The ABCCC of Director Selection – Part 2
Picking up from where we left off last time while discussing the 11 key dimensions of character, as argued by a team of academics at Western University’s Ivey Business School in Canada in their “Leadership on Trial: A Manifesto for Leadership Development” research, coming in at number five is humility.
— Governance Matters (@GovernanceMatt) May 30, 2016
Like humanity before it, humility is paramount as without it, directors are incapable of learning from others. Or, indeed, from their own mistakes.
Then there is temperance, in essence the ability to remain calm while all about you are in a flat panic. Sadly, it is seldom top-of-mind…until some almost overwhelming risk blows up in the organisation’s face and its true value in the very fibre of directors becomes imperative.
The ABCCC of Director Selection
— Governance Matters (@GovernanceMatt) May 13, 2016
I had an interesting piece sent to me just recently, an exercise conducted by a research team from the Ivey Business School at Canada’s Western University that delves into the key criteria boards should consider when assessing and appointing anyone to a leadership position, including a director.
Entitled “Leadership on Trial: A Manifesto for Leadership Development”, the comprehensive paper identifies competencies, commitment and character as the three most important measures. It goes on to argue that of the three Cs, character is both the most important and most difficult to assess.
Competencies, of course, matter. Like commitment to the position and the organisation, they are pretty much givens as they define what a person is capable of.