Title: The validity of measuring director and board performance: continuum or categorisation?

Authors: Susan P. Jauncey, David N. Moseley-Greatwich

Addresses: Global Board Consulting Pty Ltd., Level 57, MLC Centre, Martin Place, Sydney, 2000, Australia. ' Global Board Consulting Pty Ltd., Level 57, MLC Centre, Martin Place, Sydney, 2000, Australia

Abstract: This paper investigated the effects, ramifications and limitations of categorising and labelling Directors and Boards when measuring or evaluating performance. According to Weiner (1982) labelling can have a profound impact on a person|s life, leading to stigmas, reputation bias, prejudice or discrimination which can adversely impact Director and Board performance. Labelling Directors| behavioural traits can lead to the exaggeration of behaviours and lead fellow Directors or shareholders to have preconceived expectations about Directors. This study hypothesised that measurement of Directors and Boards should be measured on a continuum and remain fluid. Fluid measurement takes into account all aspects of a Directors behaviour, circumstances and situational impacts, without categorisation or judgement. Results suggest Directors feel more confident in their ability to perform as Directors and evidence a greater state of preparedness and readiness for change. Findings are discussed in terms of the impacts for Directors, decision-making ability and Board performance.

Keywords: board performance; board measurement; board evaluation; director performance; director evaluation; director assessment; director behaviour; board dynamics; effective decision making; boards; directors; performance measurement; performance evaluation; corporate governance.

DOI: 10.1504/IJBGE.2007.014317

International Journal of Business Governance and Ethics, 2007 Vol.3 No.3, pp.262 - 273

Published online: 01 Jul 2007 *

Full-text access for editors Access for subscribers Purchase this article Comment on this article