Archive for the ‘Technology’ Category

The Promise and Risk of Information and Technology at NACD Directorship Forum

May 31st, 2011 | By

Solange Charas is the president of Charas Consulting, Inc. and a senior-level human capital professional with 20-plus years of experience as corporate CHRO and consulting firm practice director. She is currently pursuing her doctor of management at Case Western Reserve. She has served as the chair of the remuneration committee for a NASDAQ-traded company.

One of the benefits of attending NACD events is the opportunity to learn from directors and executives of big-name boards. The NACD Directorship Forum held May 23-24 did not disappoint: sessions on shockproofing the board, learning from the financial crisis and finding the best leadership model for your board and company were led by board members and C-suite leaders from companies including Jet Blue, GM, Ford, AIG and Best Buy.

The session I thought most interesting from both a content and “sociological” perspective concerned the promise and risk of information and technology. I am a “device diva”—a real technology junkie—so the topic was fascinating to me and it seemed to engage the 200 or so directors in the room. The panel represented some of the best thinking in the hi-tech and communications industries, with professionals from Oracle and Levick Strategic Communications sharing interesting technology “tales.”

                                                                How familiar are you with the concept of cloud computing?

Panelists discussed cloud technology, alternatives to large-scale capital investments, security, and e-discovery. Then the talk turned to “social media.” Richard Levick asked directors to consider “who are your bloggers, tweeters and Facebook friends” resulting in participants looking at one another with raised eyebrows. Examples of Bank of America’s inadequate response to the threat of negative information disclosed by WikiLeaks and Taco Bell’s deft response to the “where’s the beef” scandal illustrated the power of social media—as opposed to traditional channels—in shaping public opinion.

Leave nothing to chance

The third and perhaps most interesting aspect of this session was the dynamic of the panelists— there was actual dissention!  The give-and-take, with each expert expressing his and her own perspective on the topics, resulted in a robust dialogue. Contrasting the other panels where there were polite “I agree with….” and “John makes a good point…” these panelists didn’t mince words and had the courage to express their dissenting opinions.   

What a treat for the audience to observe a healthy dynamic where collegiality is NOT confused with congeniality. This rich dialogue offered value to the audience—not only in content, but as a model to directors that healthy dialogue generates better outcomes. As Sydney Finkelstein and Ann C. Mooney (2003) stated in an article published in Academy of Management, the number one goal for directors is to “engage in constructive conflict,”—meaning that directors should express their diverse views. When this happens the exchange of ideas “help the board better understand issues surrounding the decision context and synthesize multiple points of view into a decision that is often superior to any individual perspective.”  

This is something for directors to think about, especially those on nominating committees. Diversity isn’t just about skin color, gender or nationality. It is about selecting directors who will promote diverse ideas and have the courage to express those ideas to generate rich and constructive dialogue. When collegiality is confused with congeniality, your board and the quality and effectiveness of the cognitive product of the board is compromised.

Read more blog posts from Solange here

To register for the NACD D100 Forum, November 8-9 at the Waldorf Astoria, NYC click here.

Technology In the Boardroom

April 29th, 2011 | By

Add another skill to the list of qualities every director should possess: technological literacy. Technology-specific issues can get short shrift in the boardroom, because most directors lack “expertise” in the field. However, there are constantly stories of the pervasive aspects of technology, an area no longer reserved for companies such as Google, Apple or Microsoft. Just this week, it was revealed that some smartphones track and collect user location, and there was a potential security breach at a popular online game platform.

It would be unfathomable for a director to ignore a discussion about the company’s financials, because they were not an “audit expert.” Technology should be viewed in the same manner. The topic of IT risk oversight has been covered recently in both this blog site, and in a recent NACD white paper, “Taming Information Technology Risk: A New Framework for Boards of Directors,” published in collaboration with Oliver Wyman. This white paper details four areas of IT risk a firm could be exposed to:

  • Competitive risk
  • Portfolio risk
  • Execution risk
  • Service & security risk

Of the four areas mentioned, recent data has placed a spotlight on the oversight of competitive risk, or the risk of competitors getting to the market faster. According to Arbitron and Edison Research, the amount of time Americans spend consuming radio, television and the Internet increased by roughly 20 percent over the past decade, from a daily average of 6 hours and 50 minutes in 2001 to a daily average of 8 hours and 11 minutes in 2011. This dramatic increase in consumer use of technology should be considered in all strategic planning, which is consistently ranked by directors as the top boardroom priority[1].

Boards are also directly experiencing the pervasive quality of technology. A recent article from the Wall Street Journal noted the increased use of videoconferencing at the boardroom level. Once avoided due to slow connections and poor visuals, Cisco Systems has improved the technology in its “telepresence,” a system that simulates in-person meetings. Many high profile boards use advanced videoconferencing for meetings, including American Express Co., Wal-Mart Stores Inc. and PepsiCo Inc. While virtual meetings are unlikely to create the collaborative dialogue created by in-person meetings, their use can supplement those in-person meetings, reduce travel expenses and potentially facilitate more international diversity in the boardroom.

Learn more about the risk areas and the right questions to ask on Wednesday, May 4 at 12:00 PM (ET) for a complimentary NACD webinar: Board/C-Suite Interaction: Skills of the IT Team


[1] According to the 2010 NACD Public Company Governance Survey

Refocusing Technology Discussions

April 8th, 2011 | By

Information technology is a fast-paced environment, and most directors are playing a game of catch up. In the past, technology was reserved for providers, such as Apple or Microsoft, or Internet leaders, such as Google or Amazon. Today, every business relies on technology through a constantly evolving list of options, such as increasing operations efficiency or social media. As expected, this increased reliance on technology entails a higher risk profile, evidenced in security breaches or system malfunctions. Despite these increased risks, recent studies have found that many boards need to refocus how they view information technology (IT).

NACD and Oliver Wyman’s Global Risk Center recently conducted a study to address the issue of IT risk oversight titled Taming Information Technology Risk. According to the survey, nearly half (47%) of directors are dissatisfied with their board’s ability to provide IT risk oversight. Almost a third of directors believed failure to properly provide IT risk oversight stemmed from insufficient expertise at the board level.

A substantial number of corporate boards feel they have not yet met the level of oversight the topic requires. A recent report from the Deloitte Center for Corporate Governance found that while directors should examine IT projects with the same level of scrutiny as any other major capital expenditure, this is rarely the case. The same report also recommended that boards add “tech-savvy directors” who can provide the board with expert oversight.

While every board member will not be an expert in IT, all directors should be well-versed on the subject and able to discuss IT risk oversight in relation to their company’s strategic planning. In Taming Information Technology Risk, six questions are provided that should be on every board’s agenda:

  1. How do you determine the strategic importance of IT to the business?
  2. How do you evaluate the evolving IT capabilities of competitors that could threaten our industry position?
  3. How do you allocate dollars across the portfolio of IT investments to ensure an efficient risk return?
  4. What trade-offs are you making in managing the IT portfolio?
  5. How are you effectively executing major IT programs?
  6. How do you ensure that a breadth of best practice capabilities and processes are in place to protect the firm from operational and security risks—both now and in the future?

The above six questions provide a foundation of the questions boards should ask regarding technology-related decisions. Directors should also take into consideration the ways technology touches their specific company when scrutinizing IT projects. Also, just asking the right questions will only get boards halfway to the finish line. Understanding what constitutes as an acceptable answer is just as critical.