What Our Clients Say
“On behalf of MEPCO, Gillian and her group have conducted searches for several Board Directors to a major pension board and each time, produced excellent outcomes” Read Testimonials
At Lansdowne Board Intelligence, we’ve been at the forefront of helping to improve board diversity and our commitment remains unwavering. In the last two decades, we’ve seen much change from the early days of holding Board Chair & CEO Roundtables to introduce why diversity is important – a novel concept at the time, to today’s environment where diversity discussions are a fixture in boardrooms across the country. However, the term “diversity” has unfortunately become somewhat nebulous, overused and misapplied.
Diversity is now an umbrella term used to describe the variety of skills, experience, competencies, and perspectives, a board is seeking in its composition as well as reporting on gender, racial, ethnic, age, and other social diversity, which causes confusion. In addition, changes in voting policies from proxy advisory firms such as withholding votes for nominating and governance committee chairs whose board lacks diversity, may on the surface, appear like a good idea to spur action; but it has unintended consequences. Conducting a one-dimensional audit of the balance of gender, race, ethnicity, and other diversity of a board can drive unwanted behaviours among existing directors to keep their roles, and most certainly encourages a rote, box-ticking mentality, which may contribute to the appointment of directors who are ‘unfit to sit’.
Hollow homage neutralizes purpose and meaning, results in tepid impact, and ultimately detracts from creating stronger board effectiveness and performance.
How to Rectify the Problem
Enhancing the capabilities of boards and improving the balance of men and women are not mutually exclusive. However, to avoid meaningless obeisance, the focus must be squarely on rigorously assessing the competency and capability of prospective directors. Boards need to modernize their composition and skills matrices and overhaul recruitment and selection practices to guarantee an objective, robust, competency-focused, and consistently applied process where biases are negated.
When reporting on diversity, it is necessary to be more definitive and clarify the language so as not to cause confusion and to mitigate misleading messaging. A clear delineation needs to be established between the variety sought in the amalgam of experience, knowledge, skills, and competencies versus having greater equity in the balance of gender, race, ethnicity, and ages.
Proxy advisors and investors are encouraged to apply broader, more disciplined, and integrated thinking as to the concrete and measurable actions the organization is taking to affect meaningful change. In addition to a prescriptive audit of the gender, racial, ethnicity, and ages make-up of a board, it is necessary to widen the audit to review steps taken by the governance and nominating chair in the five key areas that drive impactful change:
- The existence of diversity policies and objectives to increase representation.
- A policy outlining the process the board undertakes to recruit new directors, and whether it is executed through an independent, external expert.
- The existence of term limits.
- The process the board undertakes to evaluate the performance of directors, and whether it is executed through an independent, external expert.
- The use of appropriate, modern, metrics-based competency matrices.
The Benefits of Cognitive Diversity are Well-Known
Research has shown how organizations with greater leadership diversity outperform homogeneous ones. Diverse teams:
- contribute to better decision-making;
- exhibit higher returns on equity, higher valuations and higher profits;
- demonstrate increased innovation;
- achieve a more robust understanding of opportunities and risks;
- avoid the propensity for “group-think;”
- improves employee engagement and performance;
- enhance governance and sustainability; and,
- enables the attraction and retention of more diverse talent
Organizations with a greater balance of men and women in leadership positions outperform homogeneous ones. When leadership teams are comprised of men and women who possess different thinking and communication styles, a blend of differing, and relevant skills, competencies, experience, knowledge, and backgrounds, they are more likely to avoid ‘groupthink’ and thus achieve a more robust understanding of opportunities, issues, and risks. Consequently, difficult topics will be more deeply discussed and challenged, the quality of decision-making will improve, governance will be more effective, and overall performance will be stronger.
Contact Us for More Information
Learn how Lansdowne Board Intelligence can help your board modernize its skills matrices and selection practices, and find the qualified and diverse candidates that will best position you for the future!