How Boards Deal with Lazy Directors

By Sana Siwolop N. Y. Times News Service | THE JOURNAL RECORD, October 27, 1999 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

How Boards Deal with Lazy Directors


Sana Siwolop N. Y. Times News Service, THE JOURNAL RECORD


Though their numbers have been under downward pressure in recent years, they are still far from an endangered species: Deadwood directors who occupy seats on corporate boards but rarely bother to attend meetings or keep abreast of company matters.

Because most companies lack any formal mechanism for regularly culling and restocking their boards, corporate governance experts say, even notoriously disengaged directors might hang on for years, routinely renominated every proxy season simply because fellow directors are loath to embarrass their own by dropping them from the proxy ballot.

Over the last decade, some companies have tried to keep their boards fresh and involved, by adopting mandatory retirement ages or imposing "term limits" of 10 or 15 years' maximum tenure. About half the companies in the Standard & Poor's 500 now have one rule or the other, according to the Investor Responsibility Research Center, a group that studies corporate governance.

While they have had some effect, though, such measures have been criticized as arbitrary and ill-aimed, removing the best directors as well as the worst.

"All too often, companies use term limits as a substitute for thorough evaluations," said Donald S. Perkins, a former chairman of Jewel Cos. who has served on a number of corporate boards.

Lately the focus has shifted to another approach, familiar to many a middle manager but still new in the clubby world of the boardroom: Performance evaluations.

Few companies have yet taken the idea as far as International Multifoods in Wayzata, Minn. The company's three-pronged policy calls for each of the company's eight directors to confidentially evaluate the board as a whole, the other seven directors individually, and themselves; the compiled evaluations are considered by the company's nominating committee when directors' three-year terms expire. Still, the effort by International Multifoods seems to represent the future.

"We're seeing two things," said Roger Raber, chief executive of the National Association of Corporate Directors. "Companies are moving more toward board evaluations, as opposed to term limits. And more are going toward a peer review process, in which board members evaluate each other individually, instead of just evaluating the board as a whole."

Promoting a healthy level of board turnover has taken on greater urgency as more companies find themselves selecting younger directors, often turning to candidates in their 40s, corporate governance experts say. Against this background, many companies cast a critical eye on mechanical solutions like term limits.

Term limits are now used by only about 8 percent of for-profit companies, but interest in director evaluations is growing, according to a recent survey of Fortune 1,000 company directors by Korn/Ferry International, a executive search firm. One in five respondents said their companies already evaluated directors individually, but 73 percent said they should.

But corporate governance experts are divided over board evaluations. Some critics say they are often conducted in ways that undermine their effectiveness.

"I see some pretty funny schemes going on at boards, where the evaluations are done as if to see who is the best-liked person in the room," said Jay Lorsch, a business professor at Harvard University who has served as a consultant to some 25 boards over the last four years.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

How Boards Deal with Lazy Directors
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?