Why the traditional board CV is no longer enough

Given the fast-changing, volatile environment most boards operate in, directors will rarely have enough information to make watertight decisions. Instead, they must rely on their personal attributes and behavioral dispositions to navigate uncertainty and drive effective decision making. 

Sadly, “soft” skills aren’t easily discernible from CVs or skills matrices, which typically reflect what directors have done in the past, not how they will think or behave in the future. 

Paul Smith, a board adviser, director and founder of Future Directors, explains. “CVs and matrices provide proof of a path of competency that is auditable, but they are backwards-looking by design, and not that useful when the future doesn’t look like the past.” 

Gavin Nicholson FAICD, an Associate Professor in the School of Accountancy at Queensland University of Technology’s Business School, adds that CVs and skills matrices concentrate on individuals, but a good board is more than just the sum of the individuals who come together to make decisions.  

“The question is, how does the individual contribute to the collective to improve the judgement the group is making?” And also, what skills does an individual need to do this? 

The intangible toolkit 

Here, Smith lists judgement, noting it’s more than being able to ask good questions. “It’s about choosing what to probe and when, and knowing when you’re slowing the room down.” 

Nicholson believes directors should also be open-minded. “Research shows that experts who are sure they’re right about an area of uncertainty are more likely to be wrong than those who aren’t quite as sure.” 

He adds that boards need experts on certain topics, but also must decide how much they will defer to those experts. “That’s where curiosity comes in. Just because an expert said something, doesn’t mean directors shouldn’t want to understand it themselves.”  

Smith describes curiosity as a constant willingness to ask questions inwardly (about your actions), outwardly (about the actions of others) and the questions no-one else is thinking about. 

Another valued skill is a “comfort with ambiguity”. “Boards by nature are there to steward and bring a bit of certainty, but we don’t live in a world like that,” says Smith. “It’s not about getting the question right. It’s about the quality of decisions made in times of uncertainty. That takes a particular temperament.” 

Smith interprets emotional intelligence as having the ability to manage your own reactions when challenged in the boardroom, to read the room, understand the people around you and change your position when receiving new information. 

Merran Kelsall AO FAICDLife – chair of Dementia Australia and a director of Australian Red Cross Lifeblood and CareSuper – believes there are also particular skills needed to challenge management. 

“Some directors like massive amounts of detail and can drive management nuts because they’re delving too much into the operational side, but clearly, if you believe there’s a problem somewhere, you do need to have that delving,” she says. 

The secret is finding the right balance and an effective way of doing so.  

Kelsall says robust debate must be based on respect and trust. “That’s why it’s important to develop relationships outside formal meetings. There’s value in pre-board dinners and site visits.” 

She notes some directors have the happy knack of defusing tension, not necessarily by cracking a joke, but rather by not taking things so seriously if people get too passionate or lose their tempers.  

Steven Bowman FAICD, managing director of Conscious Governance, says a useful attribute is the willingness to use the organisation’s vision or purpose as a key lens for everything directors examine or say. 

He also prizes the ability to see risk not just as a compliance issue, but also as a strategic advantage. Also vital is a director’s experience of failure. “Success teaches confidence while failure teaches judgement,” he says.