This product has already been purchased.
- Being a director is one part capability and three parts behaviour. It’s a vocation, not just a role.
- Inaction is a risk often underweighted by directors. While caution can look prudent in the room, it can cost the company over a decade.
- There’s often an expectation that boards exist to provide answers. The real role is to ask better questions and create the conditions for better decisions. That means deliberately seeking perspectives that aren’t already around the board table.
Hard-won wisdom is a precious commodity. Several commonalities emerged in the knowledge these experienced directors chose to share when asked, individually, for their best advice.
SUSAN PASCOE
Susan Pascoe AM, FAICD is an adjunct professor at the University of Western Australia, board member and deputy chair of Mercy Health Australia and a trustee of St John of God Health Care.
“I have learned from observation, guidance and explicit advice. From staff meetings as a teacher and later in board discussions, I learned the dangers of a mindset convinced of its view and accompanied by rigidity and inflexibility. The cornerstone of good decision making is the exercise of judgement informed not only by your values, expertise and experience, but also by the discernment process around the board table. Certitude impedes this process.
I was advised by a respected colleague early in my board career to refrain from being the first to speak, to enable a nuanced contribution to discussion. Fundamentals such as trust, mutual respect and good communication are as important as the structures, processes and regulations that guide good decision making. Individual capacity to exercise self-regulation, alongside an ability to read the room, assists in contributing to productive outcomes.
There are particular responsibilities for the chair to ensure a constructive collegial approach is adopted and that solidarity with decisions (even those we oppose) is maintained within and beyond the boardroom. Hospitality associated with meetings helps directors to get to know one another and build trust. From my perspective, an effective chair operates primus inter pares respecting the skills and expertise of board colleagues, working with senior management and engaging with key stakeholders.”
ANDREW DONOVAN
Andrew Donovan FAICD is the founder of Thoughtpost Governance board advisory and has been a director and board educator for 30 years. He is independent chair of Moores Legal and a non-executive director of DPV Health.
“When I was starting out as a director, I wish I’d known it was one part capability and three parts behaviour. Being a trained accountant, I’d assumed it’s all about skill, but in the boardroom, adding value requires a lot of behavioural skill. You have to think about the dynamics – with the board, CEO, senior team and stakeholders – seeing the system in a behavioural context. In a way, it’s more of a change management piece.
The best advice I’ve had is when I’ve had a problem, gone to a mentor and talked it through. Maybe it would’ve been better to have had the advice earlier – prevention rather than cure. But the reality is, mostly you find yourself in a situation where you need advice, and because you’ve got that pain point, the advice sticks.
There’s a lot of advice in the director space about current circumstances – trends around marketing, CSR, technology and cybersecurity, and now all about AI. These come and go. Advice that’s really stuck has come from people who made me look at the causal context and the whole picture in a longitudinal sense – 100 years of political, cultural and sociological context and patterns, rather than just the past week.
Ultimately, directorship is not a role, it’s a vocation. You are the mind of the company and the steward of its interests. Because of that, you need to see it as a calling and be incredibly prepared for it, both capability-wise and personally. This means committing to training, mentorship and constant self-reflection on how you perform.”
ANTHEA ROBERTS
Anthea Roberts is co-founder and CEO of award-winning generative-AI strategic intelligence company Dragonfly Thinking and Professor of Global Governance at the Australian National University.
“One thing I think about a lot is that a board’s risk radar is often calibrated in one direction. We’re trained to see the risk of action – the deal that goes wrong, the strategy that misfires, the decision that lands in front of a regulator or a royal commission. That scrutiny is right, but it’s only half the job.
The risk we underweight is the risk of inaction – the market entered too late, the business model left unexamined, the disruption we treated as someone else’s problem. These failures rarely trigger a governance review. No-one is called to account for the opportunity quietly missed. So the incentives all point one way – towards caution that looks prudent in the room and costs the company its position over a decade.
The best directors ask both questions with equal seriousness: What is the risk if we do this, and what is the risk if we don’t? Not acting is a decision, too. It just doesn’t feel like one, which is exactly why boards forget to examine it. We need to reframe from thinking about governance risk only, to thinking about strategic risk. Embracing AI is a perfect example of where this disconnect often occurs.”
CONNIE HENSON
Dr Connie Henson GAICD is a non-executive director and Senior Research Fellow at UNSW, bringing expertise in co-design, implementation science and community partnerships to both governance and research.
“The most valuable lesson I’ve learned as a director is that good governance starts with curiosity, not certainty. There’s often an expectation that boards exist to provide answers. I’ve come to believe our real role is to ask better questions and create the conditions for better decisions. That means deliberately seeking perspectives that aren’t already around the board table. Lived experience, frontline staff, community members, and people with different professional backgrounds often see opportunities and risks that directors cannot. Diversity isn’t simply about representation, it leads to better judgement.
Curiosity also means being open to emerging technologies. Boards don’t need to adopt every new tool, but they do need to understand what’s changing and ask how new technology might better support their purpose, people and stakeholders.
I’ve learned to challenge inherited practices with a simple question: ‘We’re doing it this way because we’ve always done it, but is it still the best way to achieve our mission?’
Coming to governance from a non-traditional background has taught me that my role isn’t to be the expert in the room. It’s to help bring together diverse expertise, ask thoughtful questions and create the trust that allows better decisions to emerge.
The advice I’d give a new director is simple – stay curious. Curiosity is what keeps boards listening, learning, adapting and, ultimately, governing in the best interests of the people they serve.”
DANIEL SEKERS
Daniel Sekers FAICD is executive director of risk intelligence and research firm Openi Analytics Australia. He is a non-executive director of the Australia-Israel Chamber of Commerce and on the board of the Young Presidents Organization.
“The biggest lesson I’ve learned as a director is that my value isn’t measured by the answers I give, but by the quality of the questions I ask. The most valuable advice I received was to be curious enough to ask the pertinent question and patient enough to wait for the insight.
Early in my board career, I felt I needed to demonstrate the expertise that had earned me a seat at the table. Over time, I realised my role is to improve the quality of the board’s thinking. Curiosity has become a key attribute I work most on in myself and value most in directors I work with. It builds the collective knowledge in the room, challenges assumptions, surfaces risks, uncovers opportunities and encourages broader perspectives.
A key part of curiosity is the art of the pause. Quite often, the first answer is often the prepared or instinctive response. The second answer, the one that often comes after a moment of reflection, is usually where the richer insight emerges. It’s a practice I’m consciously developing. That pause often allows management to reflect on what they’ve just said, refine their thinking and often volunteer a deeper answer or insight.”
Latest news
Already a member?
Login to view this content