La recherche de mandats sur des C.A. | Au-delà des contacts !


Plusieurs personnes très qualifiées en gouvernance de sociétés souhaitent trouver une place sur un ou plusieurs conseils d’administration de sociétés cotées. Mais comment s’y prendre ? L’article ci-dessous rédigé par *Boris Groysberg et Deborah Bell et paru dans HBR Blog Network saura sûrement piquer votre curiosité !

Les auteurs proposent une méthode plus acceptable de choisir les membres de conseils que celle de s’en remettre aux administrateurs potentiels reconnus par les membres de C.A. Bien sûr, l’appartenance à des réseaux d’administrateurs et l’approche progressive de l’acceptation des mandats, en commençant par les OBNL, sont des méthodes très pratiquées … mais souvent elles tardent à produire les résultats escomptés.

Les auteurs présentent une autre option laquelle dépend de la mise en place d’un processus de sélection systématique consistant à repérer les personnes possédant les expertises répondant aux besoins de l’entreprise. De plus en plus, la stratégie de recherche de mandats sera de faire connaître son expertise et son expérience auprès des membres des comités de gouvernance et de nomination.

L’article montre que les capacités les plus prisées par les comités de nomination sont (1) la connaissance de l’industrie, (2) les compétences stratégiques et (3) les expertises en finance-audit.

Je vous invite à lire l’article au complet afin de mieux vous préparer à trouver votre place sur des conseils. Vos commentaires sont toujours très appréciés. Bonne lecture !

Joining Boards: It’s Not Just Who You Know That Matters 

For many, a corporate directorship is a career capstone. But attaining one is far from easy. No one can say for sure how to get on a corporate board, but many people point to two routes: the first is to break into the « right » network and the second is to seek a progression of board seats that begins with, for example, a seat on a not-for-profit or community board and eventually results in appointment to a corporate board.

Both paths are problematic — neither is particularly transparent or relies on objective measures and given that many boards are stubborn bastions of white masculinity, pursuing the « right » network can be fraught, especially for women and other diverse candidates. Indeed, our research reinforces that concern: many boards still rely on their own (mostly white, mostly male) networks to fill seats.

There’s a different way — one that is more measurable, controllable and offers greater transparency. It starts with a focus on skills. Although many boards continue to select new members from their own networks, our research suggests that more are beginning to implement objective processes to select members based on the skills and attributes that boards need to be effective. Our 2012 survey, in partnership with WomenCorporateDirectors and Heidrick & Struggles, of more than 1,000 corporate directors across the globe, found that only 48% of the boards had a formal process of determining the combination of skills and attributes required for their board and, therefore, for new directors

We know this approach can work because we’ve seen it: We studied a large corporation that was being split into two public companies for which two new boards had to be created. The chairman wanted to create two balanced boards, with the mix of skills, knowledge, and experience each company needed. He appointed a special team to create an objective, transparent method for selecting the directors. After reviewing the roles and responsibilities of each board and the natures of the new businesses, the team derived lists of the skills each board needed. Then it created a model containing the dimensions critical to a high-performing board, from functional and industry expertise to behavioral attributes. This approach led both companies to recruit board members that were diverse in needed strategic skills. Both boards are on to a good start — demonstrating that when a firm builds a board using a rigorous assessment of the qualities it needs to carry out its governance task, rather than personal networks, the board is better equipped to execute its functions.

In our survey, we also asked about specific skills. We wanted to know which were the strongest skills represented on boards and which were missing. Directors named industry knowledge, strategy, and financial-audit expertise as their strongest skill sets.

Skill Sets Overall

And 43% cited technology expertise, HR-talent management, international-global expertise, and succession planning as the skills missing most on their boards.

______________________________________________

* Boris Groysberg is a professor of business administration at Harvard Business School. His  work examines how a firm can be systematic in achieving a sustainable competitive advantage by leveraging its talent at all levels of the organization.

* Deborah Bell is a researcher of organizational behavior whose work focuses on leadership, drivers of success, and organizational effectiveness and dynamics, especially at the board level.

Getting a Seat at the Table (venitism.blogspot.com)

Corporate Director Selection and Recruitment: A Matrix (blogs.law.harvard.edu)

Strategy For Securing a Seat on a Corporate Board (thestreet.com)

Why your business needs an advisory board (hiponaconsulting.wordpress.com)

Grands défis de gouvernance pour les entreprises cotées en 2013 | Un recueil de la NACD


Vous trouverez, ci-joint, une publication de la NACD qui présente les grands défis qui attendent les administrateurs de sociétés au cours des prochaines années. Ce document est un recueil de lectures publié par les partenaires de la NACD : Heidrick & Struggles International, Inc., KPMG’s Audit Committee Institute, Marsh & McLennan Companies, NASDAQ OMX, Pearl Meyer & Partners et Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP.

Vous y trouverez un ensemble d’articles très pertinents sur les sujets de l’heure en gouvernance. Chaque année, la NACD se livre à cet exercice et publie un document très prisé !

Voici comment les auteurs se sont répartis les thèmes les plus « hot » en gouvernance.

English: 1166 Avenue of the Americas (Marsh & ...
English: 1166 Avenue of the Americas (Marsh & McLennan Headquarters) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
    1. What to Do When an Activist Investor Comes Calling par Heidrick & Struggle
    2. KPMG’s Audit Committee Priorities for 2013 par KPMG’s Audit Committee Institute
    3. Board Risk Checkup—Are You Ready for the Challenges Ahead ? par Marsh & McLennan Companies
    4. Boardroom Discussions par NASDAQ OMX
    5. Paying Executives for Driving Long-Term Success par Pearl Meyer & Partners
    6. What Boards Should Focus on in 2013 par Weil, Gotshal and Manges, LLP

NACD Insights and Analysis – Governance Challenges: 2013 and Beyond

Today, directors are operating in a new environment. Shareholders, regulators, and stakeholders have greater influence on the boardroom than ever before. In addition, risks and crisis situations are occurring with greater frequency and amplitude. Directors have a responsibility to ensure their companies are prepared for these challenges—present and future.This compendium provides insights and practical guidance from the nation’s leading boardroom experts—the National Association of Corporate Directors’ (NACD’s) strategic content partners—each recognized as a thought leader in their respective fields of corporate governance.

Article relié :

NACD BoardVision: Private Equity’s Influence on Executive Compensation (bulletproofblog.com)

Les critères d’évaluation du rôle d’administrateur de sociétés


Voici un excellent article publié par Jeffrey Gandz, Mary Crossan, Gerard Seijts et Mark Reno* dans la revue Ivey Business Journal. Les auteurs insistent sur trois critères d’évaluation du rôle d’administrateur de sociétés : (1) compétences, (2) engagement et (3) caractère. Bien que ces trois critères soient déterminants dans l’exercice du rôle d’administrateur, la dimension la plus difficile à appréhender est le leadership qui se manifeste par le « caractère » d’un administrateur.

Les auteurs décrivent 11 caractéristiques-clés dont il faut tenir compte dans le recrutement, la sélection, l’évaluation et la rotation des administrateurs.

Je vous invite donc à lire cet article. En voici un extrait. Qu’en pensez-vous ?

« When it comes to selecting and assessing CEOs, other C-suite level executives or board members, the most important criteria for boards to consider are competencies, commitment and character. This article focuses on the most difficult of these criteria to assess – leadership character – and suggests the eleven key dimensions of character that directors should consider in their governance roles ».

Leadership character and corporate governance

Competencies, commitment and character

Competencies matter. They define what a person is capable of doing; in our assessments of leaders we look for intellect as well as organizational, business, people and strategic competencies. Commitment is critical. It reflects the extent to which individuals aspire to the hard work of leadership, how engaged they are in the role, and how prepared they are to make the sacrifices necessary to succeed. But above all, character counts. It determines how leaders perceive and analyze the contexts in which they operate. Character determines how they use the competencies they have. It shapes the decisions they make, and how these decisions are implemented and evaluated.

Seasonal Reflection on Ivey Business building
Seasonal Reflection on Ivey Business building (Photo credit: Marc Foster)

Focus on character

Our research has focused on leadership character because it’s the least understood of these three criteria and the most difficult to talk about. Character is foundational for effective decision-making. It influences what information executives seek out and consider, how they interpret it, how they report the information, how they implement board directives, and many other facets of governance.

Within a board, directors require open, robust, and critical but respectful discussions with other directors who have integrity, as well as a willingness to collaborate and the courage to dissent. They must also take the long view while focusing on the shorter-range results, and exercise excellent judgment. All of these behaviors hinge on character.

Our research team at Ivey was made very conscious of the role of character in business leadership and governance when we conducted exploratory and qualitative research on the causes of the 2008 financial meltdown and the subsequent recession. In focus groups and conference-based discussions, where we met with over 300 business leaders on three continents, participants identified character weaknesses or defects as being at the epicenter of the build-up in financial-system leverage over the preceding decade, and the ensuing meltdown. Additionally, the participants identified leadership character strengths as key factors that distinguished the companies that survived or even prospered during the meltdown from those that failed or were badly damaged.

Participants in this research project identified issues with character in both leadership and governance. Among them were:

Overconfidence bordering on arrogance that led to reckless or excessive risk-taking behaviors

Lack of transparency and in some cases lack of integrity

Sheer inattention to critical issues

Lack of accountability for the huge risks associated with astronomical individual rewards

Intemperate and injudicious decision-making

A lack of respect for individuals that actually got in the way of effective team functioning

Hyper-competitiveness among leaders of major financial institutions

Irresponsibility toward shareholders and the societies within which these organizations operated.

These character elements and many others were identified as root or contributory causes of the excessive buildup of leverage in financial markets and the subsequent meltdown. But the comments from the business leaders in our research also raise important questions about leadership character. Among them:

What is character? It’s a term that we use quite often: “He’s a bad character”; “A person of good character”; “A character reference.” But what do we really mean by leadership “character”?

Why is it so difficult to talk about someone’s character? Why do we find it difficult to assess someone’s character with the same degree of comfort we seem to have in assessing their competencies and commitment?

Can character be learned, developed, shaped and molded, or is it something that must be present from birth – or at least from childhood or adolescence? Can it change? What, if anything, can leaders do to help develop good character among their followers and a culture of good character in their organizations?

___________________________

Strategic Leaders-Challenges, Organizational Abilities & Individual Characteristics (workplacepsychology.net)

How to Succeed As a Leader! (ejims05.wordpress.com)

Character & Leadership (colleensharen.wordpress.com)

Une formation en gouvernance pour les nouveaux administrateurs | Un prérequis ?


La formation en gouvernance est de plus en plus un préalable à l’exercice du rôle d’administrateur de sociétés. L’article retenu montre que l’apprentissage sur le tas est en voie de disparition dans les conseils d’administration de grandes sociétés. La formation préparatoire peut prendre différentes formes : training sur mesure, coaching, séminaires, etc.

Cependant, il semble de plus en plus évident que les programme de formation en gouvernance (tels que IoD, C.dir., ASC, IAS) menant à une certification reconnue, constituent la voie à suivre dans le futur. L’article de Hannah Prevett, paru dans le Sunday Times, montre que les formations organisées sont de meilleurs endroits pour un apprentissage de qualité que les tables de conseils d’administration… Bonne lecture.

Diplômés ASC du Collège des administrateurs de sociétés 2012

A head start for novices

The received wisdom is that new directors learn on the job. If they are not  equipped with the necessary skills when they accept their first board  appointment, they will need to be quick on the uptake.

Not any more: the tidal wave of new governance requirements means it is not  good enough to acquire expertise over time. And, as a result, many  prospective boardroom stars are seeking training to help them do the job  they’re paid to do from day one. When Alan Kay learnt he was to join the executive board of Costain in 2003, he  immediately began considering how to prepare for his new role at the  engineering and construction group.

“A lot of people haven’t really thought about how to prepare for a board role.  [They think] it’s something that happens naturally: you get on the board and  then you think, I’m going to learn on the job,” said Kay, who is Costain’s  technical and operations director. “But once you’re appointed, becoming  competent and learning as you go takes several months, which is not ideal.”

He researched training options for new board members and came across the  Institute of Directors’ accredited programmes, including the certificate and  diploma in company direction. The IoD fills 6,000 places on such courses annually with representatives of  both large and small organisations — not all of them young guns, as Roger  Barker, head of corporate governance at the IoD, explained.

“The directors of large organisations were reluctant to undertake any form of  formalised director training. These were typically seasoned former  executives, with extensive experience of serving on boards as chief  executives or chief financial officers. It has been difficult to persuade  such individuals that director training is relevant to them,” said Barker.

Nonprofit board development is a process when done right (donordreams.wordpress.com)

L’évolution de la « Hawkamah » (Gouvernance en arabe) dans les pays en développement (jacquesgrisegouvernance.com)

A head start for novices (david-doughty.com)

L’établissement d’une juste rémunération du PCD | Responsabilité absolue du C.A.


Aujourd’hui, je vous propose la lecture de l’article d’Adam Davidson, publié dans le New York Times du 29 mai 2013. L’auteur présente une excellente analyse des facteurs qui influencent la rémunération du PCD et montre comment le conseil d’administration doit jouer un rôle capital dans l’établissement d’une rémunération juste et efficace.

Voici un extrait de l’article. Bonne lecture. Vos commentaires sont les bienvenus.

C.E.O.’s Don’t Need to Earn Less. They Need to Sweat More

« Most C.E.O.’s used to be able to handle their pay negotiations in private, but the Dodd-Frank reforms, which were passed in 2010, now give shareholders the right to vote on executive compensation. This has helped usher in a so-called “say on pay” revolution, which tries to stop executives from making more money when their companies don’t do that well. In Switzerland, a recent nationwide referendum, passed 2 to 1, gave shareholders the right to restrict the pay for the heads of Swiss companies. The European Union is likely to vote on a similar measure by the end of the year.

Economically speaking, this is more than a little odd. Shareholders should be motivated to pay their C.E.O.’s according to their success. But doing so involves a tricky dance known to game theorists as the principal-agent problem: how does an employer (the principal) motivate a worker (the agent) to pursue the principal’s interest? This principal-agent problem is everywhere. (Do you pay a contractor per day of work or per project? Do you pay salespeople by the hour or on commission?) It becomes particularly thorny when the agent knows a lot more about his job than the principal.

Boards and chief executives don’t often suffer from Costanza-like ineptitude, but they are harder to rein in. They are often rewarded when they don’t succeed but are not usually penalized enough when they do a lackluster job. Lucian Bebchuk, a professor at Harvard Law School and perhaps the leading academic voice for corporate reform, told me that the problem isn’t (just) greed. It’s the boards of directors. The directors are supposed to represent the stockholders’ interests, he says, but most public firms, where C.E.O.’s can have considerable influence over board appointments, neuter those interests. They are structured so that a board tends to side with its chief.

Excessive C.E.O. pay, Bebchuk says, is a manifestation of a deeper problem. A bad C.E.O. pay package can cost shareholders millions; a corporation that is being poorly overseen by its board can cost billions. “Shareholder rights in the U.S. are still quite weak relative to what they are in other advanced economies,” he explained. His solution is to pass laws that make it easier for shareholders to vote out boardmembers who fail to discipline underperforming chief executives. This, he argues, will motivate them to push back against executives that do an underwhelming job. At the very least, all the attention would keep boardmembers and C.E.O.’s on their toes. And a multitude of better-run companies would result in billions, perhaps trillions, of wealth returned to the economy ».

Principal Agent Problems in Government (sympathyandbureaucracy.com)

Remuneration Programs: A Principal Agent Theory perspective of CEO Remuneration Programs (projectsparadise.com)

Obtenir un siège sur le C.A. d’une grande entreprise | Difficile … même pour une gestionnaire expérimentée !


L’article de J.T. O’Donnell est très direct et, possiblement, assez juste ! Personne ne me fera dire qu’obtenir un siège sur le C.A. d’une grande entreprise cotée en bourse est une chose facile … même pour une personne expérimentée qui possède déjà un poste de haute direction ! Non, c’est une avenue qui demande beaucoup, beaucoup de temps, de volonté et de stratégies !

Ainsi que l’auteure le mentionne, en plus de l’expérience, la bonne …, il faut beaucoup de chance car vous n’êtes pas le seul, ou la seule, à vouloir accéder aux postes de commandes (sur les C.A.). Vous devez avoir un solide réseau de contacts professionnels et faire connaître votre disponibilité, ce que plusieurs refusent de faire parce qu’ils ou elles ont peur de l’échec.

De plus, vous devez avoir les « bonnes connections », le bon profil LinkedIn, la bonne réputation sur les réseaux sociaux, le bon parcours d’emploi dans les grandes organisations, le bon mentor, le bon timing, la bonne formation académique et, de plus en plus, la bonne formation en gouvernance de sociétés.

Si vous êtes intéressés par un poste sur un C.A. prestigieux (à votre retraite, par exemple) préparez-vous en conséquence en utilisant une démarche structurée et en le laissant savoir dans votre milieu, auprès des firmes de recrutement, sur les réseaux sociaux et auprès d’administrateurs chevronnés. Même si vous êtes le fils ou la fille du propriétaire, ce ne sera pas « une marche dans le parc ».

Je vous invite à lire ce bref article qui vous expliquera quelques barrières à l’entrée… Et n’oubliez pas de lire les commentaires à la fin !

Voici un bref extrait de l’article :

Board Seats: Elusive Carrots? (4 Reasons Why)

In the last several weeks, I’ve had three separate conversations with smart, proven C-suite members – all men in their late 50s/early 60s. They’re all credentialed and have previous board experience. Each has been aggressively seeking executive board positions over the last 18 months. Not one of them has been successful. Their only solace? Colleagues trying to do the same are failing too.

LinkedIn One Percent Most Viewed Profiles Email
LinkedIn One Percent Most Viewed Profiles Email (Photo credit: DavidErickson)

As it turns out, more than a few executive Baby Boomers are looking to grab coveted roles on corporate boards. And, why not? Getting paid five-figures to attend quarterly meetings and do some business strategy work seems like a great deal. However, based on my discussions with industry professionals over the last 10 months, for even the most proven executives, it might be easier to win the lottery than to land a board seat. There’s clearly a supply and demand issue – too many senior, white, male executives for too few board positions. Plus, to add insult to injury, according to Jack Welch, some of the executives getting those board seats aren’t very effective.

If you’re an executive who had a board seat(s) in mind for the next phase of your career, here are some things to ponder…

Mise à jour des compétences des membres du C.A.


Voici un plaidoyer en faveur de l’établissement d’un comité de gouvernance et de nomination par Alan. S. Gutterman. L’article est intéressant en ce qu’il procure d’excellentes justifications pour l’amélioration continue des membres du conseil. De plus, l’auteur présente une description des principaux devoirs et responsabilités des administrateurs qui sera utile à tout nouveau membre du conseil.

J’ajouterais que les programmes de formation en gouvernance telles que ceux du Collège des administrateurs de sociétés (CAS) sont de plus en plus nécessaires de nos jours. Voici un aperçu du billet de M. Gutterman.

« The centerpiece of any such initiative is creating a permanent committee committed to working year-round on board development. This includes not only the traditional recruiting and selection but also mapping out a long-term strategy for the board’s composition and ensuring that active members are informed about “best practices” for being knowledgeable and effective (e.g., orientation, training and assessment) ».

Turn your board of directors into a key strategic asset

« One simple but often neglected step in board development is creating a description of the duties and responsibilities of directors. It’s like a job description and should be written in a manner that informs candidates about the types of behaviors that will be expected of them. Consider the following list as an example:

Intel Board of Directors
Intel Board of Directors (Photo credit: IntelFreePress)

Attend regular meetings of the company’s board of directors, which are held at least four times per year and which generally extend for about four to five hours.

Be accessible for personal contact with other board members and company officers between board meetings.

Participate on, and provide leadership to, at least one of the committees of the board. Prepare for active participation in board meetings and board decision making, including thorough review of materials distributed in advance.

Participate in orientation and training activities for new and continuing directors and proactively seek out other self-education opportunities on issues and problems that are being considered by the board.

Responsibly review and act upon recommendations of board committees brought to the entire board of directors for discussion and action.

Participate in the annual self-review process required of all board members.

Participate in the annual development and planning retreat for the entire board, which is usually held in January of each year.

Understand and comply with the terms and conditions of all policies, procedures and agreement applicable to board members in general and to you specifically, including fiduciary obligations imposed on board members under applicable laws.

In general, use your personal and professional skills, relationships, experiences and knowledge to advance the interests and prospects of the company.

A description of director duties and responsibilities is obviously important during the recruitment, interviewing and selection process; however, it also can be used as a guide in the development of orientation and training programs and creating of an assessment framework to evaluate how well directors are fulfilling their obligations ».

Taking Board members onboard (cbglobalassociates.wordpress.com)

3 Ways to Find Your Perfect Board of Advisors (entrepreneur.com)

Les rétributions excessives des hauts dirigeants | Les causes, les effets et les solutions


Voici un document phare sur l’étude des rémunérations jugées excessives dans les grandes sociétés publiques. Cette recherche, dirigée par Charles M. Elson et Craig K. Ferrere de l’Université du Delaware*, a été acceptée pour publication dans le Journal of Corporation Law.

Les auteurs présentent plusieurs arguments qui remettent en cause l’étalonnage compétitif (competitive benchmarking), une méthode d’établissement de la rémunération jugée inflationniste. Les auteurs font la démonstration que cette façon de faire n’est pas justifiée et que ses effets ont des répercussions pernicieuses sur toute la structure de rémunération. En fait, l’hypothèse selon laquelle il faut rémunérer « grassement » les hauts dirigeants afin de les retenir ne tient pas la route.

L’article recommande aux comités de rémunération de s’éloigner des méthodes traditionnelles de « benchmarking » et de développer des standards internes de rémunération basés sur les spécificités de l’entreprise, notamment son environnement compétitif unique. Les comités de rémunération aurait avantage à prendre connaissance de cette étude. Vous trouverez, ci-dessous, un résumé de l’article.

Executive Superstars, Peer Groups and Overcompensation: Cause, Effect and Solution

In setting the pay of their CEOs, boards invariably reference the pay of the executives at other enterprises in similar industries and of similar size and complexity. In what is described as « competitive benchmarking », compensation levels are generally targeted to either the 50th, 75th, or 90th percentile. This process is alleged to provide an effective gauge of « market wages » which are necessary for executive retention. As we will describe, this conception of such a market was created purely by happenstance and based upon flawed assumptions, particularly the easy transferability of executive talent. Because of its uniform application across companies, the effects of structural flaws in its design significantly affect the level of executive compensation.

President Barack Obama delivering remarks on n...
President Barack Obama delivering remarks on new executive compensation restrictions. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

It has been observed in both the academic and professional communities that the practice of targeting the pay of executives to median or higher levels of the competitive benchmark will naturally create an upward bias and movement in total compensation amounts. Whether this escalation has been dramatic or merely incremental, the compounded effect has been to create a significant disparity between the pay of CEOs and what is appropriate to the companies they run. This is not surprising. By basing pay on primarily external comparisons, a separate regime which was untethered from the actual wage structures of the rest of the organization was established. Over time, these disconnected systems were bound to diverge.

The pay of a chief executive officer, however, has a profound effect on the incentive structure throughout the corporate hierarchy. Rising pay thus has costs far greater than the amount actually transferred to the CEOs themselves. To mitigate this, boards must set pay in a manner in which is more consistent with the internal corporate wage structures. An important step in that direction is to diminish the focus on external benchmarking.

We argue that: (I) theories of optimal market-based contracting are misguided in that they are predicated upon the chimerical notion of vigorous and competitive markets for transferable executive talent; (II) that even boards comprised of only the most faithful fiduciaries of shareholder interests will fail to reach an agreeable resolution to the compensation conundrum because of the unfounded reliance on the structurally malignant and unnecessary process of peer benchmarking; and, (III) that the solution lies in avoiding the mechanistic and arbitrary application of peer group data in arriving at executive compensation levels. Instead, independent and shareholder-conscious compensation committees must develop internally created standards of pay based on the individual nature of the organization concerned, its particular competitive environment and its internal dynamics.

_________________________________

*Cette recherche a été financée par (1) The Weinberg Center for Corporate Governance, (2) The Investor Responsibility Research Center Institute et (3) The Social Science Research Network.

Articles reliés au sujet de la rémunération :

Les actionnaires doivent-ils être consultés sur les rémunérations des hauts dirigeants ? (jacquesgrisegouvernance.com)

Executive Peer Groups – Your Virtual Board (peterdickinson.net)

Pay for Performance Disconnect Cited as Main Shareholder Concern in Say on Pay Vote Failures (sys-con.com)

Your benchmarking peer group says a lot about you (architects.dzone.com)

Comment bâtir un C.A. d’OBNL performant ?


Voici une présentation de diapos très efficace préparée et partagée par Misha Charles, experte dans le domaine de la gouvernance organisationnelle. Sliseshares est une excellente façon de livrer votre message à vos réseaux. En voici un exemple.

Comment bâtir un C.A. d’OBNL performant ?

Questionnaire de Leadership Montréal | À la recherche de relève au C.A.


Voici une excellente initiative de Leadership Montréal : un questionnaire destiné aux représentant(e)s d’organisations ayant des postes à combler dans les prochains mois au sein de leurs conseils d’administration.

Leadership Montréal favorise le contact entre des représentants de C.A. et des candidats talentueux souhaitant mettre leurs compétences au service d’organisations de la région de Montréal. Leadership Montréal et ses partenaires organiseront prochainement quelques événements qui réuniront candidat(e)s et représentant(e)s d’organisations. Le fait de compléter le questionnaire ne vous garantit pas une place lors des prochains événements. Toutefois, Leadership Montréal pourra diffuser les ouvertures de postes et vous appuyer dans la recherche de futurs administrateurs et administratrices ».

Questionnaire de Leadership Montréal | À la recherche de relève au C.A.

Vous aurez prochainement des postes à combler au sein de votre C. A. ou vous connaissez des gens souhaitant assurer la relève au sein de leur conseil d’administration ? Vous souhaitez rencontrer des candidats qui vous permettront d’enrichir et de diversifier la composition de votre conseil ? Cette invitation est pour vous !

Liberal leadership campaign launch. Oct 2, 2012.
Liberal leadership campaign launch. Oct 2, 2012. (Photo credit: Justin Trudeau)

Dans les prochaines semaines, Leadership Montréal et ses partenaires organisent deux événements qui réuniront une centaine de candidat(e)s talentueux aux profils variés et des représentant(e)s d’organisations à la recherche de membres de C. A. En participant à l’un de ces événements, vous pourrez rencontrer des candidat(e)s partageant un intérêt pour les questions de gouvernance et disposant d’une expertise utile et recherchée par les C. A. Leadership Montréal dispose d’un vaste réseau réunissant des professionnels et entrepreneurs intervenant dans des secteurs variés : droit, ingénierie, RH, finance, développement économique, développement durable, philanthropie, gestion, etc.

Leadership Montréal favorise la diversité au sein des lieux décisionnels. Vous pourrez ainsi rencontrer des jeunes de moins de 40 ans, des femmes, des personnes issues de l’immigration et des membres de minorités visibles à la recherche de défis au sein de nouveaux conseils d’administration. Plusieurs des candidat(e)s présents auront suivi une formation d’introduction à la gouvernance de sociétés offerte par le Collège des administrateurs de sociétés de l’Université Laval ou par les Jeunes administrateurs de l’Institut sur la gouvernance des organisations publiques et privées (IGOPP).

La participation aux événements est gratuite. Les représentants d’organisations intéressés doivent compléter un questionnaire dans lequel seront indiqués les détails quant aux postes à combler.

Pratiques exemplaires en matière de divulgation d’information concernant les administrateurs | CCGG (jacquesgrisegouvernance.com)

L’apport déterminant des professeurs-administrateurs à la performance des entreprises


Voici un article scientifique publié dans Social Science Research Network (SSRN) par Bill Francis (1), Iftekhar Hasan (2) et Qiang Wu (3) sur un sujet très pertinent pour la gouvernance des sociétés : L’utilité de la présence de professeurs d’université sur les C.A. des entreprises publiques.

L’article montre que la présence de professeurs sur les conseils d’administration est positivement associée à une meilleure performance des entreprises. Les professeurs-administrateurs, plus particulièrement ceux qui ont une formation en administration, jouent un rôle très important de conseillers auprès de l’entreprise. Leur influence sur la performance des entreprises semble déterminante dans plusieurs domaines relatifs à la bonne gouvernance.

« Directors from academia served on the boards of more than one third of S&P 1,500 firms over the 1998-2006 period. This paper investigates the effects of academic directors on corporate governance and firm performance. We find that companies with directors from academia are associated with higher performance. In addition, we find that professors without administrative jobs drive the positive relation between academic directors and firm performance. We also show that professors’ educational backgrounds affect the identified relationship. For example, academic directors with business-related degrees have the most positive impacts on firm performance among all the academic fields considered in our regressions.

Furthermore, we show that academic directors play an important governance role through their monitoring and advising functions. Specifically, we find that the presence of academic directors is associated with higher acquisition performance, higher number of patents, higher stock price informativeness, lower discretionary accruals, lower CEO compensation, and higher CEO turnover-performance sensitivity. Overall, our results provide supportive evidence that academic directors are effective monitors and valuable advisors, and that firms benefit from academic directors ».

Si vous souhaitez avoir plus d’information sur les objectifs, la méthodologie ou les résultats de l’étude, je vous invite à lire l’article au complet.

Professors in the Boardroom and their impact on corporate governance and firm performance

Peter F. Drucker and Masatoshi Ito Graduate Sc...
Peter F. Drucker and Masatoshi Ito Graduate School of Management (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

« This paper empirically investigates whether the presence of academic directors affects firm performance and corporate governance. Based on the independence theory, expertise theory, and diversity theory, we hypothesize that academic directors can improve board efficacy and subsequent firm performance because of their monitoring abilities and advising abilities. The key result is in line with our hypothesis. We find that the presence of directors from academia in the boardroom is associated with higher firm performance. The positive association holds after controlling for firm- and other governance-specific characteristics, and considering endogeneity issues, such as omitted variable bias, self-selection bias and causality issue. By comparing the differences in the attendance behavior and committee assignments of academic directors and other outside directors, we find that academic directors perform better than other outside directors in the boardroom.

We further examine the monitoring and advising roles of academic directors in details. We find that firms with academic directors have higher CEO turnover-performance sensitivity, lower cash-based CEO compensation, more patent numbers, higher acquisition performance, higher stock price informativeness, and are less likely to manage their earnings. The results provide several channels through which academic directors affect firm value positively.

We also find evidence that academic directors with administrative jobs do not improve firm performance as much as academic directors without administrative jobs. Additional analysis finds that academic directors with administrative jobs have more severe board-meeting attendance problems. Furthermore, we find that academic directors’ areas of study have different impacts on firm performance ».

_______________________________________

(1) Lally School of Management and Technology, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

(2) Schools of Business, Fordham University

(3) Bank of Finland

Que font les « bons » administrateurs pour faciliter le succès des organisations ? (jacquesgrisegouvernance.com)

L’attention est de plus en plus mise sur l’efficience des C.A. | Les déficiences observées


Stephen Miles, fondateur et PCD de The Miles Group, une entreprise qui se spécialise dans le conseil en gestion des talents, met l’accent sur un véritable problème de plusieurs C.A. : leurs relatives faiblesses en gouvernance ! Après avoir fait ressortir les exigences accrues des investisseurs institutionnels pour une plus grande performance des membres de C.A., l’auteur présente cinq lacunes majeures de plusieurs conseils d’administration : (1) connaissances déficientes, (2) manque d’auto-évaluation, (3) sentiment de supériorité, (4) manque d’expérience de plusieurs membres dans certains comités et processus de recrutement déficient, (5) problème de leadership.

À mon avis, les membres de conseils d’administration devraient examiner leur efficacité à la lumière des constats évoqués par l’auteur. On voit que la composition d’un C.A. performant repose beaucoup sur le recrutement des membres, sur le leadership du président du conseil et sur le renforcement du comité de gouvernance, parent pauvre des comités statutaires selon Stephen Miles.

L’article est-il biaisé en faveur de la gestion des talents ? Vos commentaires sont les bienvenus. Bonne lecture.

Why Are Boards Coming Up Short In Performance ?

No board member sets out to be mediocre. And yet as institutional shareholders and activists are “grading” board performance on a steeper curve than ever before, their view is that many boards are coming up short.

RDECOM Board of Directors holds meeting
RDECOM Board of Directors holds meeting (Photo credit: RDECOM)

ISS, government regulators, the press, and others are exercising much greater scrutiny over whether boards are executing their fiduciary responsibilities and really acting in the best interests of shareholders. While activist shareholders traditionally were able to hold sway and demand board seats in smaller companies outside the Fortune 500, today we are seeing this happen with venerable names such as Procter & Gamble, Yahoo!, BMC Software, and JC Penney.

In this climate of stakeholders’ taking a much tougher stance on what they deem to be “underperforming directors,” it’s worth it to examine the causes of mediocre performance on boards today. Why are many boards missing the mark?

CEO & Board of Directors: Forging An Effective Relationship (rickdacri.wordpress.com)Que font les « bons » administrateurs pour faciliter le succès des organisations ? (jacquesgrisegouvernance.com)

Comment: Keeping boards accountable means making them formally report on their activities & goals (business.financialpost.com)

Six raisons qui militent en faveur du choix d’administrateurs externes au C.A. (jacquesgrisegouvernance.com)

Stephen Griggs: Do independent directors provide independent advice? (business.financialpost.com)

Questions que tout futur administrateur devrait se poser ?


Dans le billet du Huffingtonpost.ca du 27 janvier 2013, Richard Leblanc procède à un inventaire assez complet des questions que tout nouvel administrateur ou que toute nouvelle administratrice de sociétés devrait se poser avant d’accepter le poste qu’on lui propose. Ce sont des questions qu’il faut se poser personnellement, tout en cherchant à obtenir les informations pertinentes et les documents nécessaires. Il faut également obtenir des informations sur la culture organisationnelle et se faire une tête sur le climat qui règne au conseil d’administration. Notons que la plupart de ces questions sont aussi valables pour les conseils d’administration d’OBNL..

Thinking of Joining a Board ? Ask These Questions First

Question Mark
Question Mark (Photo credit: auntiepauline)

« Here are the questions I would ask before joining a NFP board. Some or many of them can apply to other types of boards. It is important to scrutinize the organization for professionalism and fit, particularly for NFPs where resources can be stretched, as your reputation and even financial assets may be at risk. Many directors I interview, when I ask for their greatest regret, they say not firing the CEO earlier, and joining the wrong board.

These questions try to address the downside of joining the wrong board ».

Je vous invite à consulter ce court billet pour connaître la nature des questions qu’un nouvel administrateur d’OBNL devrait se poser.

Spencer Stuart Board Index 2012


Vous trouverez, sur le site de Spencer Stuart, une excellente synthèse des résultats de l’étude 2012, menée auprès des 500 entreprises du S&P. Ce rapport sur l’état de la gouvernance des sociétés américaines révèle certaines tendances significatives en ce qui concerne (1) le recrutement d’administrateurs, (2) le processus du conseil et (3)  la rémunération des membres du conseil. En général, les résultats montrent que les tendances de 2011 se concrétisent en 2012.

Spencer Stuart Board Index 2012

Voici les principales tendances :

          1. Board turnover continues to decline
          2. Restrictions on other corporate directorships more common
          3. First-timers and other corporate executives prove to be attractive pool
          4. Mandatory retirement age rising
          5. Independent board leadership becoming the norm

« This year’s report also gives special attention to the issue of female representation on boards. Despite acknowledgement by boards that diversity in the boardroom generally results in increased value for shareholders, the pace of change in the U.S. is discouraging. Women now account for just over 17% of independent directors, up from 16% in 2007 and 12% in 2002 …

… As European governments have made diversification a priority, U.S. companies have lost their lead in female representation. The S&P 500 now trails Norway (40%), Finland (27%), Sweden (26%), France (22%), Denmark (18%) and the Netherlands (18%) and ties with Germany (17%) in the percentage of women on corporate boards. Several of these countries adopted regulation or voluntary targets to increase the percentage of women serving on corporate boards, and more may follow. And, while European boards strive to meet their gender goals, many are looking to recruit experienced female executives from the U.S., particularly those with specialized expertise in highly sought-after areas such as digital media, emerging markets and finance ».

Si vous souhaitez avoir une meilleure compréhension de la portée de l’étude de 2012,  plus de détails sur le sommaire, et même la possibilité de lire l’ensemble du rapport, veuillez vous rendre sur le site de Spencer Stuart :

http://www.spencerstuart.com/

Quelles questions un futur administrateur d’OBNL devrait-il se poser ?


Dans son billet du 1er janvier 2013, Richard Leblanc procède à un inventaire assez complet des questions que tout nouvel administrateur ou que toute nouvelle administratrice d’OBNL devrait se poser avant d’accepter le poste qu’on lui propose. Ce sont des questions qu’il faut se poser personnellement, tout en cherchant à obtenir les informations pertinentes et les documents nécessaires. Il faut également obtenir des informations sur la culture organisationnelle et se faire une tête sur le climat qui règne au conseil d’administration. Notons que la plupart de ces questions sont aussi valables pour d’autres types d’organisations.

20 Questions For New Directors Asked to Join a Not-for-Profit Board in 2013

English: Frequently asked questions, 2008, 150...
English: Frequently asked questions, 2008, 150 cm x 100 cm (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

« Here are the questions I would ask before joining a NFP board. Some or many of them can apply to other types of boards. It is important to scrutinize the organization for professionalism and fit, particularly for NFPs where resources can be stretched, as your reputation and even financial assets may be at risk. Many directors I interview, when I ask for their greatest regret, they say not firing the CEO earlier, and joining the wrong board.

These questions try to address the downside of joining the wrong board ».

Je vous invite à consulter ce court billet pour connaître la nature des questions qu’un nouvel administrateur d’OBNL devrait se poser.

Comment se préparer à accueillir la main-d’oeuvre de la prochaine décennie ?


Ci-dessous, un article paru dans HBR sous la plume de Ron Ashkenas, associé de la firme Schaffer Consulting, qui explique clairement les effets des retraites des boomers au cours des 20 prochaines années. À quels changements du monde des affaires devons-nous nous attendre ?

Get Ready for the New WorkforceP1020141

« I recently heard a stunning statistic: For the next 19 years, 10,000 people per day will turn 65 years old, and (presumably) retire shortly thereafter. While this graying of the Boomer generation certainly has implications for health care and social policy (and for me personally, as one of those eventual retirees), it may have even more significance for the nature of the workforce and the job of the manager.

First, there will be a shortage of workers for key jobs. This may sound hard to believe at a time when U.S. unemployment hovers around 8% and parts of Europe have 25% of their people out of work. Yet as millions of boomers leave the workforce, there are far fewer younger people to replace them. In the trucking industry alone, for example, it’s estimated that there will be a shortage of over 100,000 drivers in just a few years. Moreover, the replacements will have far less experience and know-how, and will need considerable training to get up-to-speed. This will lead to significant gaps in areas such as engineering, petrol-chemicals, utilities, defense manufacturing, education, healthcare, and air traffic control ».

  1. 7 Tips for People Planning to Retire in 2013 (dailyfinance.com)
  2. Daily Baby Boomer News Update: January 2, 2013 (babyboomers.com)
  3. Aging Boomers May be a Great Market (asourparentsage.net)

« Global Board Ready Women » | Online database list of 8 000 women from the European Business Schools


Voici un communiqué, transmis par ecoDa, sur une nouvelle initiative des Grandes Écoles européennes pour promouvoir des femmes à des conseils d’administration. Le Québec, le Canada et les É.U. pourraient certainement s’inspirer de cette démarche.

Viviane Reding held a conference press this morning to launch ‘Global Board Ready Women’ list. According to Viviane Reding, “figures don’t improve by themselves. Europe is facing effective 85% male quota in boardrooms. European Business Schools are chartering the myth that there would not be enough qualified women. The database shows that there is a pool of talents and it is only the beginning. Europe can not afford this waste of talents”. “My proposed directive put emphasis on qualification and merit: no one will gat a job because she is a woman but noone will be denied a job because she is a woman”. As expressed by the representative of European Business schools, “we are building the pipeline to enable generations of women to become senior executive and then to join boardrooms. The database is part of the social contract between governments and private sector”. The database is not limited to women that have been graduated at business schools. Women can submit their application and a task force will look at each application. The objective of the database is almost to promote diversity in terms of nationality.

 Voici le communiqué de presse présentant la liste des « Global Board Ready Women« 

« The European Business Schools Women on Boards Initiative is migrating their ‘Global Board Ready Women’ list of 8 000 women into an online database. The women on this list all fulfil stringent criteria for Corporate Governance as defined by publicly listed companies and are well qualified and ready to go on boards as of today. This ever growing list of « Board Ready Women » – which will now be consultable online for corporations and for executive search companies – makes it clear that there are more than enough eminently qualified women to help lead Europe’s and the world’s corporations into the 21st century and that it is now time to shatter the glass ceiling that keeps these women from ascending to board of directors positions.

Deutsch: Viviane Reding auf dem Europäischen F...
Deutsch: Viviane Reding auf dem Europäischen Forum Alpach (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

« We need to use all of our society’s talents to ensure that Europe’s economy takes off. That is why the European Commission has proposed a European law for boosting gender balance in company board rooms, » said Vice-President Viviane Reding, EU Justice Commissioner. « I often hear the argument that there are not enough qualified women to occupy positions in the boardroom. TodayEuropeanBusinessSchools and their colleagues around the world are shattering those myths as well as glass ceilings! The list shows that the qualified women are there – 8 000 of them. Companies should now make use of this untapped pool of talent. »

The « Global Board Ready Women » searchable database list and forum will be administered by the Financial Times Non-Executive Directors’ Club on the global business platform, LinkedIn. All women listed in the Global Board Ready Women (GBRW) searchable database are suitable to be considered for publicly listed company board-level positions and meet a clear set of criteria as developed and defined over the last year and a half by the organization members of the European Business Schools/Women on Board initiative (see below).

Every application to be part of this database is formally assessed and reviewed and only those women who meet the criteria are accepted. Participating BusinessSchools and Professional organizations apply the same criteria for their participating Alumnae and Members.

Notably, all women on the list have at least five years’ experience in one or more of the following roles:

Chair and/or NED of listed/private corporations

CEO, COO, CFO or other C-suite exec/director level in listed/private corporations

Family member and controlling shareholder of boards of large family companies

Director of government agencies

Director of non-profit orgs

Institutional investment community senior professional

Professional firms senior partner serving boards and their committees as clients

Entrepreneur

Senior academics with relevant experience

Downloadable video message from Vice-President Viviane Reding:

http://ec.europa.eu/avservices/video/player.cfm?ref=I075488

The List of 8 000 Board Ready Women – Where They Come From

Business School Alumnae, Faculty and Board Members

1) London Business School has 330 Alumnae they have identified as Board Ready – 330.

2) Cambridge Judge Business School has identified 160 women from its networks who are either already on boards or board ready according to the criterion provided – 160.

3) EDHEC Business School has 300 Alumnae, Faculty and Board Members they have identified as board Ready – 300.

4) ESMT European School of Management and Technology ‐ Out of 24 women Executive MBA alumni from its three graduated Executive MBA classes, ESMT has identified 6 board ready women – 6.

5) IESE has identified 900 women in top executive positions, 155 of whom are on boards already and 300 of which are board ready currently and the rest will become board ready in the coming years – 455/900.

6) The IFPM Female Board Pool at the University of St.Gallen/Switzerland has identified 526 women who are Board ready (245 from their Female Board Pool Network and 281 women who work at the Board of Directors or Top Management Team level of Swiss companies) – 526.

7) IMD has identified amongst its alumni 348 board-ready women with more than 25 years of experience plus 12 senior Faculty – 360.

8) INSEAD has identified 2000 women – 67 of whom are on boards already 500 of which are currently board ready and the rest will become board ready in the coming years – 670/2000.

9) RSM (Rotterdam School of Management/Erasmus University) has identified 32 board ready women -150.

10) Bocconi Business School, Italy has identified 150 board-ready women amongst their alumnae and faculty – 150.

11) SKEMA Business School, France has identified 467 board-ready women amongst their alumnae and faculty – 467.

12) Academic Council of the University of Mumbai, India has identified 20 board-ready women in India – 20.

Professional Women and Corporate Governance Organizations:

13) IFA (Institut Francais des Administrateurs) has 250 women board-ready or active on boards with readily available biographies – 250.

14) The Financial Times Non-Executive Directors’ Club currently have 105 people undertaking the new Financial Times Non-Executive Director’s Certificate which provides a formally recognized qualification for non-executive directors, 27 of whom are women – 27.

15) TIAW – The International Alliance for Women has 425 board ready women throughout their 36,000 members worldwide – 425.

16) GTWN – The Global Telecom Women’s Network which has contributed more than 60 names to the names and profiles publicly listed – 60.

17) WiTT – Women in Telecoms and Technology has identified more than 70 individual senior executive women publicly supporting this initiative – 70.

18) WoB – Women on Board has identified 90 Senior Executive board-ready women in Belgium alone – 90.

19) The EPWN (European Professional Women’s Network) has identified 349 members across their networks throughout Europe – 349.

20) Bellisario Foundation, Italy has identified 793 board-Ready women amongst their prize-winners from over 20 years – 793.

21) Woman Corporate Directors has identified 1800 board-ready women from their members around the world including 25 different countries – 1800.

22) Deutscher Juristinnenbund e.V. Vereinigung der Juristinnen, Volks- und Betriebswirtinnen has identified 93 board-ready women among their members in Germany – 93.

23) Geneva Group International has identified 20 board-ready women from their members in Bulgaria, Romania, Estonia, and Hungary – 20.

24) Forte Foundation as identified 200 board-ready women from their members which are major Corporations and Business Schools around the world – 200.

25) G16+ Administrateurs au feminine has identified 54 board-ready women from HarvardBusinessSchool alumnae in Europe plus France’s top engineering schoos – 54

26) Canadian Women in Communications has identified 100 board-ready women from their membership – 100

27) American Chamber of Commerce in France and Spain has identified 47 women from their memberships – 47

Europe Weighing Boardroom Quotas for Women (sloanreview.mit.edu)

Conseils pratiques aux nouveaux administrateurs de sociétés !


Voici un article de Lucy P. Marcus paru sur son blogue du 26 novembre 2012. C’est un texte simple et pratique qui sera sûrement utile à toute nouvelle recrue sur un conseil d’administration. Voici quelques éléments à considérer :

  1. Faites confiance à votre première impression lors de votre apprentissage aux réunions du C.A. … Écoutez et notez !
  2. Mettez-vous rapidement à jour en parcourant les documents concernant l’entreprise et les documents relatifs au C.A.
  3. Apprenez à bien connaître vos collègues administrateurs et n’hésitez pas à rencontrer le président du conseil et les présidents des différents comités
  4. Évaluez vos forces et vos faiblesses et positionnez-vous en conséquence sur le C.A.
  5. Lisez à propos des suggestions pratiques offertes aux recrues sur des C.A. (Voir l’article ci-dessous afin d’en savoir plus sur le sujet)

 

New Board Members: Hit the Ground Running !

 

English: Integrated boardroom designed and ins...
English: Integrated boardroom designed and installed by EDG in 2003. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Voici un extrait tiré de l’introduction de l’article:

« A good board can be rocket fuel or it can be rocks in an organization’s pockets. But what does a new board member need to be active, engaged, and dynamic? The principles are the same regardless of whether this is somebody’s first or tenth appointment, and their significance does not diminish with every new appointment either. Every boardroom has its own personality, its own cadence, and its own means of getting things done, and there is no way of knowing for sure how that works till you are around the table. But every board deserves the best from each of its members—long-serving and new alike ».

« The sooner new board directors are comfortable and familiar with the landscape in which their organization operates, with the challenges it confronts, the sooner they can make a meaningful contribution to the organization and help it deal with its current challenges as well as future-proof it. Equally importantly, new directors need to become comfortable and familiar with the dynamic of the boardroom itself. A boardroom is, after all, a room of people who have to work together toward a common goal. The more comfortable everyone is, the more effective the group can be, so it is worth investing some time and effort into ensuring that new directors hit the ground running ».

  1. Board Meeting (smrla.typepad.com)
  2. Scoring des C.A. américains | les plus forts et les plus faibles ! (jacquesgrisegouvernance.com)
  3. The Boardroom Is Still the Boys’ Room (jacquesgrisegouvernance.com)

Vous désirez devenir administrateur de sociétés | Quelques pistes ?


En reprise – Très bon billet de James Citrin, Senior Director | Spencer Stuart, sur un sujet qui intéressera sûrement plusieurs personnes désirant décrocher un poste sur un conseil d’administration. Les diplômés et les diplômées des programmes de formation en gouvernance de sociétés, tels que le Collèges des administrateurs de sociétés (CAS), le Directors College (DC) et l’Institute of Corporate Directors (ICD), sont particulièrement invités (es) à lire ce billet d’expert, mais aussi à suivre les discussions sur son Blogue. Voici, ci-dessous, un extrait de l’article :

2011 Board of Directors Retreat
2011 Board of Directors Retreat (Photo credit: sfbike)

You Want to Be a Board Director – Now What?

« You’re a sitting chief executive officer who wants to see how another company’s board governs.  Or you’re an aspiring CEO who wants to benefit from a valuable professional development opportunity and expand your marketability.  Perhaps you are a newly retired executive who wants to stay active and connected.  Or maybe you are a functional leader who wants to contribute your expertise in exchange for gaining a broader strategic perspective.  You may even be a CEO or chief HR officer looking for ways to improve your own company’s succession planning by getting your CEO-ready executives boardroom experience. Whether it is one of these or any other number of reasons, many of today’s senior executives would like to join a corporate board of directors. The irony is that while much has been written about the legitimate difficulties of companies finding qualified and interested directors for their boards, there are a growing number of prospective directors who would be all too happy to serve. If you are one of these prospective directors, the question is how position yourself and navigate the nuances of the director selection process to get placed on a board ».

L’auteur propose six étapes à suivre.  Lire l’article pour plus de détails.

  1. Board Bio
  2. Target List
  3. Your Interests
  4. Director Events
  5. Search Firms
  6. Not for Profits

« Board service is often a rewarding experience both professionally and personally.  There is a growing demand for dedicated directors who can guide and govern our corporations.  So if you want to be a board director and bring your expertise to bear, we offer these six steps to get you on your way.  Good luck ».

Articles reliés :

Que pouvez-vous faire pour devenir administrateur de sociétés ?


Très bon billet de James Citrin, Senior Director | Spencer Stuart, sur un sujet qui intéressera sûrement plusieurs personnes désirant décrocher un poste sur un conseil d’administration. Les diplômés et les diplômées des programmes de formation en gouvernance de sociétés, tels que le Collèges des administrateurs de sociétés (CAS), le Directors College (DC) et l’Institute of Corporate Directors (ICD), sont particulièrement invités (es) à lire ce billet d’expert, mais aussi à suivre les discussions sur son Blogue. Voici, ci-dessous, un extrait de l’article :

You Want to Be a Board Director – Now What?

« You’re a sitting chief executive officer who wants to see how another company’s board governs.  Or you’re an aspiring CEO who wants to benefit from a valuable professional development opportunity and expand your marketability.  Perhaps you are a newly retired executive who wants to stay active and connected.  Or maybe you are a functional leader who wants to contribute your expertise in exchange for gaining a broader strategic perspective.  You may even be a CEO or chief HR officer looking for ways to improve your own company’s succession planning by getting your CEO-ready executives boardroom experience. Whether it is one of these or any other number of reasons, many of today’s senior executives would like to join a corporate board of directors. The irony is that while much has been written about the legitimate difficulties of companies finding qualified and interested directors for their boards, there are a growing number of prospective directors who would be all too happy to serve. If you are one of these prospective directors, the question is how position yourself and navigate the nuances of the director selection process to get placed on a board ».

L’auteur propose six étapes à suivre.  Lire l’article pour plus de détails.

  1. Board Bio
  2. Target List 
  3. Your Interests
  4. Director Events 
  5. Search Firms
  6. Not for Profits

« Board service is often a rewarding experience both professionally and personally.  There is a growing demand for dedicated directors who can guide and govern our corporations.  So if you want to be a board director and bring your expertise to bear, we offer these six steps to get you on your way.  Good luck ».

Articles reliés :