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 Messages • Key Assumptions • Scoring & Financials • Methodology • Evaluation Scorecards • Key Financials & Cash Flow • High-level Timeline • Benefits • Four Key Measures • Case Studies • Impact By Group • Options • Overview • Option 1 • Option 2 • Option 3 • Option 4 • Option 5 • Option 6 • Option 7 • Option 8 • Option 9 • Appendix • 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 • Meeting Objectives • Eliminate some options as not viable • Identify any new options not included that may present themselves • Seek guidance around clarifying further the situation with AC redevelopment and whether staying in it is viable or not • Confirm next steps • When is this going to ALT • Key Messages • Financial Benefits (Tangible) • Financial benefits are not especially strong, as expected the project needs to be approached as one whose benefits are non-financial or not easily measured in conventional financial terms. • Cultural Benefits (Intangible) • 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 • Tangible and intangible business objectives can be measured within four key areas; efficiency, effectiveness, expression and environment • CQvs New AC Options • CQ options 1 to 4 • CQ and new Ac options 5 to 8 • New AMP culture across all AMP or fragmented by building • ABWCapex Investment • Capexinvestment in CQ (old building) vs. capex investment in new AC • ABWImplementationTiming • Timelines are tight for getting to a pilot in Q4 this year and decisions will need to be made quickly to progress. • Very tight ABW, Change Mgmt. & fit-out programme and sequencing for CQroll-out • New AC Unknowns • xxxxxx

5. AMP Real Estate & ABW Analysis | Executive Summary • Rental Costs.The model comprise of rent per the CQ and AC leases, plus landlord outgoings. Rental costs for CQ and AC are based on the current leases and annual rent increases have been applied to rental costs, CQ at 3.75% per year and AC at 4.25% in accordance with lease terms. • Rental Income. Rates per floor are based on the market evaluation of CQ conducted by external consultants, CBRE, inflated each year by 3.75% on the assumption that we would back-to-back our lease rental increases with any sublet arrangement we enter into. Rental income is expressed as income net of rental expense (excluding landlord outgoings) e.g. we pay $1m rental per annum, and sublet for $1.1m so net rental income is $100k per annum. • Off-site Overspill. xxxxx • IT Costs. xxxxx • Key Exclusions • Costs of internal Change Management alignment, internal ABW project streams and teams (HR, IT, Workspace) • IT@AMP costs for ABW-enabling technology projects such as virtual desktop and associated hardware rollout. • ABW implementation in AC • Key Assumptions • Moving Cost. $200 cost per move per person. Specific filing and team storage excluded. Internal Workspace budgeting figure. • 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. This includes an allowance for external resource to develop ABW Strategy and Change Management Consultancy. • 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. • ABW Strategy & Change Management Costs. The implementation cost per floor includes Consultancy fees and Change Management events. • No of People Moves. Based on a mathematical calculation of people moved out during fit-out, and people moved back in to a completed ABW floor. • Team Adjacency Requirements: The accommodation planning for this stage of analysis does not take into account team adjacencies, blocking or stacking requirements during the non-ABW reshuffles. It is a purely mathematical exercise to calculate space requirements. There is therefore the possibility that the number of required floors could be higher in reality than indicated in this analysis. • Discount Rate. 15%, standard project evaluation discount rate for calculating NPV. • Lease Costs. xxxxx

6. Scoring & Financials

7. AMP Real Estate & ABW Analysis | Scoring & Financials • Methodology • Each of the 5 high-level options was planned on a headcount basis to determine timing of people moves, release of surplus space to market, and costs incurred. • 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 on the next slide. • Options are expressed financially as delivering a saving (or cost increase) over the base case scenario. These cost differences are shown as both discounted and non discounted cash flows. Capex is included in the cashflows e.g. Base Case cost in year 2 might be $30m of cost, while cost of an option is $35, inclusive of $5m of capital expenditure, and this is expressed as a negative $5m position in that year relative to base case. The standard discount rate of 15% has been used for NPV calculations. • The options have also been evaluated and ranked on the following dimensions in addition to NPV: • 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. Some options have inconsistency across AMP staff and implement ABW on a limited number of floors and leave substantial populations in ‘as is’ accommodation, while others house all personnel within ABW accommodation eventually, but take several years to achieve this. A subjective assessment ranks the options. • 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. • Capex requirement : 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, as well as costs associated with each person movement. 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 to sublet is better, and higher floors are more attractive to sublet than lower floors.

8. AMP Real Estate & ABW Analysis | Scoring & Financials • CQ Options 1 to 4 | Evaluation Scorecard • <commentary> • As well as the financial evaluation, the options were assessed on a number of other dimensions, above, to come up with an overall ranking of the options. Key metrics for each option used as the basis of the rankings are shown on the next page.

9. AMP Real Estate & ABW Analysis | Scoring & Financials CQ & AC Options 5 to 8 | Evaluation Scorecard • <commentary> • As well as the financial evaluation, the options were assessed on a number of other dimensions, above, to come up with an overall ranking of the options. Key metrics for each option used as the basis of the rankings are shown on the next page.

10. AMP Real Estate & ABW Analysis | Scoring & Financials All CQ & AC Options 1 to 9| Evaluation Scorecard • <commentary> • As well as the financial evaluation, the options were assessed on a number of other dimensions, above, to come up with an overall ranking of the options. Key metrics for each option used as the basis of the rankings are shown on the next page.

11. AMP Real Estate & ABW Analysis | Options Evaluation Scorecard • <not for inclusion in the pack – this is for us to utlize while constructing it>

12. AMP Real Estate & ABW Analysis | Scoring & Financials • DCF and Non-DCF figures are totals over a 10 year period, not annual amounts • On a non-discounted basis, the options range from positive to strongly positive. However, on a discounted basis even the best performing option has a marginal benefit at ~$7m over 10 years. • The business case for the change is therefore the non-financial benefits – increased collaboration, productivity, innovation, making AMP an employer of choice etc. – rather than the financial benefits, as these are not significant at less than $750k per annum even in best case.

13. AMP Real Estate & ABW Analysis | Scoring & Financials • Non-DCF 10 Year Cash Flow Projection • Breakeven projection based on • ABW fit-out • ABW strategy & change management • People moves • Overspill rental • Leasing costs

14. AMP Real Estate & ABW Analysis | Scoring & Financials • DCF10 Year Cash Flow Projection • Breakeven projection based on • ABW fit-out • ABW strategy & change management • People moves • Overspill rental • Leasing costs

15. 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

16. Benefits

17. 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

18. 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

19. 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

20. Options

21. AMP Real Estate & ABW Analysis | Options, Overview • In all scenarios, CQ levels 26-24, and Ground/Level 1, are assumed to be retained. The options are as follows: • Option 3 • ABW CQ, High-Rise downwards, until all CQ personnel are housed in ABW’d accommodation within CQ (15 levels ABW’d and 6 levels of CQ Low-Rise sublet). • In 2020 following redevelopment of AC, staff from 4 levels of CQ Low-Rise move to new AC and are sublet so all CQ Low-Rise is sublet. • Option 4 • As option 2 except CQ Low-Rise personnel do not move to redeveloped AC in 2020. • Option 5 • ABW CQ Low-Rise and move High-Rise staff into Low-Rise to free up High-Rise floors to sublet (5 levels). • High-rise floors (levels 23-20) retained. • Option 1 • ABW CQ High-Rise (levels 23-12) and move Low-Rise staff into High-Rise to free up Low-Rise floors to sublet (4 levels). • Low-Rise floors (levels 7-2) retained non-ABW’d for staff who cannot fit into ABW’d High-Rise, until 2020, at which point following AC redevelopment remaining Low-Rise personnel are moved into AC and remainder of CQ Low-Rise is sublet. • Option 2 • ABW CQ, High-Rise downwards, until all AC personnel can be accommodated in CQ by time of AC lease expiry Q1 2016 (19 levels ABW’d). • AC being empty for redevelopment is assumed to expedite delivery by 1 year, and when complete in 2019, majority of CQ Low-Rise personnel (levels 11-5) move to new AC and CQ space is sublet (CQ Low-Rise floors 4-2 which would sublet at a loss are retained).

22. 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 Table to Update 3rd= Place – Score 27/40 4 11 CQ. 0 ACCulture & ABWValue • 3 CQ1B. AC 1BReal Estate Outcome • 5 +$23mCash Benefit • 4 2020 Q1 Breakeven (CB) • 1 $21.4mCapex Required • 1 3310 hc No of People Moves • 4 2020 Q1 Time to Completion • 5 10 CQ. 0 AC Ease of Sub-letting Pro’s • Consistent working culture and ABW environments in CQ High-rise • Possibility to absorb extra headcount in CQ High-rise in 2020 through improved ABW sharing • Sub-lease entire CQ Low-rise in 2020+ • Lowest Capex required • Lowest number of people moves and disruption • AC 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 • 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

23. 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 Table to Update 5th Place – Score 30/40 511 CQ. 0 ACCulture & ABWValue • 3CQ1B. AC 1BReal Estate Outcome • 4 +$26mCash Benefit • 4 2020 Q1 Breakeven (CB) • 3 $29.2mCapex Required • 3 4217 hc No of People Moves • 4 2020 Q1 Time to Completion • 4 10 CQ, 0 AC Ease of Sub-letting Pro’s • Consistent working culture and ABWenvironments in CQHigh-rise • Possibility to absorb extra headcount in CQHigh-rise in 2020+ through improved ABWsharing • Sub-lease entire CQ Low-rise in 2020+ • AC 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 • Significant 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 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

24. AMP Real Estate & ABW Analysis | CQ Option 3 Release AC by lease expiry in Q1 2016, through implementing ABW in CQ on 19 levels Table to Update 1stPlace – Score 15/40 119 CQ. 0 ACCulture & ABWValue • 1CQ2B. AC 0Real Estate Outcome • 1+$48.5m Cash Benefit • 2 2019 Q3 Breakeven (CB) • 4 $37mCapex Required • 4 4797 hc No of People Moves • 1 2016 Q1 Time to Completion • 1 0 CQ, 9 AC Ease of Sub-letting Pro’s • Consistent working culture and ABW environments across 90% of CQ& AMP • Possibility to ABW last 2 Low-rise in 2016+ • Possibility to absorb extra headcount at CQ in 2018+ through improved ABW sharing • AC staff collocated in CQ, improved connectivity • AC released at the end of Q1 2016. • Earliest end game completion • Single AMP real estate portfolio Con’s • Tight ABW, Change Mgmt. & fit-out programme and sequencing – medium/high risk • High Capex required • 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

25. AMP Real Estate & ABW Analysis | CQ Option 4 Sub-let 7 Low-rise levels at CQ by mid-2015, through implementing ABW in CQ High & Low-rise levels No changes to AC Table to Update Pro’s • Consistent working culture and ABW environments in CQLow-rise • Possibility to absorb extra headcount at CQ in 2018+ through improved ABWsharing • Sub-lease CQ High-rise (7 levels). Stronger real estate saving • Strongest NPV and breakeven point • Low number of people moves, no AC moves to CQ • Early end game completion 2ndPlace – Score 18/40 214 CQ. 0 ACCulture & ABWValue • 4CQ2B. AC 1 Real Estate Outcome • 3 +$40.7mCash Benefit • 1 2018 Q3 Breakeven (DCF 15%) • 2 $27.3mCapex Required • 2 3568 hc No of People Moves • 2 2016 Q14 Time to Completion • 2 7 CQ, 0 AC Ease 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/stacks, AC & CQ Yr1 Q4 Yr4 Q4 Year 1 Q4 - 2013 Year 4 Q4 - 2016 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

26. 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 Table to Update 3rd= Place – Score 27/40 4 11 CQ. 0 ACCulture & ABWValue • 3 CQ1B. AC 1BReal Estate Outcome • 5 +$23mCash Benefit • 4 2020 Q1 Breakeven (CB) • 1 $21.4mCapex Required • 1 3310 hc No of People Moves • 4 2020 Q1 Time to Completion • 5 10 CQ. 0 AC Ease of Sub-letting Pro’s • Consistent working culture and ABW environments in CQ High-rise • Possibility to absorb extra headcount in CQ High-rise in 2020 through improved ABW sharing • Sub-lease entire CQ Low-rise in 2020+ • Lowest Capex required • Lowest number of people moves and disruption • AC 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 • 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 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

27. 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 Table to Update 3rd= Place – Score 27/40 314 CQ. 0 ACCulture & ABWValue • 5 CQ2B. AC 1BReal Estate Outcome • 2 +$47.9mCash Benefit • 2 2019 Q3 Breakeven (CB) • 4 $37mCapex Required • 5 5761 hc No of People Moves • 3 2019 Q1 Time to Completion • 3 7 CQ, 0 AC Ease of Sub-letting Pro’s • Consistent working culture and ABW environments in CQHigh-rise • Possibility to absorb extra headcount in CQ High and Low-rise in 2020+ through improved ABWsharing • 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, non-ABWand ABW environments • Significant fit-out financial loss with 5 ABWCQ Low-rise levels when sub-lease starts in 2019 • Highest Capexrequired • 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

28. 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 Table to Update 5th Place – Score 30/40 511 CQ. 0 ACCulture & ABWValue • 3CQ1B. AC 1BReal Estate Outcome • 4 +$26mCash Benefit • 4 2020 Q1 Breakeven (CB) • 3 $29.2mCapex Required • 3 4217 hc No of People Moves • 4 2020 Q1 Time to Completion • 4 10 CQ, 0 AC Ease of Sub-letting Pro’s • Consistent working culture and ABWenvironments in CQHigh-rise • Possibility to absorb extra headcount in CQHigh-rise in 2020+ through improved ABWsharing • Sub-lease entire CQ Low-rise in 2020+ • AC 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 • Significant 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

29. 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 Table to Update • 2nd Place – Score 18/40 • 214 CQ. 0 ACCulture & ABW Value • 4 CQ2B. AC 1 Real Estate Outcome • 3 +$40.7mCash Benefit • 1 2018 Q3 Breakeven (DCF 15%) • 2 $27.3mCapex Required • 2 3568 hc No of People Moves • 2 2016 Q14 Time to Completion • 2 7 CQ, 0 AC Ease of Sub-letting Pro’s • Consistent working culture and ABW environments across 90% of CQ & AMP • New AC building delivery 1 year ahead in 2019 • Single AMP real estate portfolio Con’s • Tight ABW, Change Mgmt. & fit-out programme and sequencing – medium/high risk • Significant fit-out financial loss with 19 ABWCQlevels when released in 2019 • Highest Capex required • Highest number of people moves and disruption 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

30. AMP Real Estate & ABW Analysis | CQ & AC Option 9 • XXXXXXXXX Table to Update • 2nd Place – Score 18/40 • 214 CQ. 0 ACCulture & ABW Value • 4 CQ2B. AC 1 Real Estate Outcome • 3 +$40.7mCash Benefit • 1 2018 Q3 Breakeven (DCF 15%) • 2 $27.3mCapex Required • 2 3568 hc No of People Moves • 2 2016 Q14 Time to Completion • 2 7 CQ, 0 AC Ease of Sub-letting Pro’s • XXXX Con’s • XXX Colour Key ABW Levels, Max Capacity Non ABW Levels, Max Capacity Sub-let Levels Released Levels Out of Scope Levels

31. Appendix

32. 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

33. 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

34. 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

44. 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

45. 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

46. 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”]

47. 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”]

48. 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

49. 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

50. 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