The Hampton Alexander report published yesterday provides some useful facts and figures but the general thrust is no different from any other similar report that we have read over the years.
I've posted this in a comment thread below an article in the FT today:
-----------
Perhaps it's time to question some fundamental assumptions which underpin all these criticisms.
What exactly is the problem that increasing board gender diversity is designed to address? Companies with all male boards don't seem to be failing all over the place and there is a distinct lack of *robust* evidence to show that diverse boards perform better (anecdotes are not data and correlation does not imply causation).
Why should corporate boards be expected to reflect the diversity of the population as a whole?
Evidence that diversity among groups and teams may improve performance is frequently cited. But how far can this be applied to corporate boards which are a rather specialised type of working group with specific accountability obligations operating within a defined regulatory framework?
-----------
No comments:
Post a Comment