Corporate Board Member magazines

Corporate Board Member Magazine NYSE Euronext

Board Committee Interactive
Home / Magazine / Archives 06-07 / March/April 2006 / Meet Your British Cousins

Meet Your British Cousins

from March/April 2006
by Don Morrison
They look like us, only whiter (and more male). They talk like us, only better. They share our Anglo-Saxon corporate culture, although they think they invented it. They are British directors, and they’re not a happy breed. After years of snoring through meetings and applauding management’s every whim, the members of British boards find themselves working harder than ever. They’re facing unprecedented shareholder revolts, struggling with corporate governance rules that, as Corporate Board Member has reported, are in some ways more exacting than Sarbanes-Oxley, and still earning less than their U.S. counterparts. Colonel Blimp wouldn’t recognize the place, though an American director very well might.

That, at least, is the gist of several recent governance studies from the land that gave us the limited liability company. The London-based executive search firm Whitehead Mann, for instance, surveyed 124 inside and outside board members at some of Britain’s largest companies. The directors said they’re putting in more time than ever on board duties—an average of 24 days a year, and some as many as 40—which makes life difficult for those outsiders who also have day jobs. Many U.S. board members work the same kind of hours, but for a lot more pay. This is particularly true at the 200 biggest companies, where total director compensation approaches $200,000 a year, according to Pearl Meyer & Partners. The latest biennial survey of 300 major European companies by the search firm Heidrick & Struggles International found that British directors collected about half that. Perhaps as a result, many British board members feel they’re overworked and under-rewarded. “It does seem to be a pittance,” says one unnamed U.K. director in the Whitehead Mann survey, “given the time commitment one has to put in to do the job properly.”

Ah, there’s the rub. Doing the job properly is something new for British directors, long known for their genteel ways. These days they are laboring under the lash of the Combined Code of Corporate Governance, which took effect in 2003. It requires, among many, many other things, that the jobs of chairman and chief executive be separated. So boards have been scrambling to untie those functions, with some success. While the majority of American CEOs still serve as chairmen too, most British ones don’t. The code also stipulates that half of a company’s board must consist of non-executive directors (outsiders), a serious setback for Britain’s famed old-boy network. Yet U.K. boards remain both old (pushing 60 on average) and boy (90% male).

Directors on both sides of the pond will find much that is familiar in the Whitehead Mann survey responses. The researchers asked U.K. board members what qualities make for a good—and a bad—director. Atop the “good” list is a breadth of experience, followed closely by a lack of egotism and the ability to provide independent and challenging advice. The bad director, respondents agreed, is what Whitehead Mann calls a “nodding dog,” who presumably takes up space at the table and wags his tail at appropriate moments without barking (or scratching). Also widely despised is the frustrated former CEO who constantly second-guesses management. “We had one non-exec who sat in board meetings with his calculator and challenged the calculations of the finance director,” recalled a disapproving respondent in the Whitehead Mann study. Another listed the most irritating boardroom sins: “Asking stupid questions, posturing, being rude, being late.”

Horrors! No wonder British board members are grumbling. “A lot of potential non-executive directors are deciding to move into private equity businesses because they don’t want the exposure or any potential hassles,” says Philip Hampton, chairman of the British supermarket group J Sainsbury. He should know. Hampton’s predecessor, Peter Davis, was forced out in 2004 by angry shareholders for accepting a $4.1 million bonus at a time when profits and market share were falling. This is clearly no country for nodding dogs.

Comment on issue