This product has already been purchased.
- Elizabeth Crouch says Australia’s “laid-back” leadership style is actually a secret weapon for surfacing bad news and preventing board failures.
- A board's core role is strategic oversight rather than operational execution.
- Customer-owned banks avoided Royal Commission scrutiny by keeping member trust, community focus and customer advocacy at their core.
Our new At the table series explores how directors actually make decisions under pressure – and what only becomes visible once you’re inside the boardroom.
With a career spanning building and construction, transport, infrastructure, health and higher education, Elizabeth Crouch AM FAICD brings an extraordinarily broad lens to governance. As chair of the Customer Owned Banking Association (COBA), the Sydney Children’s Hospital Network and Catholic Schools Parramatta Diocese – alongside chairing Hunter Water and a councillor role at the University of Newcastle – she leads across some of Australia’s most critical public and community institutions.
In the second interview of our series, Crouch sits down with Jessica Mudditt to discuss navigating complex multi-sector environments, balancing purpose with oversight and leading boardrooms through periods of rapid organisational change.
What sets Australian governance and leadership apart when tested on an international stage?
Generally, I believe Australian governance and leadership is more robust, transparent and accountable. Part of that is driven by the regulatory and compliance environment we operate in, but it is also a factor of who we are as a nation. For example, our system of compulsory voting gives everyone a voice and creates a more egalitarian style of leadership.
Culturally, we’re prepared to give people a go and that comes through in our approach to governance and leadership. Other people might call our style of leadership “laid back or casual”, but I believe it’s authentic. I also think this style of leadership encourages the surfacing of “bad news” – with engaging and collaborative leadership, people will be more inclined to surface issues that may need resolving. Many Australian leaders possess a healthy dose of humour and the desire to keep their egos under control.
This keeps our leaders and governors grounded and focused on continuous improvement, with a strong willingness to share experiences, learn from one another and invest in ourselves as we do through organisations like the AICD. One of the most interesting sessions at the AICD annual conference used to be the “Tales from the Corporate Battlefield”, where fellow directors would share their governance experiences, particularly where these experiences had been challenging.
What do Australian directors bring to forums like the World Credit Union Conference?
Australian directors bring a willingness to engage and share our learnings and experiences. We also learned how far we have progressed in our governance and leadership journey as a nation and how important our egalitarian voting and system of government really is.
We can learn much about the experiences of our counterparts internationally in dealing with the impact of AI, how technology is shaping their business and from their customer service experiences, including the important role of face-to-face contact and investing in communities.
We learned that many of the issues we’re dealing with, such as the future of cash, capital structures and risks around financial and cybercrime, are consistent across the globe. The conference also provided an important opportunity for several of our mutual banks to host their counterparts for more detailed discussions.
Representing the “customer voice” of smaller institutions, how do organisations like COBA advocate for customer-owned banks and mutuals, ensuring smaller, member-focused players aren’t drowned out by the major banks in policy debates?
COBA remains laser-focused on advocating for customer-owned banks in our financial system, not only in terms of competition and choice, but also because of the fundamental validity and purpose of the model. Customer-owned banks have their genesis from groups formed in the late 1850s. Many were formed out of credit unions and building societies, where groups of like-minded people came together to pool member shares and provide credit to people who could not otherwise access it from major banks. This still holds true today, with many customer-owned banks continuing to deliver financial services to regional areas where major banks have exited.
Customer-owned banking is always stronger together and our united voice collectively represents over five million Australians who bank with us. We are focused on creating a policy environment that supports the customer-owned banking model. We do collaborate on policy matters with the major banks when it comes to sector-wide initiatives – for example, scams prevention, which involves not just the banking sector, but also telecommunications and tech companies like Meta, who need to do some of the heavy lifting to protect Australian customers.
We maintain our own “seat” at the table of financial regulators and policymakers, and advocate our own policy position with direct input from our customer-owned banks, many of whom join us for discussions with regulators. It is that direct voice and direct customer experience that adds enormous value to these discussions. That is not something the major banks can readily achieve, given the inevitable “distance" of their leaders from their customers.
What is the sector’s role in delivering a fairer, more competitive banking landscape at a time when trust in banking is under scrutiny?
It is no coincidence that customer-owned banks didn’t feature in the banking Royal Commission. Customer-owned banks have always enjoyed a reputation for fairness and competition and our trust scores are exemplary. The Roy Morgan report into banking shows customer-owned banks remain the most trusted due to their good service, customer relationships and reliability.
As customer-owned banks continue to stay close to their customers (who are their members and owners) and their communities, they can adapt their product suite and ensure their services remain fit for purpose and accessible.
What’s one question directors should be more willing to ask at the board table?
Directors should always be willing to ask and test perceptions and reality around culture in their organisations.
Culture is the lifeblood of any organisation and getting that right is the key to success.
What’s the most common misconception about how boards actually work?
Common misconceptions relate to the board’s role and responsibilities. Our job is to be "eyes in not hands in” – at times this can cause confusion for leadership teams.
Striking the right balance while satisfying our duties is always an important issue. Boards need to draw on the diverse skills around their table to add value to the leadership team and be clear about expectations around risk, both upside and downside.
Latest news
Already a member?
Login to view this content