Evaluating the effectiveness of corporate boards

Nordberg, Donald; Booth, Rebecca

doi:10.1108/cg-08-2018-0275

Cited by 27 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 65 publications

(95 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This argument does not diminish the importance of analysis in corporate governance, or of the need for psychic distance and challenge in the boardroom often associated with board effectiveness (Forbes and Milliken 1999 ; Nordberg and Booth 2019 ). Those aspects are often precisely what turns the practice of boards into an aesthetic experience for directors by showing the picture of the company in the round.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Art in Corporate Governance: a Deweyan Perspective on Board Experience

Nordberg

2020

Philosophy of Management

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Corporate governance sits at the intersection of many disciplines, among them law, business, management, finance, and accounting. The point of departure for large portions of this literature concerns the ugliness of greed, ambition, misdemeanors, and malfeasance of corporations, their directors, and those actors who hold shares in them. This essay takes a rather different starting point. Drawing upon insights from a distant field, it uses the discussion of aesthetics in Dewey’s treatise on art to ask what motivates directors to act in ways that constitute the attention and engagement that we associate with the effectiveness of boards. Using Dewey’s thinking about aesthetic experience, this paper examines the experience of organization boards, both in the literature and in the personal experience of the author. These observations point to need to reflect on motivation when considering both the practice of corporate governance and the policy frameworks in which it operates.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Art in Corporate Governance: a Deweyan Perspective on Board Experience

Nordberg

2020

Philosophy of Management

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They also maintained that board committee evaluation should focus on the presence, composition and working style of board committees, while the FRC (2011, p. 11) recommended an appraisal of the overall effectiveness of board committees and their connection with the board. At the level of appraisal of individual directors, the literature recommends a review of individual director's knowledge of business and management (Nadler, 2004;Conger and Lawler, 2003;Lawler et al, 2002), commitment to obtain information and devote time to take adequate preparation and attend board and committee meetings (Nordberg and Booth, 2019;Conger and Lawler, 2003), contribution to board task performance (Minichilli et al, 2007;FRC, 2011) and integrity (Nadler, 2004;Conger and Lawler, 2003). Finally, the achievement of the aim of board performance evaluation depends on the formulation of an action plan based on the outcomes of board evaluation (Sroufe and Naficy, 2005;Kiel and Nicholson, 2005).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Determinants of the quality of external board evaluation in the UK

Sobhan

Adegbite

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This study aims to examine the influence of the following on the quality of externally facilitated board evaluation, namely, the timing of adoption of external board evaluation, type of evaluators and the independence of external facilitators. Design/methodology/approach The statements on board evaluation in annual reports of a sample of FTSE 350 companies were content analysed to measure the quality of externally facilitated board evaluation. This paper then used descriptive analysis and inferential statistics to demonstrate the possible association between the timing of adoption, as well as the type and independence of external facilitators and the quality of externally facilitated board evaluation. Findings Results reveal some effects of the timing of adoption, as well as the type and independence of external facilitators on the quality of externally facilitated board evaluation. Practical implications Shareholders should be aware of the timing of adoption, as well as consider the types and independence of external facilitators, given their influence on the quality of externally facilitated board evaluation. Regulatory authorities should provide more specific guidance on what types of professional organisations can be engaged as external facilitators and on the implementation of externally facilitated board evaluation, to promote its quality. Originality/value Several studies have provided theoretical accounts on how board evaluation should be conducted to ensure its effectiveness. However, there is a dearth of empirical literature, which examines the quality of externally facilitated board evaluation. This study develops a quality measure for externally facilitated board evaluation and shows the effect of the timing of adoption, types and independence of external facilitators on its quality. The study forges ahead institutional theorising of external board evaluation.

show abstract

“…Cornforth (2001) attempted to translate such concerns into the charitable sector, creating a list of characteristics of effective boards. More recently, the policy agenda in corporate governance has emphasised the importance of board evaluation as a tool of assessing effectiveness (Nordberg & Booth, 2018). But evaluation is a time-consuming exercise, and volunteer directors of charitable companies may think they're done enough.…”

Section: A Normative Agenda -In Whose Interest?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Who’s in charge, in whose interest? The experience of ownership and accountability in the charity sector

Nordberg

2020

MRR

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This paper aims to examine the puzzles of “ownership”, the legal and psychological commitment of directors, through the experience of the work of boards at non-profit organisations. Design/methodology/approach An exploration of the literature on charity governance leads to a first-person reflection on the tensions in directing two common types of non-profit organisations. Findings In the UK as in other countries, charities are companies, bound by company law as well as regulatory constraints of the non-profit sector. This creates responsibilities of ownership without the material benefits. In contrast to corporate share ownership, a sense of psychological ownership may pre-date appointment as a director, facilitating stewardship behaviour, facilitating stewardship and accountability. Research limitations/implications This paper calls for expanded empirical work on boards of non-profit organisations, giving a focused agenda of aspects to highlight the differences between charities and the corporate sector. Practical implications The focus on psychological ownership can influence recruitment, induction and organisation of the work of charity boards, helping to ease resource deficits. Social implications With pressure mounting in deliver of public services, the charity sector needs to fill growing gaps in provision. The constitution of boards plays a valuable role. Originality/value By incorporating psychological ownership in a framework of accountability, this paper points towards both a research agenda and practical considerations for charity boards.

show abstract

Evaluating the effectiveness of corporate boards

Cited by 27 publications

References 65 publications

Art in Corporate Governance: a Deweyan Perspective on Board Experience

Art in Corporate Governance: a Deweyan Perspective on Board Experience

Determinants of the quality of external board evaluation in the UK

Who’s in charge, in whose interest? The experience of ownership and accountability in the charity sector

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About