Turbocharging your board assessment: have your performance evaluation initiatives run out of gas? Here is what some of the best boards are doing to rev up the value of this exercise.

• Author: Behan, Beverly
• Position: DIRECTOR EVALUATION

BOARD ASSESSMENTS are mandatory at all NYSE-listed companies. And many other organizations--even private companies and not-for-profit organizations--have also adopted this "best practice" of conducting an annual review of the performance of the board and its committees.

Everybody's doing it.

Problem is, most of the time this annual review consists of nothing more than a "box-ticking" exercise that may have been interesting and even effective the first year or two that the board adopted it. But now, the annual survey has run out of gas and is having only marginal impact in terms of generating useful ideas to genuinely enhance the board's effectiveness.

So, what are America's best boards doing to turbocharge their annual board assessment process?

Changing the lens: interviews and focus groups

Looking at the board's performance through the same "survey lens" year after year is not only monotonous, it simply doesn't provide enough textured data to facilitate a robust discussion of the key issues that could genuinely help a board move from "good to great." Far more useful feedback is typically generated by giving directors an opportunity to express their points of view by talking about the issues instead of circling a number from 1 to 5 with a few write-in comments.

Structured director interviews are without a doubt the most constructive approach to board assessments, both in terms of gathering the insights and perspectives of participants and in terms of the far richer pool of data that can be collected from a confidential interview process. Typically, the process involves confidential one-on-one interviews using a structured interview protocol that covers all key parameters of board effectiveness. The protocol can be tailored to gather specific data on key issues the board may be working on (such as succession planning or adding new skills to the board).

Interviews can be conducted either in person or on the phone. While one-on-ones are often preferable, experienced interviewers can typically generate very good feedback from phone interviews--limiting costs and facilitating easier scheduling.

Using an experienced third party to conduct the interviews inevitably surfaces different issues (one might argue "the real issues") than a process whereby interviews are conducted by a board member, such as a lead director or general counsel.

Directors typically find the interview process more engaging than a survey, and the results yield far more...