To remain effective, today’s directors must redefine governance itself. It is no longer enough to track outcomes; we must expand accountability to examine the very processes, biases and power dynamics that shape our decisions.
The data suggests we have work to do. For the first time ever, a prominent annual survey of corporate directors found that more than half of directors believe someone on their board should be replaced. This “status quo” isn’t working—not for organizations, and certainly not for directors themselves. Almost 90 percent of those surveyed for PwC’s 2025 Annual Corporate Directors Survey said they can take specific actions to increase effectiveness, whether it’s more training regarding key issues or more strongly encouraging innovation. A full third mentioned strengthening relationships among board members. After all, strangers don’t tend to make for effective team players.
A board that operates with courage and resists groupthink is one that fully leverages its directors’ expertise for the benefit of all stakeholders. While CEOs are responsible for setting the governance culture, boards only rise to meet clear expectations and bold leadership. I believe directors want to actively serve and engage in difficult discussions and bring key questions and real answers to meetings—but they rarely achieve excellence on their own.
As the CEO of the Colorado Women’s Chamber of Commerce, I’ve invested a lot of time working with my board to make it more engaged and accountable, and we’ve had some fun along the way. Sure, non-profits and for-profits differ, but improving board service should be a goal for every organization.
• Board development and management: Start by looking at who’s on the board, who’s not and how that makeup came about. Although it’s important to have big names on your board, having the right skills is just as important. Ascertain what strategic goals your board can help achieve. If, for example, you know that you’re going to move to a new building in five years, you might want to have construction or project management skills on your board. Create a matrix of skill sets the board needs—communications, finance, legal—and consult it every time there’s an opening. And there should be scheduled one-on-one check-ins, especially with newer members, to address problems early, realign interest and get feedback.
• Mission moments: Make time at board meetings to remember the mission at hand and why everyone agreed to sign on in the first place. At every meeting I invite a stakeholder to attend who shares how the organization has impacted them and answers questions from board members about how they experience the organization. It can be an investor, a partner or a program participant. We recently had a corporate member come in and when she was asked what we could do better, she lamented the lack of professional development opportunities for female co-workers. Board members immediately saw the revenue potential of creating a conference that fit squarely with our mission. This approach encourages energy and interactions that spark creativity, new ideas and unexpected opportunities.
• Listen and learn: Pay attention to who’s talking at board meetings and who’s not. What subjects cause the most conversation and which end in silence? Encourage questions and be specific: Outline the kinds of questions you want board members to consider in making more informed decisions. For my board the most silence was around finance. So instead of just reproducing the P&L, we added a layer of commentary to be more transparent and to spark dialogue. Like most people, directors need to feel safe and supported and empowered to have robust conversations.
• Driving a better kind of consensus: I use a modified version of the “fist-to-five” methodology to drive board alignment. In traditional fist-to-five voting, team members raise their hand showing anywhere from a fist (firm opposition) to five fingers (strong agreement), giving an instant read on where everyone stands. I’ve adapted this approach by making it a dynamic consensus-building tool rather than just a vote. At board meetings, everyone starts with five fingers raised. We then work through critical decision checkpoints: Do we have enough information to decide? One finger down. Any remaining questions? Another finger down. We continue through alignment filters: Is this congruent with our mission, vision and values? Does it advance our strategic plan? Fingers come down as we achieve clarity on each. A roomful of fists means we’ve reached genuine consensus and are ready to vote. Fingers still up tell us exactly where we need more discussion before moving forward.
• Retention, attrition and everything in between: Obviously one of a board’s big responsibilities is to ensure that top management is doing its job. The director’s responsibility is to dig down when problems surface. For example, it’s not enough that they know that attrition is high, but why. The board needs to hear who is leaving, if certain departments are being drained and whether it’s across the board. Companies need to pop the hood, so to speak, because these are not questions that boards typically ask. And directors can’t help solve problems they don’t know about.
It’s all about creating high cultures of accountability. The board’s role is clear: support the organization’s mission, raise its profile through strategic networking and visibility, and secure the resources it needs to succeed. But even top-notch directors can use some assistance and extra oomph in owning their work.
