board survey
& white papers
Global Board Survey 2024
Boards in a Darwinistic Age
2023 held major events – political as well as business – that few would have predicted. Around the world we are now witnessing wars, political dogma shifts, greater polarization, technological advances, breakthroughs in business model innovation, geopolitical turmoil, terrorism, migration flows, emerging artificial intelligence, rapidly evolving climate change, alternative facts and accusations of fake news, digitization of services and products, anti-woke movements, cybercriminals, etc. Additionally, corporate boards have never attracted more attention than what we see today; from how they are composed, to the influence they have, to how they act and perform, attention is received from the entire organization internally, all the way from the man or woman on the floor and all the way up to the C-suite, but also from politicians, public authorities , media, investors and the rest of the business community. With global supply and value chains, but with growing tendencies towards nationalism, complemented by corporate scandals, many judged by new ethical standards, and with increased investor activism, we have all the ingredients needed to put further pressure on the individual contributions to the board and the overall performance of the board. The number of operational activities and the level of detail of these activities with which the board is expected to be familiar is growing rapidly. The days when business leaders only had to worry about making money and staying away from illegalities are long gone. Today, the responsibilities and expectations of managers as well as non-managers are much more versatile and subject to significantly tighter control. This puts enormous pressure on political, public and not least business leaders. They hold the ultimate responsibility for the long-term viability of the businesses they lead – all at a time when competition can take many forms; size, speed, access to resources, and many more. Survival will only be for the fittest. Between January – February 2024, we polled our significant global network of chairmen and board members, and we are very proud to present you with the results of our Global Board Survey 2024 – Boards in a Darwinistic Age.
Global Board Survey 2021
Boards In Flux
Global Board Survey 2020
The Purposeful Board
Nordic Board Survey 2020
The Future-Proof Board
Global Board Survey 2019
Cerating Impact In And From The Boardroom
Global Board Survey 2018
Board Of The Future - How Boards Take Charge Of The Future
Global Board Survey 2017
Advancing Boards
Global Board Survey 2016
Radical Innovation and Growth
Global Board Survey 2015
Boards In A Disruptive Age
Bestyrelses-evaluering 2013
When Good is the Enemy of Great
In recent years, there has been more focus on the work of boards in general, and in its wake attention, more and more measures have appeared from shareholders as well as the press and legislators who sets demands and expectations for the work of boards. Among these measures are both hard law and soft law, which respectively require and recommend that boards prepare and report on board evaluations. In Denmark, a law has been introduced for financial companies, which requires that financial companies carries out evaluation of the board’s competences. The Committee for Good Corporate Governance recommends that (listed) companies carry out board evaluations, and individual sectors have their own recommendations for good board work, where it is also recommended that boards carry out evaluations.
BOARD NETWORK og PwC har i sommeren 2013 gennemført en spørgeskemaundersøgelse om bestyrelsesevaluering. Denne publikation gengiver resultaterne og tegner et billede af fakta, holdninger og
tendenser for arbejdet med dem.
Bestyrelsesevaluering har vundet indpas i de danske bestyrelser som et værktøj, der kan danne grundlag
for løbende forbedringer af bestyrelsens arbejde. Vores undersøgelse viser, at bestyrelserne gennemfører
evaluering for at bruge den som analyseredskab relateret til hvilke forbedringer, der bør gennemføres, og
til at identificere og beslutte hvorledes sådanne forbedringerne kan gennemføres.
Evalueringerne bruges desuden som katalysator for den interne, udviklende dialog imellem bestyrelsesmedlemmerne. En dialog som respondenterne altoverskyggende vurderer som det mest værdifulde i
evalueringsprocessen. Evalueringer er i Danmark fokuseret på det samlede bestyrelseskollektiv – således
evalueres specifikke udvalg kun i sparsomt omfang.
For de bestyrelser, der ikke gennemfører bestyrelsesevalueringer, er hovedbegrundelsen virksomhedens
ejerstruktur, i henhold til hvilken bestyrelsesevaluering ikke anses for egnet. Andre forhold, der ofte
spiller en rolle, er bestyrelsens interne uenighed om værdien af en evaluering, eller at der endnu ikke har
været tid og lejlighed til at gennemføre evaluering.
I 2012 blev der i Danmark indført lovpligtig kompetenceevaluering i de finansielle virksomheder. Det
bemærkes for en god ordens skyld, at termen ”bestyrelsesevaluering” i nærværende publikation dækker
over den betydeligt bredere form for evaluering, som udover en kompetenceafdækning også behandler
forhold som bestyrelsens interne dynamikker, samarbejdet med direktionen, etc.
Med denne undersøgelse ønsker vi at sætte spot på fakta, holdninger og tendenser blandt de bestyrelser,
der allerede gennemfører evalueringer, i håb om at samle erfaringer om, hvordan bestyrelserne kan gøre
mere af det, der bringer værdi og mindre af det, der blot er compliance.
Hvordan evaluerer bestyrelser bedst?
Bestyrelsen bør som enhver anden del af virksomheden stræbe efter at skabe mest mulig værdi for den
virksomhed, den har ansvaret for. Effektive bestyrelser er ofte meget bevidste om, hvordan bestyrelsesåret planlægges, hvordan bestyrelsestiden anvendes, både på og imellem møder, samt hvorledes de mest
optimalt udgør en strategisk sparringspartner for direktionen.
Sådanne bestyrelser er tillige bevidste om, at de for at blive endnu bedre, øge værdiskabelsen samt
udgøre en kompetent sparringspartner for direktionen til gavn for virksomheden, skal evaluere på deres
indsatser, resultater og sammensætning, herunder deres individuelle kompetencer. Dette i øvrigt helt på
linje med, at de jævnligt evaluerer direktionens indsatser og resultatskabelse, og forventer, at direktionen
tilsvarende evaluerer mellemledere og medarbejderes indsatser og resultatskabelse.