The effectiveness of MySuper mystery shoppers and a tick-a-box approach in managing the risk that bank staff were breaking financial advice rules were put to Mark Pankhurst, ANZ's head of superannuation in his final stint in the royal commission witness box.At issue was the approach that had been taken by ANZ by including an offer to take up an in-house super product during the course of its so-called "A to Z selling review".Pankhurst said he was not directly involved in the A to Z review but was able to explain that "it's, effectively, a process where a customer will come into a branch and have a conversation with a banker, accredited to provide that service to customers, where they will simply be looking at situations around what they currently own, what they currently owe, etc, almost like a balance sheet conversation that they have about financial needs, primarily for the purpose of banking services….""The banker then advises the customer that the A to Z review has now finished, and then provides what they call a de-linking statement which effectively says that any information or any further information that they provide about any other products or services is not going to take into consideration the information that they've provided"They will then ask the client, once they've done that, whether or not that customer is interested in understanding anything more about superannuation."It was this proximity to a balance sheet assessment and the offer of a superannuation product by staff not authorised to give financial advice that has put ANZ back on rocky ground, with ASIC forcing the bank to sign an enforceable undertaking and to pay A$1.25 million.The key risk that the way ANZ's Smart Choice Super was sold presented to the bank was that customers could switch their existing superannuation to that product without understanding the potential consequences and end up with a less suitable product than their existing funds.Pankhurst told the commission that the ANZ Smart Choice super product being offered to as many of its customers as its staff could manage was a "one size fits all product", but not a MySuper product.This led Michael Hodge, counsel assisting the commission to ask: "It's confusing because there is more than one ANZ Smart Choice product?" leading to this exchange:Pankhurst: "That is correct."Hodge: "And there is an ANZ Smart Choice product that is a MySuper product?"Pankhurst: "That's right.  One is called Super and Pension and one is called Smart Choice for employers and their employees, that is correct."Hodge: "There is then another ANZ Smart Choice product which is the one being sold through the branches which is not a MySuper product?"  Pankhurst: "Sorry, they're the two that I was talking about."Pankhurst, when pressed, said he was not aware of how ANZ was remunerated for providing this service, nor could he say if there was a revenue sharing arrangement with OnePath Custodians in relation to the Smart Choice product.   What could be established was that the value of the funds under management