Welcome to the May 2011 edition of The Director's Dilemma.
The newsletter provides case studies that have been written to help you to
develop your judgement as a company director. The case studies are based upon
real life; they focus on complex and challenging boardroom issues which can be
resolved in a variety of ways. There is often no single 'correct' answer; just
an answer that is more likely to work given the circumstances and personalities
of the case.
Although these are real cases, the names and some
circumstances have been altered to ensure anonymity.
Each potential solution to the case study has
different pros and cons for the individuals and
companies concerned. Every month this newsletter
presents an issue and several responses.
Consider: Which response would you choose and
why?
Zack has been recently appointed to a board as
the nominee of a government department. His nomination is the result of years
of work on an industry association board where he impressed his colleagues (and
apparently also the Minister) with his pragmatism, dedication and skill. While
discussing the potential appointment Zack was told that the plan was for him to
be voted in as chairman by the other directors, all of whom have been nominated
by government departments or by industry associations. The board is to govern
an international technology standards harmonisation body.
This was a great honour and Zack was thrilled.
The thrill turned to horror at the board's
first meeting: Many of his colleagues were reading emails on their phones
during the meeting, two left the room to receive phone calls, one answered a
call at the table and two left before the meeting had finished because "the
items they were interested in had now been addressed".
Unfortunately he was voted in as Chairman at
item two of the Agenda before he could witness this behaviour and, anyway, he
was reluctant to let down the Minister who had placed considerable trust in
him.
After the meeting concluded Zack broached the
topic of the use of phones and reading of emails with one of his fellow
directors. This director felt it was culturally inappropriate to restrict
people's access to their means of communication and that, as long as the agenda
was covered and the decisions made, there was no problem. It appears that
different generations and nationalities have very different views on the issue.
What should Zack do?
Richard's Answer
Zack has a problem. As background, two or perhaps
three of the Canadian banks, I believe, have banned
smart-phones from board meetings, because of the
intellectual distraction. Ontario recently made it a
highway traffic act offence to text whilst driving
based on a study finding that an individual is four times as
likely to have an accident when speaking on the phone
or texting, because of the intellectual taxation
involved.
The problem is that Zack is a new director, and
doesn't want to appear non-collegial out of the gate.
The chair is part of the problem as the chair sets the
norms and culture. Perhaps Zack could have a word
with a few other directors, or bring the subject up
gently, or see what practices exist within peer
companies or in other jurisdictions.
Zack also has an option of presenting (or nudging)
a solution. I was in a board meeting a few weeks ago
where the entire board had iPad tablets. This was the
first time I had seen each director with technology.
It was a company in a very risky industry and had made
the decision to train directors on digital reading and
note-taking and attempting to go paperless versus a
hybrid solution (some directors on laptops, for
example).
I think tablets (Blackberry's Playbook or Apple's
iPad) are better than laptops for interaction and
engagement (as the laptop creates more of a barrier),
and appears to be where the technology is heading. On
another board, the CEO recently brought a laptop to
meetings. When two hands are used to type (as opposed
to one hand to take notes) with the back of the laptop
facing colleagues, the body language and reading of
non-verbal cues is off kilter. I had advised the CEO
to go back to paper for the time being, and the Chair
to consider tablets for all directors.
Another board made the decision a year ago to
purchase iPads for all directors. I think universities
should go in this direction too, as it reduces carbon
footprint (one governance course I taught had two
large binders of material) and the technology is much
better now than it was five years ago.
The tablet idea might not totally address Zack's
issue of distraction, but it bundles several issues up
in the form of a solution, which might be better
received by peers.
Richard
Leblanc is an Associate Professor, Governance,
Law & Ethics at York University in Toronto, Canada. He
is the co-author of Inside
the Boardroom which was
reviewed
in The Director's Dilemma in May 2008.
Julie's
Answer
Glowing screens are irresistibly seductive; it is hard to resist an
immediate response. In some cultures it is a mark of honour to return emails
promptly and be available when senior executives request your input. However,
in boardrooms, there can be no consideration of anything other than the needs
of that board, company, shareholders, and decision at hand. Directors must
concentrate or risk being derelict in their duties.
Directors with no training in governance often assume a board meeting is the
same as an executive meeting where they are responsible only for 'their' agenda
items. It is common for nominee directors to believe that they need only
further the interests of their nominator to discharge their duty. Many
directors on industry bodies are experts on their industry but ignorant of
corporate governance or board obligations.
Zack's first task, as chairman of a newly formed board, must be to educate
his directors in the responsibilities and duties of their role. Once his
colleagues learn that they are personally liable for actions of the company
even if they are not personally culpable (and even, or especially, if they were
out of the room or distracted at the time) they will be more likely to apply
appropriate diligence.
Zack should provide the directors with a suitable
reference book (Prof. R Baxt's Duties and Responsibilities of Directors and
Officers, David Fischel's The Book of the Board, Carter McNamara's Field Guide
to Developing, Operating and Restoring your Non-profit Board, or my own All
Above Board; great governance for the government sector). He should start the
next meeting with an education session. He could also benefit from the use of a
case study (such as Bennetts - summarised by Macquarie University at https://www.pers.mq.edu.au/pmh/24/2401B.html
) to focus the discussion and the assistance of an external expert facilitator.
After the session the board should discuss how they wish to operate given
their new understanding of their legal duties. Designing their own 'operating
protocol' will give the directors a sense of ownership. They should discuss
how they will handle the phone and text issue. They may opt for shorter but
more frequent meetings or for longer breaks at scheduled times so that messages
may be checked and returned. Cyber meetings are also a possibility but only if
the directors commit to concentrate. Zack can assist by ensuring meetings are
well chaired and there is no superfluous content on the agenda.
If he acts fast, before bad habits are formed, he can build a good board
after this poor start.
Julie Garland
McLellan is a specialist board consultant and
practising non-executive director based in Sydney, Australia.
Pankaj's
Answer
The problem that Zack has is that he has no formal
power and is presiding over equals. He cannot simply make rules and expect that
others will fall in line. He must address the root causes of the problem. He
would probably find that people are genuinely busy and take their attendance at
the meeting as an imposition out of which they get no satisfaction.
In order to get his colleagues involved he has to ensure that they have
greater input into the way the meetings are transacted. A starting point may be
to ask the other directors to suggest how the meeting should be conducted,
followed by their suggestions on how the business could be transacted quicker.
It would also help if Zack were to make sure that everyone is invited to speak
up and no one is ignored.
There should be an attempt to define what
international technology standards harmonisation means and what exactly the
role of the Board is. An enquiry of this nature would help cut out useless
activities and people would be able to direct their valuable time towards what
is really important.
An attempt on Zack's part to administratively control the use of technology
is likely to fail and he would only succeed in getting people off side. On the
contrary if he is able to improve the meeting process, and everyone can see
that he is serious about it, they might on their own reduce self-induced
distractions.
Pankaj
Rai Mehta is Supply Chain Manager at MM Kembla Products in New South
Wales, Australia.
Disclaimer
The opinions expressed above are general in
nature and are designed to help you to develop
your judgement as a director. They are not a
definitive legal ruling. Names and some
circumstances in the case study have been
changed to ensure anonymity. Contributors to
this newsletter comment in the context of their
own jurisdiction; readers should check their
local laws and regulations as they may be very
different.
What's
New
Book reviews - Finding books that
meet the needs of directors and aspiring directors is no easy task. Many glossy
publications have little substance. Here is my review of David William's new
book Growth Whispering. It is a useful and practical
book for improving your own performance and understanding where you may be
holding yourself back.
Success tips for board
presentations - My new book "Presenting to
Boards; practical skills for corporate presentations"
launched last month. You can get a copy through Amazon.com
or from independent book retailers. I was thrilled to
receive the attached review from Ralph
Ward, one of the world's leading experts on
Boards and Directorship and the author of The
Boardroom Insider
Where's Julie? - A few readers manage to
catch up with me on my travels and it is such a
pleasure to meet them that I now share my travel
plans each month.
Date | Place | Activity |
3 May |
Sydney |
Australian Institute of Company Directors; Fellow's Dinner |
5 May |
Sydney |
Australian Institute of Company Directors; Briefing on 'Preparing a Company for Transition' |
10 May |
Hobart (Tasmania) |
Australian Institute of Company Directors; Company Directors Course |
13 May |
Sydney |
Australian Institute of Company Directors; Company Directors Course |
17 - 22 May |
Beijing |
Australian Institute of Company Directors; Company Directors Conference |
1 June |
Terry Hills |
Kimbriki Eco House Grand Opening |
15 June |
Sydney |
Australian Institute of Company Directors; Briefing on 'The Audit and Risk Committee' |
22 June |
Internet |
Seminar for Australian Business Women's Network on 'Would you, Could you, Should you join a board' |
23 June |
Sydney |
Australian Institute of Company Directors; Company Directors Course |
Please call or email me if you would like to
schedule a meeting or find out more about
attending one of these events.
This newsletter - If you have any ideas for
improving the newsletter please email me your
thoughts. If you are reading a forwarded copy
please visit my website and sign up for your own
subscription.
Suggestions for dilemmas - Thank you to all
the readers who have suggested dilemmas. I will
answer them all eventually.
Farewell until the next issue (due 1 June).
Enjoy governing your corporations; we are
privileged to do what we do!
Best regards
Julie
www.mclellan.com.au | PO Box 97 Killara NSW 2071
email julie@mclellan.com.au | phone +61 2 9499 8700 | mobile +61 411 262 470 | fax +61 2 9499 8711