“We were seeking a relationship-based advisory service focusing on a small clientele,” Ms Zahra, the company’s managing director told The Business Observer. “We are thinking more on long-term relationships; less transaction-based and thus, more relationship-based. We believe in partnering with businesses and always aim at being open, transparent and genuine in the way we work with them.”
The boards of directors of listed and regulated companies have been hardened further during these last ten years as regulators’ tentacles have reached the board rooms and company secretary offices of thriving business and financial institutions.
“My model for business is The Beatles. They were four guys who kept each other kind of negative tendencies in check. They balanced each other and the total was greater than the sum of the parts. That’s how I see business: great things in business are never done by one person, they’re done by a team of people.” Indeed, well said by Steve Jobs.
There is no alternative to heterogeneity. Different views and opinions from persons with different experience and competence enrich discussion and provide for better decision-making. People with similar views and opinions on a board of directors can fall into the trap of immobility, recycling of the same ideas year in-year out, lack of innovation in policy and strategy. Grid-lock.
A few weeks back I wrote about the millennials and the Gen Z, and how businesses and employers need to change to attract and retain them.
It is challenging times for members of board of directors of companies. Boards have never had it so hard. They are pressured by the market to have their companies giving short-term results when they understand that the business is there for the long-term. They are asked to comply with stiffer regulations, when they should be focusing on business strategy and performance. Meanwhile, they are being hounded by small shareholders and the public on the social media as their professionalism, experience and performance is being challenged by attacks that they are not doing enough, that they are being highly (or excessively) paid and that they have conflicts of interest.
