62. Does ”Representation” in the Boardroom Matter?

SCRIPT: Back in episode 20 I talked a little bit about boardroom representation and quotas. The point I made at the time is that a single boardroom can’t have representatives from every demographic or stakeholder group that’s affected by the organization’s actions. The only way to do it would be to have a MASSIVE and constantly shifting board – which would be good for nobody. But this raises an interesting question about representation in boardrooms, or having one or more person on the board who can speak directly from an external stakeholder’s perspective. How much does it matter? On the one hand stakeholder representatives are a shortcut – they bring the stakeholder directly into the conversation so boards can ask questions and gain insights in real time. On the other hand, representation introduces some sticky challenges. The most obvious one being conflicts of interest, where a director – let’s say they represent a large shareholder – is obviously going to struggle at times to distinguish between their duties as a board member and their duties to the shareholder they represent. Another tricky issue is that one person can never fully or accurately represent a group. You know, the frustrating tendency to imagine that an individual should be able to speak on behalf of their entire race or gender, for example. Now, I’m not trying to say that representation is somehow sinister. But anyone who’s been in a representative boardroom will tell you: plopping a stakeholder’s delegate onto the board is no substitute for active, ongoing organizational engagement with the stakeholder as a whole.