![]() ![]() As a board member, trust results when fellow members believe what you say, they know you will follow through on commitments and you are comfortable being open and vulnerable regarding difficulties you encounter, making others more likely to reciprocate. Some people believe you trust others until they provide a reason not to ("trust until"), or you trust them because they have shown they can be trusted ("trust because"). If you are an experienced or aspiring board director, try these cornerstone suggestions: Increased board use of finesse leads to better governance outcomes. ![]() It is how they accomplish their objectives. Finesse is more than what board directors possess. This is finesse in a business environment. Intrapersonal and interpersonal essentials determine how board members carry themselves in addition to comprehending, evaluating and skillfully performing in these complicated conditions. For instance, do they recognize the right time to push back on fellow directors or the C-suite? How well do they understand when to use a steel-hand approach, a velvet-glove approach or something in between those two? Do they examine the type and severity of the situation, who is impacted by it, and how to best influence it? It also entails members knowing their own strengths that can assist and limitations that could hinder the board in these situations.Įqually important is how each board member interacts with other members as they address these precarious situations. What do I mean? I am talking about what directors consider on their own prior to and during these challenging circumstances. Finesse In The Boardroomīoard members, whether independent or inside directors, applying the right amount of finesse makes a significant difference in such tricky situations and mitigates the risk. The unchecked behavior of a few damaged the board's credibility with stakeholders and ultimately its effectiveness. The actions violated the director duties of care and loyalty and brought about turmoil. These individuals undermined the remaining members of the board including the chairman and CEO. In a merger situation involving cursory due diligence, half the directors wanted to integrate with another company because they saw the opportunity as a financial windfall. Consequently, an ongoing power struggle between the two executives created chaos in the company. Some board members who were related to one of the co-CEOs wavered on enforcing this collaborative requirement. ![]() In a succession planning circumstance, a board approved creating co-CEO roles but did not ensure the leaders placed in the roles bought into the "co" in co-CEO. Morale and productivity suffered which negatively affected the top and bottom lines. The primary, secondary and tertiary reporting relationships established by management confused the workforce. Management across the enterprise lacked the experience to efficiently operate in a matrix. Since board members failed to adequately push back, the implementation of this structure produced a corporate hairball. In one case, a board supported installing a matrix organizational structure without much consideration because the chairman was set on it. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |