Why Directors Should Not Fear Board Evaluations
In governance circles today, the conversations about board performance continue to advance.
<To view the Article in its published format, click here: Why Directors Should Not Fear Board Evaluations >
Governance advocates, proxy advisors and institutional investors encourage varying approaches to evaluating directors, assessing board effectiveness, and raising the bar on expectations for director contributions and performance.
Many community bank directors, however, are reticent to go down the board assessment path, fearing that the process will somehow result in their removal from the bank’s board. The goal of any evaluation, however, should not necessarily be to weed out directors, but rather to highlight areas for board and director improvement, and encourage continual forward movement on good governance.
In our view, there are three general types, or levels, of board evaluation to consider:
Level 1: A general assessment of the board overall and how the group is functioning. This evaluation might include areas such as:
Do we have the right committee structure, leadership and meeting frequency?
Are we as a board focusing our time on the correct and critical topics?
Do we have an appropriate and valuable range of skills and experiences around the board table to govern effectively in today’s industry climate?
<To read the Article in its published format, click here: Why Directors Should Not Fear Board Evaluations >
Alan J. Kaplan is Founder & CEO of Kaplan Partners, a retained executive search and talent advisory firm headquartered in suburban Philadelphia. Kaplan Partners is the country’s only talent advisory firm member of both the ABA and ICBA, as well as a longstanding partner of Bank Director. You can reach Alan at 610-642-5644 or alan@KaplanPartners.com.