The good, the bad and the ugly of governance
It’s got to the point these days while poring over the raw results of board performance evaluations that we look across at each other and instinctively begin to hum that instantly recognisable theme tune from the movie ‘The Good, the Bad and the Ugly’, because that’s precisely what this potpourri perennially presents.
‘We’ happen to be Mel and Sascha, aka ‘the ladies behind the throne’ at Governance Matters, and our years of backroom experience in examining unsanitised results has given us what we believe is an if not unique then certainly different perspective on board behaviour.
We thought you’d be interested to learn what we’ve found to be the most common shortcomings of boards – and what’s surprising is not so much our list but the fact that these seemingly no-brainers make it onto the inventory in the first place!
Talking Business with Alan Kohler on Qantas Radio
Listen as our Managing Director, Kate Costello talks to Qantas Radio’s Alan Kohler about the importance of evaluating your board, individual directors and Chair.
Self-evaluation in DNA of every good or great board
During my many years in governance, I’ve noted a number of traits that are perennials of every good board – and one that is deeply woven into their very fabric is a willingness to embrace board performance evaluation.
Good boards are good leaders and good leaders lead by example, so they figure that if they’re evaluating the CEO, the CEO is evaluating the managers and so the evaluation waterfall cascades down through the organisation, why should they be exempt?
They understand, too, that by looking at their own performance and being prepared to tell people about it, they’re sending a strong and powerful message: we’re not the repositories of all wisdom; rather we’re fallible human beings.