Corporate directorship pressures continue to mount
The average annual director time commitment has increased to 235.9 hours per board, up from 218.6 hours last year, says the 2013-2014 NACD Public Company Governance Survey
November 07, 2013 at 05:20 AM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
While the annual director time for corporate board members has increased, there is higher board turnover, increased demand for IT risk knowledge, and focus on stronger talent development programs at the majority of public companies in the U.S. according to one survey.
In fact, the average annual director time commitment has increased to 235.9 hours per board, up from 218.6 hours last year, says the National Association of Corporate Directors' (NACD) 2013-2014 NACD Public Company Governance Survey, which polled 1,000 directors of public companies who shared their perspectives on the state of their boards.
The study also revealed that executive talent management and leadership development ranked fifth in priority of leading issues, a huge jump from 13th place just five years ago.
Board turnover is becoming commonplace at many enterprises, as nearly 60 percent of boards replaced or added at least one director in the last 12 months, compared to 41 percent in 2012.
“Whether it's additional regulatory activity or legislation, demands from shareholders, or scrutiny from the media and public, the pressures of corporate directorship continue to increase,” Ken Daly, NACD president and CEO said in a statement. “NACD's annual public company governance survey captures a snapshot of today's boardroom environment to enable us to better anticipate trends, develop leading practices, and inform future decisions.”
Other key findings of the survey include the following:
- Directors are most likely to use nomination by board committees (72.3 percent) than personal networks (69.9 percent) when searching for candidates to fill open board seats.
- More than 60 percent of respondents believe directors could use improvement when it comes to understanding IT risk, noting that directors have some technical knowledge.
- There is no “one-size-fits-all” approach for allocating risk oversight, though most respondents continue to assign the majority of risk oversight tasks to the audit committee.
- Directors are more content with allocating risk to the full board—nearly all (92.7 percent) directors who currently assign risk oversight to the full board believe this is the correct location.
The NACD survey is one of a recent slate of studies that have shown that regulatory requirements have increased and only become more burdensome for companies of all sizes.
For more on boardroom trends, check out InsideCounsel's coverage below:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllFatal Shooting of CEO Sets Off Scramble to Reassess Executive Security
5 minute readBen & Jerry’s Accuses Corporate Parent of ‘Silencing’ Support for Palestinian Rights
3 minute readShareholder Activists Poised to Pounce in 2025. Is Your Board Ready?
Regulatory Upheaval Is Coming. How Businesses Prepare and Respond Will Separate Winners and Losers
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250