The role of the board of directors : perceptions of managerial elites

We highlight how directors and senior managers perceive the roles of a board to involve overseeing risk and compliance, strategy, governance, developing the CEO and senior management and managing stakeholders. We find that managers and directors perceive board effectiveness as linked to different combinations of these roles and that there appear to be differences in perceptions between different types of firms. We conclude that clarity around the board’s role set is critical to furthering the corporate governance research agenda, and that the relationship between board roles and perceived board effectiveness differs between managers and directors.

The changing role of the supervisory board chairman: the case of the Netherlands (1997-2007)

Over the last ten years, the corporate governance context in most Western countries has changed as a result of irregularities, increased regulation, heightened societal expectations and shareholder activism. This paper examines the impact of the changing context on the role of chairmen of supervisory boards in the Netherlands. Based on a combination of thirty semi-structured interviews with board members of leading Dutch corporations and secondary data on the position of supervisory board chairmen at the top-100 listed firms in the Netherlands, the study reveals that board chairmen have become increasingly involved in both their control and service roles. While the demographics (i.e., age, tenure, gender and nationality) of chairmen have hardly changed over the last decade, chairmen are spending considerably more time on boards and committees, have reduced the number of board interlocks and have become more active on the forefront of the corporate governance discussion. The paper highlights several implications for scholars and practitioners.

How nonprofit boards monitor, judge and influence organisational performance

The law and popular opinion expect boards of directors will actively monitor their organisations. Further, public opinion is that boards should have a positive impact on organisational performance. However, the processes of board monitoring and judgment are poorly understood, and board influence on organisational performance needs to be better understood. This thesis responds to the repeated calls to open the ‘black box’ linking board practices and organisational performance by investigating the processual behaviours of boards. The work of four boards1 of micro and small-sized nonprofit organisations were studied for periods of at least one year, using a processual research approach, drawing on observations of board meetings, interviews with directors, and the documents of the boards. The research shows that director turnover, the difficulty recruiting and engaging directors, and the administration of reporting, had strong impacts upon board monitoring, judging and/or influence. In addition, board monitoring of organisational performance was adversely affected by directors’ limited awareness of their legal responsibilities and directors’ limited financial literacy. Directors on average found all sources of information about their organisation’s work useful. Board judgments about the financial aspects of organisational performance were regulated by the routines of financial reporting. However, there were no comparable routines facilitating judgments about non-financial performance, and such judgments tended to be limited to specific aspects of performance and were ad hoc, largely in response to new information or the repackaging of existing information in a new form. The thesis argues that Weick’s theory of sensemaking offers insight into the way boards went about the task of understanding organisational performance. Board influence on organisational performance was demonstrated in the areas of: compliance; instrumental influence through service and through discussion and decision-making; and by symbolic, legitimating and protective means. The degree of instrumental influence achieved by boards depended on director competency, access to networks of influence, and understandings of board roles, and by the agency demonstrated by directors. The thesis concludes that there is a crowding out effect whereby CEO competence and capability limits board influence. The thesis also suggests that there is a second ‘agency problem’, a problem of director volition. The research potentially has profound implications for the work of nonprofit boards. Rather than purporting to establish a general theory of board governance, the thesis embraces calls to build situation-specific mini-theories about board behaviour.

Challenges in the supervisory boardroom : an exploratory study in the Netherlands

As a consequence of recent corporate governance reforms, the work of supervisory board members in the Dutch two-tier system has become more complex. The objectives of this study are to gain more insight in the current challenges that supervisory board members face and assess whether they are well-equipped to manage them. Based on a combination of an analysis of self-assessment reports, a web-based survey and semi-structured interviews, we conclude that the major challenges of supervisory board members lie in the field of interaction and collaboration with executives. Distinct ‘challenge areas’ were relatively often perceived as problematic as well as important, highlighting the need to improve the current functioning of boards. With regard to the skills that are present on supervisory boards, we find that individual qualities, like integrity, professionalism and knowledge, are better recognized than collective qualities for the supervisory board as a whole. In particular, openness and honesty are seen as important, but often lacking. The paper highlights several implications for scholars and practitioners.

Boardroom identities: can independence by 'cued' in directors?

Director independence is a cornerstone of fiduciary responsibility and good corporate governance. However, most directors are recruited because of the roles and networks they hold, meaning that there is an expectation that identities held by a director outside the boardroom will be used to benefit the company. While this often works well, it is acknowledged that many directors, either consciously or subconsciously, will at times allow themselves to be influenced by their other roles to the detriment of the governance process. In this paper we argue that identity theory can be used to explore the impact of ‘identity’ on corporate governance and that practical tools can be developed to actively assist directors to maintain ‘independence’ in the boardroom.

The effectiveness of supervisory boards : an exploratory study of challenges in Dutch boardrooms

Triggered by highly publicized corporate scandals, changing societal expectations and the collapse of financial markets, the roles of boards of directors have changed significantly in safeguarding the interest of shareholders and other stakeholders. Yet relatively little is known about contemporary challenges non-executive directors face and whether their boards are well-equipped for their new tasks. Based on self-assessment reports by supervisory boards, a survey and interviews with supervisory board members, this paper investigates the challenges non-executive directors face in the Netherlands, particularly after a decade of corporate governance reform. Non-executive directors’ inadequate role in scrutinizing executive directors’ performance, information asymmetries and dysfunctional working relationships between executive and non-executive directors are among the greatest challenges indicated by non-executive directors on Dutch supervisory boards. The paper discusses several implications for scholars and practitioners and provides a unique insight in boardroom dynamics (word count: 138).

Unpacking director financial literacy : a Delphi study from Australia

The ‘Centro case’ confirmed that each individual director is responsible for financial governance and must be able to ‘read and understand’ financial statements. Despite the centrality of director financial literacy to directors duties, practitioner and academic literature have failed to clearly define or provide evidence-based reliable measures of director financial literacy. This paper seeks to address this weakness by presenting the initial results of a Delphi study on unpacking the conceptualisation of director financial literacy. We have found that director financial literacy involves more than reading and understanding financial statements. Rather, it encompasses capabilities in applying accounting concepts to the analysis and evaluation of financial statements. As such director financial literacy may be more accurately described as ‘director accounting literacy’.

Unpacking director financial literacy

The social and economic effects of high profile governance scandals such as the National Safety Council, HIH and Centro have triggered much debate, reform and research into predicting and preventing future failures. While this has meant director financial literacy is now recognised as a core capability required of each individual director, there has been little guidance on what this capability involves other than the very general statement of being able to 'read and understand financial statements'. This thesis presents the results of a Delphi study aimed at identifying the core concepts a director needs to master to be financially literate. Thirty-five experts drawn from accounting, education and practice agreed that to be financially literate a director must have a conceptual understanding of 24 basic accounting concepts and be able to independently apply this understanding to a strategic evaluation of the finances of the organisation they serve.

Inside the boardroom : exploring board member interactions

This study aims to open-up the black box of the boardroom by directly observing directors’ interactions during meetings to better understand board processes. Design/methodology/approach: We analyse videotaped observations of board meetings at two Australian companies to develop insights into what directors do in meetings and how they participate in decision-making processes. The direct observations are triangulated with semi-structured interviews, mini-surveys and document reviews. Findings: Our analyses lead to two key findings: (i) while board meetings appear similar at a surface-level, boardroom interactions vary significantly at a deeper level (i.e. board members participate differently during different stages of discussions) and (ii) factors at multiple levels of analysis explain differences in interaction patterns, revealing the complex and nested nature of boardroom discussions. Research implications: By documenting significant intra- and inter-board meeting differences our study (i) challenges the widespread notion of board meetings as rather homogeneous and monolithic, (ii) points towards agenda items as a new unit of analysis (iii) highlights the need for more multi-level analyses in a board setting. Practical implications: While policy makers have been largely occupied with the “right” board composition, our findings suggest that decision outcomes or roles’ execution could be potentially affected by interactions at a board level. Differences in board meeting styles might explain prior ambiguous board structure-performance results, enhancing the need for greater normative consideration of how boards do their work. Originality/value: Our study complements existing research on boardroom dynamics and provides a systematic account of director interactions during board meetings.