Article Overview: Competitive strategy demands greater attention of director nomination processes, as well as better tools and more rigor in director assessment.
Article Overview: Talent-related concerns have traditionally not made a boards's their short list of issues. However, the growing body of research and expert opinion regarding the importance of a board’s attention to leadership and talent management has spawned a new contender for a board’s most strategic question: Does our operating organization have the leadership to set a winning strategy and talent throughout the organization to implement it?
Article Overview: First, do inner circles exist? Yes. Our panel indicated these coalitions operate pervasively. Their value? Our panel indicated that inner circles most often function as a constructive facilitator of board dynamics and efficiently catalyze the full board’s deliberative process — especially valuable during times of increased scrutiny, uncertainty, and heavy workload. This inner circle is an alert, continuously operating force for communications, influence, and guidance.
Article Overview: Boards increasingly appreciate that leadership and talent management are decidedly not back-burner matters. More than ever, they appreciate that these matters significantly impact the sustainable performance of the enterprise and should not solely be the charge of the HR executive or even of the CEO and top management.
Article Overview: As directors become increasingly involved in their company’s strategy process, it’s evident that some fail to have the competencies to meaningfully contribute. Some deficiencies may result in only benevolent dabbling. But at the extreme, deficiencies can result in destructive processes and the adoption of faulty strategic decisions. Often these scenarios operate
within the context of participation by well-meaning directors—not within hostile environments.
Article Overview: Trust is a necessary element in discovery, debate, change, and healthy board culture. Today, boards rarely practice building authentic trust, probably because it seems too elementary to garner director attention. Consequently, board capability is not fully accessible or effectively leveraged by board leadership.
Article Overview: Boards oftentimes realize too late that the battle for their company has already begun, and not only are they outflanked, but they are not prepared to respond. Boards frequently fail to scrutinize their company the same way an activist does. So, how do you as a director think more like an activist investor?
Article Overview: Historical board oversight has been characterized as “eyes on and fingers off”. This principle may be shifting as active money in the board room increasingly expects “hands on collaboration” between the board and operating executives. Top down oversight is being replaced with hands on engagement. Boards seem to be listening and adjusting. And, perhaps, that is the biggest benefit to shareholders from the “activist era”.