Comments for Boards of Directors http://managementhelp.org/blogs/boards-of-directors Boards of Directors Blog Thu, 26 Jan 2012 22:37:10 +0000 hourly 1 Comment on Practical Tips for Boards in Times of Crisis by Julie Garland McLellan http://managementhelp.org/blogs/boards-of-directors/2012/01/24/practical-tips-for-boards-in-times-of-crisis/#comment-42 Julie Garland McLellan Thu, 26 Jan 2012 22:37:10 +0000 http://managementhelp.org/blogs/boards-of-directors/?p=466#comment-42 Thanks for the positive feedback Daniel. I'm glad you liked this post. Regards Julie Thanks for the positive feedback Daniel.
I’m glad you liked this post.
Regards
Julie

]]> Comment on Practical Tips for Boards in Times of Crisis by Daniel Milstein http://managementhelp.org/blogs/boards-of-directors/2012/01/24/practical-tips-for-boards-in-times-of-crisis/#comment-41 Daniel Milstein Thu, 26 Jan 2012 10:23:01 +0000 http://managementhelp.org/blogs/boards-of-directors/?p=466#comment-41 That is true,Julie. As an author and business man, I can relate to how you said, "Good governance structures and reporting are associated with good corporate performance but they are not, on their own, sufficient to cause it". I hope more people discover your blog because you really know what you're talking about. Can't wait to read more from you! That is true,Julie. As an author and business man, I can relate to how you said, “Good governance structures and reporting are associated with good corporate performance but they are not, on their own, sufficient to cause it”. I hope more people discover your blog because you really know what you’re talking about. Can’t wait to read more from you!

]]> Comment on How to Ensure Board is Appropriately Involved in Projects for Change (Part 2 of 2) by Left Brain Right Brain Test http://managementhelp.org/blogs/boards-of-directors/2011/12/10/how-to-ensure-board-is-appropriately-involved-in-projects-for-change-part-2-of-2/#comment-40 Left Brain Right Brain Test Mon, 12 Dec 2011 02:55:37 +0000 http://managementhelp.org/blogs/boards-of-directors/?p=447#comment-40 All great points. I have had great success by designating a senior leader to 'champion' each strategic change objective, to ensure the implementation has the necessary backing over the long haul. All great points. I have had great success by designating a senior leader to ‘champion’ each strategic change objective, to ensure the implementation has the necessary backing over the long haul.

]]> Comment on Term Limits for Non-Profit Board Members by Hank Lewis http://managementhelp.org/blogs/boards-of-directors/2011/08/29/term-limits-for-non-profit-board-members/#comment-37 Hank Lewis Mon, 29 Aug 2011 20:32:54 +0000 http://managementhelp.org/blogs/boards-of-directors/?p=414#comment-37 Even though Dave Wiley could argue for long-term retention of board members, he suggests that there are a number of ways to keep effective board members involved (after their board terms have expired); and, I applaud his thoughts that an "alumni association" or (continuing) service on board committees would be adequate to keep valuable "former" members of boards active and involved until they are eligible to be re-elected to the board. The problem with re-electing board members after the (usual) one year hiatus is that you can miss the opportunity to get the new perspectives/experiences/skills that come with new board members ... and you miss what they could have contributed. To me, term limits should be an absolute. Even though Dave Wiley could argue for long-term retention of board members, he suggests that there are a number of ways to keep effective board members involved (after their board terms have expired); and, I applaud his thoughts that an “alumni association” or (continuing) service on board committees would be adequate to keep valuable “former” members of boards active and involved until they are eligible to be re-elected to the board. The problem with re-electing board members after the (usual) one year hiatus is that you can miss the opportunity to get the new perspectives/experiences/skills that come with new board members … and you miss what they could have contributed. To me, term limits should be an absolute.

]]> Comment on Term Limits for Non-Profit Board Members by Dave Wiley http://managementhelp.org/blogs/boards-of-directors/2011/08/29/term-limits-for-non-profit-board-members/#comment-36 Dave Wiley Mon, 29 Aug 2011 18:09:41 +0000 http://managementhelp.org/blogs/boards-of-directors/?p=414#comment-36 I can argue both sides of this issue. While I mostly agree that term limits are a good idea, I've seen many situations where very effective Board members have had to leave a Board as a result. What I do think is important is that there be a relatively easy way for Board members to leave the Board. Having term limits is one such way. I also like the idea of having a fairly active "alumni association" of former Board members, so that former Board members don't feel like they're losing the close connection they've had with the organization. And, I like the idea of allowing former Board members to continue serving on committees of the Board, as long as the Chair and a majority of the committee are Board members. I can argue both sides of this issue. While I mostly agree that term limits are a good idea, I’ve seen many situations where very effective Board members have had to leave a Board as a result. What I do think is important is that there be a relatively easy way for Board members to leave the Board. Having term limits is one such way. I also like the idea of having a fairly active “alumni association” of former Board members, so that former Board members don’t feel like they’re losing the close connection they’ve had with the organization. And, I like the idea of allowing former Board members to continue serving on committees of the Board, as long as the Chair and a majority of the committee are Board members.

]]> Comment on Board Gender Balance – a personal perspective by Tom Grey http://managementhelp.org/blogs/boards-of-directors/2011/06/01/board-gender-balance-a-personal-perspective-2/#comment-33 Tom Grey Fri, 17 Jun 2011 17:33:37 +0000 http://managementhelp.org/blogs/boards-of-directors/?p=390#comment-33 I think men and women are ... from Mars and Venus ... often different in their focus on achievement vs relationship. While many women are starting their own businesses, it seems that very few of these businesses are the kinds of firms that make something which allow economies of scale, and thus grow into becoming large firms. To me, this 20-30 year historical fact indicates a slight tendency difference between men and women. Is this small company difference relevant for big company promotion? I think it probably is. Your personal path is exemplary--strengthen the accounting/ numbers comfort, start out on a non-profit board. (I'm actually doing the same right now.) I think men and women are … from Mars and Venus … often different in their focus on achievement vs relationship.

While many women are starting their own businesses, it seems that very few of these businesses are the kinds of firms that make something which allow economies of scale, and thus grow into becoming large firms. To me, this 20-30 year historical fact indicates a slight tendency difference between men and women. Is this small company difference relevant for big company promotion? I think it probably is.

Your personal path is exemplary–strengthen the accounting/ numbers comfort, start out on a non-profit board. (I’m actually doing the same right now.)

]]> Comment on Board Gender Balance – a personal perspective by Errol Kogan http://managementhelp.org/blogs/boards-of-directors/2011/06/01/board-gender-balance-a-personal-perspective-2/#comment-31 Errol Kogan Thu, 16 Jun 2011 11:05:40 +0000 http://managementhelp.org/blogs/boards-of-directors/?p=390#comment-31 This is really interesting, You're a very skilled blogger. I've joined your rss feed and look forward to seeking more of your great post. Also, I've shared your site in my social networks! This is really interesting, You’re a very skilled blogger. I’ve joined your rss feed and look forward to seeking more of your great post. Also, I’ve shared your site in my social networks!

]]> Comment on Boldly into the Breach – the Lead Independent Director by Julie Garland McLellan http://managementhelp.org/blogs/boards-of-directors/2011/04/18/boldly-into-the-breach-%e2%80%93-the-lead-independent-director/#comment-30 Julie Garland McLellan Wed, 27 Apr 2011 01:01:00 +0000 http://managementhelp.org/blogs/boards-of-directors/?p=294#comment-30 Hi Gopal I agree - more directors (independent or otherwise) will not lead to better governance. Better directors will lead to better governance. One of our biggest issues is in defining what makes a 'good' director. Diverse boards need a range of skills and experiences but, and perhaps more, also need inquiring and open minds with strong ethical characters. Like the platypus - good directors are hard to describe and have attributes that rarely combine in one person but you know them when you see them. Thanks for the comment Julie Hi Gopal
I agree – more directors (independent or otherwise) will not lead to better governance. Better directors will lead to better governance. One of our biggest issues is in defining what makes a ‘good’ director. Diverse boards need a range of skills and experiences but, and perhaps more, also need inquiring and open minds with strong ethical characters. Like the platypus – good directors are hard to describe and have attributes that rarely combine in one person but you know them when you see them.
Thanks for the comment
Julie

]]> Comment on Boldly into the Breach – the Lead Independent Director by gopal http://managementhelp.org/blogs/boards-of-directors/2011/04/18/boldly-into-the-breach-%e2%80%93-the-lead-independent-director/#comment-29 gopal Thu, 21 Apr 2011 07:00:36 +0000 http://managementhelp.org/blogs/boards-of-directors/?p=294#comment-29 The blog is good. I have some comments on independent directors: The litany of recent corporate scandals at companies (which every one is now aware) has given rise not only to the perception that the “gate-keepers” on whom investors rely to assure market integrity have failed to provide adequate oversight, but also to widespread expectations that new reports of misdeeds are forthcoming. Much attention and criticism has been focused on the failure of directors, particularly independent directors, in their role as gatekeepers to prevent the recent instances of corporate wrongdoing despite their fiduciary duties to actin the best interests of the company and its shareholders. So is the outcry is having an effect? To answer the query does more independent directors on Board guarantee better governance and results? The answer is probably NO. The blog is good.
I have some comments on independent directors:
The litany of recent corporate scandals at companies (which every one is now aware) has given rise not only to the perception that the “gate-keepers” on whom investors rely to assure market integrity have failed to provide adequate oversight, but also to widespread expectations that new reports of misdeeds are forthcoming.
Much attention and criticism has been focused on the failure of directors, particularly independent directors, in their role as gatekeepers to prevent the recent instances of corporate wrongdoing despite their fiduciary duties to actin the best interests of the company and its shareholders. So is the outcry is having an effect?
To answer the query does more independent directors on Board guarantee better governance and results?
The answer is probably NO.

]]> Comment on Some New Nonprofit Board Models by Edward O. Hunter http://managementhelp.org/blogs/boards-of-directors/2010/12/10/some-new-nonprofit-board-models/#comment-18 Edward O. Hunter Sun, 12 Dec 2010 00:00:19 +0000 http://managementhelp.org/blogs/boards-of-directors/?p=244#comment-18 It's impossible to be brief in commenting on all of the points mentioned under the models. But one common recommendation seems to be for boards to adopt a wider perspective or scope, and to make board membership more inclusive of staff or members. In my experience the concepts are not so very new --- perhaps they're being recycled under new names or nuances. Many nonprofits long ago adopted such approaches where it made sense. It's also important to evaluate the premises asserted for each of these new models. If the premises apply, then it's appropriate to consider possible ways of addressing the shortcomings identified. But there are likely to be a number of tradeoffs in changing to pursue any of the listed models, including dilution of focus, additional time required of board members, enlargement of the board, diversion of scarce financial resources, etc., which militate against such changes. Most nonprofit board members already give all the time and resources they can to the organization, while receiving no pay for their time and commitments. Often, they are large donors. A board quickly becomes unwieldy with too many members, too many reports, too many areas of operation, too many goals and ambitions, too many chiefs, etc. Similarly, funds simply may not allow such changes. While there may be need for improvement in those nonprofits that suffer under the leadership problems specified as premises for the new approaches, it is not likely that all nonprofits are actually suffering under their current models. Thus, "new" is not necessarily "better." Any of these proposed "model" must be evaluated in the real world context of a particular nonprofit's operations. In the abstract, it's not clear that any one of them would guarantee delivery of greater good to its community. It’s impossible to be brief in commenting on all of the points mentioned under the models. But one common recommendation seems to be for boards to adopt a wider perspective or scope, and to make board membership more inclusive of staff or members. In my experience the concepts are not so very new — perhaps they’re being recycled under new names or nuances. Many nonprofits long ago adopted such approaches where it made sense.

It’s also important to evaluate the premises asserted for each of these new models. If the premises apply, then it’s appropriate to consider possible ways of addressing the shortcomings identified.

But there are likely to be a number of tradeoffs in changing to pursue any of the listed models, including dilution of focus, additional time required of board members, enlargement of the board, diversion of scarce financial resources, etc., which militate against such changes. Most nonprofit board members already give all the time and resources they can to the organization, while receiving no pay for their time and commitments. Often, they are large donors. A board quickly becomes unwieldy with too many members, too many reports, too many areas of operation, too many goals and ambitions, too many chiefs, etc. Similarly, funds simply may not allow such changes.

While there may be need for improvement in those nonprofits that suffer under the leadership problems specified as premises for the new approaches, it is not likely that all nonprofits are actually suffering under their current models. Thus, “new” is not necessarily “better.” Any of these proposed “model” must be evaluated in the real world context of a particular nonprofit’s operations.
In the abstract, it’s not clear that any one of them would guarantee delivery of greater good to its community.

]]>