year 1 Q4 - 2013 Year 4Q1- 2016 Year 7 Q1- 2019 3090Total Headcount 2126 CQ 922 AC 42 Off-site 3090Total Headcount 3090 CQ 0 AC 0 Off-site 3090Total Headcount 2133 CQ 957 New AC 0 Off-site Colour Key ABW Levels, Max Capacity Non ABW Levels, Max Capacity Sub-let Levels Released Levels Out of Scope Levels

19. AMP Real Estate & ABW Analysis | CQ & AC Option 7 Sub-let 6 Low-rise levels at CQ by mid-2015, through implementing ABW in CQ High & Low-rise levels Sub-let all Low-rise levels at CQ in 2020 by transferring remaining non-ABW people from CQ to new AC 6th Place – Score 45/72 770%AMP Culture & ABWValue • 5 CQ1B. AC1BReal Estate Outcome • 6 +$10.9mCash Benefit (Non-DCF) • 6 2021 Q2 Breakeven (Non-DCF) • 3 -$29.2mCapex Required • 5 4,217 hc No of People Moves • 7 2020 Q1 Time to Completion • 610CQ, 0AC Ease of Sub-letting Pro’s • Consistent working culture and ABWenvironments in CQHigh-rise • Future potential to release one additional Low-rise level through improved ABW sharing in CQ High-rise • Sub-lease entire CQ Low-rise in 2020+ • AC no changes, staff remain in AC throughout Con’s • Very tight ABW, Change Mgmt. & fit-out programme and sequencing – high risk • Inconsistent AMP working cultures in CQ and AC, non-ABW and ABWenvironments • Large fit-out financial loss with 4 ABWCQ Low-rise levels when sub-lease starts in 2020 • Sub-lease financial loss, 2020 Q1 onwards, CQ levels 2,3,4 • Split AMP real estate portfolio, AC & CQ Yr1 Q4 Yr3 Q2 Yr8 Q1 Year 1 Q4 - 2013 Year 3 Q2- 2015 Year 8 Q1- 2020 3090Total Headcount 2064 CQ 922 AC 104 Off-site 3090Total Headcount 2168 CQ 922 AC 0 Off-site 3090Total Headcount 1616 CQ 1474 New AC 0 Off-site Colour Key ABW Levels, Max Capacity Non ABW Levels, Max Capacity Sub-let Levels Released Levels Out of Scope Levels

20. AMP Real Estate & ABW Analysis | CQ & AC Option 8 Release AC by lease expiry in Q1 2016, through implementing ABW in CQ on 19 levels Release CQin 2019 and move all people back into new AC with ABW 8thPlace – Score 51/72 1100%AMP Culture & ABW Value 1 AC1BReal Estate Outcome 9 -$18.4mCash Benefit (Non-DCF) 8 >2022 Breakeven (Non-DCF) 9 -$73.9mCapex Required 9 7,894 hc No of People Moves 6 2019 Q2 Time to Completion 8 12CQ, 0ACEase of Sub-letting Pro’s • 100% consistent working culture and ABWenvironments across AMP in new AC • New AC building delivery 1 year ahead in 2019 • Single AMP real estate portfolio to manage Con’s • Tight ABW, Change Mgmt. & fit-out programme and sequencing – medium/high risk • Very significant fit-out financial loss with 19 ABWCQlevels when released in 2019 • Highest Capexrequired at -$73.9m • Lowest cash benefit (Non-DCF) at -$18.4m • Highest number of people moves and disruption • 19 levels to sub-lease at CQ Yr1 Q4 Yr4 Q1 Yr7 Q2 Year 1 Q4 - 2013 Year 4Q1- 2016 Year 7 Q2- 2019 3090Total Headcount 2126 CQ 922 AC 42 Off-site 3090Total Headcount 3090 CQ 0 AC 0 Off-site 3090Total Headcount 0 CQ 3090 New AC 0 Off-site Colour Key ABW Levels, Max Capacity Non ABW Levels, Max Capacity Sub-let Levels Released Levels Out of Scope Levels

21. AMP Real Estate & ABW Analysis | CQ & AC Option 9 Sub-let 5 High-rise levels at CQ by end-2014 through implementing ABW in CQ High & Low-rise levels Release CQ in 2020 and move all people from CQ into new AC with ABW Pro’s • Future potential to provide a consistent working culture and release additional levels at new AC by introducing ABW to all AMP population • Single AMP real estate portfolio to manage 9thPlace – Score 54/72 470%AMP Culture & ABW Value 2 AC1BReal Estate Outcome 8 -$324kCash Benefit (Non-DCF) 8 >2022 Breakeven (Non-DCF) 8 -$53.9mCapex Required 6 4,721 hc No of People Moves 9 2020 Q2 Time to Completion 9 21CQEase of Sub-letting Con’s • Very tight ABW, Change Mgmt. & fit-out programme and sequencing – medium/high risk • Very significant fit-out financial loss with 19 ABWCQ levels when released in 2019 • Inconsistent AMP working cultures in AC • High Capex required at -$53.9m • Low cash benefit (Non-DCF) at -$324k • Slowest time to completion, 2020 Q2 • 19 levels to sub-lease at CQ Yr1 Q4 Yr2 Q4 Yr8 Q2 Year 1 Q4 - 2013 Year 2 Q4- 2014 Year 8Q2- 2020 3090Total Headcount 2126 CQ 922 AC 42 Off-site 3090Total Headcount 2168 CQ 922 AC 0 Off-site 3090Total Headcount 0 CQ 3090 New AC 0 Off-site Colour Key ABW Levels, Max Capacity Non ABW Levels, Max Capacity Sub-let Levels Released Levels Out of Scope Levels

22. Appendix

23. AMP Real Estate & ABW Analysis | Benefits Case Studies Tangible & Intangible Benefits Overview Most major financial services organizations are pursuing ABW strategies and a large proportion of these see it solely as a property saving initiative The most successful projects are the ones where the business leadership takes hold of the change process and drives the intangible business benefits • Efficiency • ANZ Bank, Australia • Increase in the utilisation of space by more than 15% • Credit Suisse, Switzerland • 20% saving, the amount of unoccupied desks has reduced (32% to less than 10%) • BP • The flexible working strategy resulted in reductions in property operating costs of around 35% (£23 million per annum) • Savings in occupancy costs of up to £15k per person per year, a halving in the average cost per workstation • Churn costs falling from £1,500 per move to approximately £300 • Microsoft, US • Microsoft was able to accommodate 30% more people in the same amount of space due to flexible working • British Telecom, UK • Reduced property costs reduced by 30% (£104mper annum) through the rollout of flexible working practices • Expression • Credit Suisse, Switzerland • 75% are highly satisfied with the work environment • 56% are more motivated in the Smart Working environment • 82% would not return to the old way of working • Price Waterhouse Coopers, London • Post implementation, 12% of staff asked to leave in one year, the lowest figure on record • PWC was voted “UK No 1 graduate employer of choice” • 95% of staff say they are happy with the new building and services • 87% agreeing that it is a great place to work. • Effectiveness • ANZ Bank, Australia • Improved team collaboration through ability to co-locate as required • Credit Suisse • 93% of employees indicating the same or increased individual productivity • GlaxoSmithKline, UK • GSKreport that after moving to flexible working, profit growth increased from 2% to 14%, with $50m increased sales, and believe this is partly due to the success of the new workspace strategy • They also report that the speed of decision making increased by 45% and the daily time wasted decreased by 67% (40 minutes/day) • British Telecom, UK • Absenteeism reduced by 63% when employees worked flexibly. Flexible employees were on average 20% more productive than their office-based counterparts, based on internal business metrics such as absenteeism, sick leave and maternity return rates • EC Harris, UK • Increase in visibility of leadership and access to most experienced staff, which benefited new junior staff • Environment • ANZ Bank, Australia • Reduced GHGemissions • GlaxoSmithKline, UK • Halved email volume through reduced internal emails • Hewlett Packard, US • Efficiency metrics and results from the project were impressive. Energy costs were reduced by 70%, and CO2 emissions were reduced by 70% • EC Harris, UK • Increased recycling and reduced paper consumption resulting in an improvement in their Carbon footprint by 251%. Flexible workers tend to reduce printed copy and rely more on soft copy filed electronically

24. AMP Real Estate & ABW Analysis | Benefits Summary Tangible & Intangible Benefits Overview Within the rationale of each business case it is recommended to outline a series of key clear tangible and intangible business objectives AMP is committed to deliver when considering the implementation of ‘Working at AMP, A Vision for the Future’. These should align with AMP’s Cultural drivers for change, to ensure that the project meets the desired Cultural change goals. A measuring strategy should be agreed and tracked from the beginning of the initiative Tangible and intangible business objectives can be measured within four key areas; efficiency, effectiveness, expression and environment • Efficiency • Effectiveness • Expression • Environment • Do more with less, consolidation of real estate to deliver business value • Net Lettable Area (NLA) • Reduction in Real estate • M² / Worker • $ / M² • % Utilization • HC / work point • HC mobilized / % of total workforce • Churn: current cost & rate as % • Vacancy rate • % Open plan to % enclosed space • Implement strategies that increase innovation, collaboration and knowledge sharing • Faster response times/issue resolution • Less time wasted to meeting overhead • Less time wasted to individual distractions • Less time wasted commuting • More output (ideas, solutions, decisions) • More innovative output • More validated / reliable output • More total hours per person • More employee engagement • Create positive perceptions for customers and employees • Perception of AMP Brand/Values • ABW as an attraction factor • ABW as a retention factor • Employee satisfaction • Employee work/life balance • Decrease in absenteeism • Decrease in presenteeism • Substantiate workplace strategies and business cases to deliver CSR • Reduced carbon footprint • Lower energy costs • Reduced commuting miles

25. AMP Real Estate & ABW Analysis | Benefits Impact By Groups Examples of Potential Attributes and Impact Groups Associated with ABW Concrete Changes • How is the new space unique? • Desk sharing/internal flexibility • Remote working • Better collaborative technology • Variety of different types of ancillary spaces • Increased informal types of spaces • Increased collaborative spaces • Openness • Neighborhood/home zone planning • More compact spaces • Variety of colors, graphics, textures • New Perceptions • What are the first things people will notice? • More choices in where to work in the building • More choices in where to work outside the building • More innovative atmosphere • More social atmosphere • More “buzz” • More visibility between groups and teams • More visibility within groups • Better access to fellow employees • Better access to leadership • New Behaviours • Will people spend their time differently? • Face-to-face meetings • Virtual meetings • Informal one-on-one talking • Teaming • Private time • Working from home • Social interaction • Interaction across teams • Creative thinking • Analytical thinking • Manager interaction • Individual/Team Outcomes • Will teams be more efficient and effective? • Faster response times/issue resolution • Less time wasted to meeting overhead • Less time wasted to individual distractions • Less time wasted commuting • More output (ideas, solutions, decisions) • More innovative output • More validated/reliable output • More total hours per person • More employee engagement • Customer Outcomes • Impacts to the customer & employee markets? • More products to market over time • Products more relevant to market • More efficient product delivery • More customer satisfaction/ retention • Better brand image • More brand recognition • Stronger internal values • More job satisfaction/retention • Business Outcomes • What are AMPsoverall objectives? • More revenue • More customer growth • More market share growth • Better market perception/stock price • Reduce HR costs • Reduced CREScosts • Reduced IT costs

26. ABW Change Management | High-Level Pilot Road Map Discover Prepare Implement Embed Build Case For Change Weeks 0 • Finalise • Business Case • Weeks 8 to 10 Initiate User Change Program Weeks 14 to 20 Carry Out Health Checks ‘Go Live’ +4 and +12 weeks Conduct User Engagement Weeks 1 to 6 Engage Pilot Group Weeks 10 to 14 Prepare For Pilot Go Live Day Weeks 14 to 20 Drive Business As Usual ‘Go Live’ +4 to +12 weeks Translate Research Findings Weeks 6 to 8 Define ABWWorking Solution Weeks 10 to 14 Complete Pilot Fit-out Weeks 16 to 28 Conduct Pilot POE ‘Go Live’ +10 to +12 weeks Finalise Strategic Brief Weeks 8 to 10 Develop Design Solution Weeks 12 to 16 Go Live Pilot Day 1 Kick Off Week 28 Refine & Improve ABW Model ‘Go Live’ +10 to +12 weeks

27. ABW Change Management | Pilot Change Strategy Discover Prepare Implement Embed • Case For Change • Secure AMP senior sponsor/s • Co-create the project vision & key objectives to foster buy-in at all levels • Establish AMP governance structure & project team members • Business Case • Guiding coalition • Refine messaging • Communicate the sense of urgency around an identified ‘tipping point’ and critical mass point • User Change Program • Create ownership among those with leadership responsibilities in the implementation phase • Build capacity for change • Empower broad-based action plan • Health Checks • Invite feedback and sharing of early user experiences • Encourage new ideas and user contribution to solve any issues • User Engagement • Build awareness and communicate intention for the Change • Gather data to support the case for Change and obtain critical mass buy-in from senior executives • Pilot Group • Establish group leaders & champions • Empower people to enact change • Identify and engage people to deliver short-term wins • Prepare Pilot Go Live • Engage and train people to live successfully in their new working environment • Pre-move familiarisation & logistics. • Business As Usual • Establish and refine BAU mechanisms • Transition of control and ownership to teams and leadership • Research Findings • Clarify the extent of Change to inform the Change Plan • Define the strategic direction of the project • ABWWorking Solution • Clarify & communicate the vision & key messages • Establish level of readiness for change & identify gaps (BU / team level) • Develop Local Change Plan • Pilot Fit-out • Involve people in the new space to create excitement • Pilot POE • Business case realisation assessment • Refining key messages • Success stories • Strategic Brief • Unite messages with AMP business & people vision • Crystallise direction and associated messaging • Design Solution • Align behavioural changes with the physical space and IT solutions • Pilot Day 1 Kick Off • Ensure smooth launch and arrival • Provide a fully visible team to support all facets of the change • ABW Model • Updating and making messaging robust for broader implementation • Implement continual improvement processes

28. ABW Change Management | Pilot Change Strategy Discover Prepare Implement Embed • Case For Change • Exposure to market situation • Develop preliminary business cases • Identify tangible & intangible benefits • Go / No Go decision • Business Case • Develop pilot group space budget • Benefit analysis, cost & savings • Identify risks & mitigation • Timing & phasing strategy • Leadership review & sign-off • User Change Program • Change management rollout map • Agree level of development and comms • Town hall presentation • Workplace mobility & design principles • Workplace protocols development • Health Checks • Months 1 & 2 • Best practice sharing sessions • Champions feedback • Data Collection • Leadership interviews & workshop • TUS, WPS & targeted insight • Employee focus groups • IT review • Floor plan analysis • Pilot Group • Establish group leaders & champions • Interviews and focus groups • Define measures of success • Develop neighbourhood scenarios • Prepare Go Live • Users workshops & change support • Champions roles & responsibilities • Pre-day 1 activities & logistics • Welcome pack development • Business As Usual • Train champions • BAU framework & monitoring • Reporting structure & principles • Post implementation measures & metrics • Research Findings • Gap analysis • Mobility profiles development • Workstyles development • Initial sharing ratios • Pilot shortlist & evaluation • ABWWorking Solution • Finalise sharing model & workstyles • Establish minimum requirements for Business, CRES, IT & HR • Define key business drivers • Leadership review & sign-of • Pilot Fit-out • Landlord approval & building control • Construction • Design procurement and sign-off • Workplace familiarisation tours • Workplace setup • Pilot POE • Monitor space utilisation and employee satisfaction • Pilot group mini TUS & WPS • Interviews & focus groups • Review measures of success & goals • Pilot lessons learnt analysis • Strategic Brief • Research & analysis conclusion • Quantitative vs. qualitative data • Steering committee presentation • Strategic recommendations • Prioritise limitations and opportunities • Design Solution • Establish level of intervention • Design brief development support • Design consultant appointment & briefing • Design review role & design workshops • Branding & way finding strategy • Pilot Day 1 Kick Off • Welcome activity • Day 1 & 2 on-site support with sponsor, leaders, champions, HR and IT • Informal team sharing sessions • ABW Model • Survey comparison, pre and post pilot • Identify improvements and refinements • Establish new measures of success, financial and employee satisfactions • Improved ABWWorking solution rollout

29. ABW Typical Environments | Flexibility & Choice New Spaces, New Behaviours: Teaming Spaces…. home zone defensible boundaries line of sight open / display circulation defined

30. ABW Typical Environments | Flexibility & Choice New Spaces, New Behaviours: Free Collaboration…. open and inviting buffer space destination points

31. ABW Typical Environments | Flexibility & Choice New Spaces, New Behaviours: Formal Collaboration….

32. ABW Typical Environments | Flexibility & Choice New Spaces, New Behaviours: Social Spaces…. connections / transparency adjacent settings ad-hoc encounters

33. ABW Typical Environments | Flexibility & Choice New Spaces, New Behaviours: Touchdown Spaces…. settings and atmosphere create integrated experiences technology mixed team users

34. ABW Typical Environments | Flexibility & Choice New Spaces, New Behaviours: Connectivity…. informal meetings vertical networks physical links buzz spaces

35. ABW Typical Environments | Flexibility & Choice New Spaces, New Behaviours: Focus & Concentration Spaces….

36. ABW Typical Environments | Flexibility & Choice New Spaces, New Behaviours: IT Everywhere….

37. ABW Typical Environments | Flexibility & Choice New Spaces, New Behaviours: Any Space….Out of the Building

38. ABW Typical Environments | Floor Plans • Financial Services @ 0.68 Sharing • NLA1700m² • Workstations 172 • Headcount 252 • Density 9.9m² (NLA/Workstations) • Density 6.7m² (NLA/Headcount) • Sharing Ratio 6.8 Workstations : 10 People

39. ABW Typical Environments | Floor Plans • Telecommunications HQ @ 0.83 Sharing • NLA2201m² • Workstations 187 • Headcount 225 • Density 11.8m² (NLA/Workstations) • Density 9.8m² (NLA/Headcount) • Sharing Ratio 8.3 Workstations : 10 People

40. ABW & Change Case Study | ANZ, Our Space Our Space Implementation & Change. 2009 - OngoingMelbourne, Sydney, Brisbane, Perth, Bangalore, Papua New Guinea, Others The Result Improved team collaboration through ability to co-locate as required Staff feel more productive because they can move around and sit with the people they are working with on certain projects Staff say that their internal network has expanded significantly. Increase in the utilisation of space by more than 15% Increased flexibility by being able to quickly respond to fluctuations in resource requirements without needing to take up more space Reduced GHG emissions By mid 2012, ANZ Centre will support 7000 ANZ staff who will be working flexibly using the Our Space, mobile working model ANZ Aspired To Reduce costs by maximising the use of ANZ's new and refreshed buildings Reduce the carbon footprint Improve team collaboration through ability to co-locate as required Empower people to use a diverse range of spaces support and staff acceptance are the 2 key factors in the success of implementing ‘mobile working’ Our Learning Each team is different and ‘mobile working’ means something different to each of those teams. A model based on principles (rather than prescriptions) works best and should be tailored to each team Flexible working should be about empowerment and what people can do, not what people can not, or are not allowed to do in the workspace Leadership support and staff acceptance are the 2 key factors in the success of implementing ‘mobile working’ [“Having spent 15 years working for ANZ and having the same desk to go to every day, there is a little bit of reluctance to give up what you think is your personal space in the workspace to being mobile and working remotely. But I actually makes you work more efficiently. It forces you to streamline the way you work. It changed the way I thought about working withy my team. There is a lot more ‘cross-pollination’ and a lot more effective communication within our team.”] [“I was quite anxious about the whole concept to be truthful, but it is actually quite liberating”]

41. ABW & Change Case Study | Credit Suisse, Smart Working Smart Working Implementation & Change. 2011 - 2011 Zurich (2,200m²) London (1800m²), Singapore (1600m²) Credit Suisse Aspired To Create a new working culture in Credit Suisse focused on the contribution and output of employees over physical attendance. Ensure employee satisfaction with Smart Working environment Strengthen Credit Suisse’s position as an attractive and innovative employer Decrease space consumption & costs The Result 95% of employees felt they had sufficient support from Credit Suisse to help them understand the new workspace 93% of employees indicating the same or increased individual productivity Non productive time lowered by 28 minutes per day. 82% of staff say they would not return to the old way of working Increased employee satisfaction, with 75% of staff satisfied with the work environment. Reduction in unoccupied desks from 32% to less than 10% Reduced sharing ratio from 1.3 to 0.8 Cost saving targets exceeded 45% of respondents felt that Credit Suisse is a better employer than before (42% felt its position is unchanged) 56% of survey participates felt more motivated because of the Smart Working office [“82% of staff say they would not return to the old way of working”]

42. ABW& Change Case Study | Deutsche Bank, DB New Workplaces DB Workplaces Implementation & Change. 2007 - Ongoing London, Hamburg, Berlin, Frankfurt, New York, Others The Result £0 churn cost for growth, reduction or restructuring (London) A noted shift in Deutsche Bank’s culture to better support individual work, promote collaboration Deutsche Bank’s New ‘Workplace Strategy’, developed from AECOM recommendations,is sustainable in the face of market fluctuations Workplace Strategy being implemented in a staged approach globally Baseline data established through primary research involving more than 17,000 staff in 22 offices across 10 key locations in Asia Pacific, Europe and London Deutsche Bank Aspired To Establish a global programme of research to gain greater understanding of how our space is, and should be, utilized in key areas of the Deutsche Bank global real estate portfolio Provide defendable data to develop more efficient, effective and expressive work environments that will improve organizational performance and add value to the business [“The Studies undertaken by AECOM have enabled Deutsche Bank to hold more detailed, fact-based conversations with its customers about how they can use their office space more efficiently. This has been a key contributor in helping optimise a number of our key real estate strategies around the World”] Simon Ward, Global Head of Corporate Real Estate and Services Deutsche Bank

43. ABW & Change Case Study | GlaxoSmithKline, Flexible Working Innovation Hubs. 2005 - Ongoing United Kingdom, Americas The Result The Result 45% increase in the speed of decision making Achieved double digit growth (from 2-14%) by using the physical environment and fusion as an enabler to drive innovation Daily time lost has decreased by 67% (40 minutes/day) Group effectiveness has increased by 42% Initiated new profitable campaigns e.g., ‘beauty of quitting,’ $50m increased sales Halved email volume through reduced internal emails The building and workspace design had to demonstrate a less hierarchical culture and provide a flexible environment GSK Aspired To Deliver measurable business benefits by enabling innovation and organizational change Co-locate natural work teams enabling better physical connections, cross functional collaboration and stronger brand alignment Provide more variety of spaces to support highly varied work Bring customers to the heart of the workplace Demonstrate more flexibility and less hierarchy [“AECOM’s deep understanding and interpretation of our needs has created environments that are very attractive to the talent we need and are supporting faster decision making and increased responsiveness to the markets we serve. All this, with time and costs savings too.”] Robert G Wolf, Vice President, Human Resources, GlaxoSmithKline

44. ABW Pilot Project | Design Partner Selection Process • Design Pitch Example • Rethinking and redefining your workspace presents your with a significant opportunity to affect organisational transformation, increase innovation, and to create a place that will enable the business to operate at its best • An agile workplace pilot to explore a different way of working and testing different work settings, is an important stage • This will ensure you define the maximum value from the workplace in terms of improving both your work place efficiencies as well as improving business performance and productivity

45. ABW Pilot Project | Design Partner Selection Process Design Pitch Example The stage set. Integration of IT, AV, and other collaboration tools are crucial to the success of these environments The deep understanding of the user interface and the little details that make a flexible work life 'seamless' are crucial to ensuring a successful and enjoyable outcome. The understanding of ergonomics, personalisation, paper processes, shared data storage and many other performance enhancers, again - are key to a good Flexible Working Environment

46. ABW Pilot Project | Design Partner Selection Process Design Pitch Example New workplaces have a significant impact on behaviour, and behaviour impacts culture and organisational outcomes These key issues can be broken down into a number of components, many of which have been stated in the brief, Additional considerations related to the radical transformation of the world of media raise further issues Competition has vastly increased media outlets and audience control over content, through on-demand access to media and user-generated social media. It is a given that there will be more competition for talented people, and the work environment is acknowledged as a key element in attracting and retaining staff

47. AMP Real Estate & ABWAnalysis | Organisation Benchmarking Sharing ratios Current desk share ratios for key financial institutions are generally between 0.85 and 0.8 (8 to 8.5 workstations : 10 people) ANZ Bank Target ratio range from 1:1 to 0.7. Generally averaged at 0.85 Credit Suisse Target ratio 0.8 Deutsche Bank Target ratio 0.83 CBA Target ratio 0.83 Macquarie Bank Target ratio 0.83 HSBC Global target of 0.8 in 2013, with stages. Currently at 0.9 0.85 0.83 1:1 0.9 0.8 0.75 0.7 0.65

48. Now/Legacy • Current Target Shift AMP Real Estate & ABW Analysis | ABW & Change Approach Most major financial services organizations are pursuing similar ABW strategies. The principal difference relates to whether they see it as a property initiative (limited investment in change) or as a people issue From a people perspective most organizations start at a point where CRES or HR drive the change (outward driven change) However the most successful projects are the ones where the business leadership takes hold of the change process andbusiness benefits (inward driven change) Most organizations implementing ABW equivalents are still outwardly driven and do not have a structured approach to shift to inward business driven change – with the few exceptions created as much by chance as deliberate planning The one exception is Accenture, where the way people work is fundamentally built into the business model • Outward driven change (support) • Limited investment • in change • Inward driven change (business) • These examples are exceptions to the rule In these organisations – this type of outcome is not yet systemised • Singapore, UK • Sydney • Home working USA • Schiphol • Smart Working

49. AMP Real Estate & ABW Analysis | Assumed Key Data ABW Key Data Summary, 1 High-Rise Level (Based on test-fit level 10 – 2012)

50. AMP Real Estate & ABW Analysis | Assumptions AMP Sydney Raw Data AMP has been responsible for providing all assumptions and raw data, including costs, headcount, content, etc. and any other material necessary to accurately populate the preliminary ABW analysis. The raw data that underpins the preliminary analysis has been gathered and inputted into an Excel framework. As agreed with AMP, the approximate cost estimates have been compiled as a hypothetical one-level (floor) scenario that has been multiplied to arrive at high-level estimates for multiple floors. The framework includes, wherever possible, previously agreed allowances developed by WMK in the document ‘Opinion of Probable Costs’, dated 10 April 2012. The preliminary ABW cost and savings analysis made reference to raw data, costs and assumptions that: • Have been provided by AMP before or during the development phase. • Have previously been provided by AMP and are included in the DEGW Circular Quay Level 10 Flexible Working Pilot Project Proposal, dated 24th April 2012 . • Have also been provided by WMK in the document ‘Opinion of Probable Costs’, dated 10 April 2012. Where necessary, AMP has connected with the appropriate individuals and teams within AMP internally to gather material .