|
Boardroom Dynamics and Corporate Culture
BNNBreaking.com (Feb 12/24) hooked me into an article by talking about backroom board behaviours that impact our organizations. It didn't take the direction I expected, but I did feel validated on a few things. They refer to board culture as the "unseen influence" and report that 25% of corporate boards exhibit some form of dysfunction. I would argue that number is waaaaay too low.
"...dysfunction, which can manifest subtly and insidiously, affecting decision-making processes and hindering optimal performance. At the heart of this issue lies the often-overlooked concept of board culture. Board culture emerges from the complex interplay of individual biases, habits, preferences, and past experiences. Each director brings unique skills and perspectives to the table, contributing to a collective identity that ultimately determines the ethical direction and culture of the entire organization."
Okay, so there is nothing new in that statement --we get how board culture happens. With respect to that "unseen influence," they go on to mention some cons (groupthink, conformity, entrenched interests) and pros (robust debates, diverse viewpoints, well-rounded decisions), and note that the best results come from communication, diversity, and respect. Again, not new but validating.
They also mention the public's demand for more transparency, noting that transparency builds trust. "Transparency/Transparent" are trigger words for me, so let's hear from the experts at Merriam-Webster.
Transparent: a) free from pretense or deceit; frank b) easily detected or seen through; obvious c) readily understood d) characterized by visibility or accessibility of information especially concerning business practices.
Sounds 100% valid and fair, right? If you've worked with me, you know I am of the opinion that "transparency" in governance is widely (and wildly) misunderstood. Nowhere does the definition say "make all your board meetings public" or "post board minutes on the website." I believe effective and appropriate board transparency requires two things: 1) a safe place for boards float ideas, try things out, say dumb things, correct themselves, and come to a better decision; and 2) a commitment to shareholders/members to communicate well and often about what the board is doing and what's keeping it up at night. Flinging open the doors and files just leads to he said/she said drama, distractions, and misery. There is such a thing as too-much information, and there most certainly is such a thing as good/bad timing. In my experience, most information is shared eventually, but the timing of the information release is something to be managed closely.
As always, do the right things for the right reasons (eventually, at least) and proceed with caution. Good luck!
| 
