Who Should Be Involved in Evaluating a Board?
Board evaluations should be board-led but informed by management's perspective, with the chair and board owning the scope and a credible facilitator administering the process. The directors are the subject, but they aren't the only useful source of insight in a company where the board and management interact constantly around the plan.
The chair, working with the board, is the linchpin. Securing their visible support defines the evaluation's scope and uses, clears operational obstacles, and — most importantly — commits the board to acting on results. Without buy-in at the top of the governance structure, the exercise stalls at the findings stage.
Beyond the directors themselves, a fuller picture comes from the people who work with the board regularly. Executives who participate in board meetings have direct insight into how it functions. Senior leaders such as the CFO, CHRO, and general counsel interact with directors often enough to add a valuable 360-degree perspective on individual contribution. Collecting feedback from senior management apart from the CEO helps make the assessment holistic and accurate.
A credible facilitator runs the process — someone who understands boardroom dynamics and commands director respect. This can be an internal facilitator or an external one for added objectivity, which matters more when board representatives are being assessed. Either way, at least part of the assessment should preserve anonymity so directors can speak candidly about a board they sit on together for the duration of the planning horizon.
← Back to Topic 1 — Board & Director Evaluations