Board Buddies Should Come From Outside the Board Too

Board Buddies Should Come From Outside the Board Too

A the Wall Street Journal last month, Joann Lublin examined an emerging trend of boards using a buddy system that pairs new members with more experienced mentors to help them “figure out the boardroom’s cultural norms, power brokers—and even the right place to sit.” Companies using this technique include Cisco, Foot Locker, Nasdaq, and Applied Materials, and a 2016 survey by the National Association of Corporate Directors found that 33 out of 296 US Companies with orientation programs for new directors were assigning senior members to mentor them.

This buddy system, corporate governance experts told Lublin, was “virtually unheard of” five years ago but is growing increasingly common, with one expert predicting it could be in use at 50 Fortune 500 companies by 2020.

This may be in response to recent reports on board struggles, including a survey last year finding that many directors had negative perceptions of their boards. Some of the shortcomings identified in the survey include boards not bringing in relevant talent and directors not giving each other honest feedback. Based on our research at CEB, now Gartner, we have argued that the head of HR is perfectly positioned to step in and support the board with its current talent challenges.

Dissecting the goal of the buddy system, which is to acclimate new board members, we find further reason to advocate for heads of HR to increase their involvement with the integration of new board members. In their role, CHROs are responsible for talent and culture, critical areas for a new board member who needs to become familiar with an organization quickly. And this is not going unnoticed by organizations, as nearly 30 percent of CHROs tell us they are more responsible for onboarding board members now than they were three years ago. (CEB Corporate Leadership Council members can see the full results of our 2017 CHRO survey here.)

Read more

Only Half of Eligible UK Companies Using Apprenticeship Levy Funds

Only Half of Eligible UK Companies Using Apprenticeship Levy Funds

Only about half of the companies eligible to use funds from the UK’s apprentice levy, which came into effect this April, to pay for training programs have taken advantage of this option, the latest official figures show. And this is raising concerns that businesses may be “writing off the apprenticeship levy as a tax,” Emily Burt writes for People Management:

Just 10,500 apprenticeship service accounts were registered on the system at the end of August, according to the official figures, falling short of the estimated 19,150 levy-paying companies eligible to use the service. …

Elizabeth Crowley, skills adviser at the CIPD, said the government must do more to make sure employers were actively engaging with the levy: “In our view the government needs to be doing more work to ensure employers are making a choice in not using the levy, instead of being unaware of it. It is equally important that if there is an underspend, the funds are ring-fenced and used for supporting employer training, as there is a danger it could simply go back into the government’s coffer, and not be used to increase skills training and investment in the UK economy.”

Among those organizations that are using apprenticeship levy funds, many are using them in unexpected ways.

Read more

There’s No One Way to Become a CEO

There’s No One Way to Become a CEO

In fact, Neil Irwin writes in an in-depth report for the New York Times, it’s increasingly a requirement for prospective chief executives to chart a winding course in their careers:

To get a job as a top executive, new evidence shows, it helps greatly to have experience in as many of a business’s functional areas as possible. A person who burrows down for years in, say, the finance department stands less of a chance of reaching a top executive job than a corporate finance specialist who has also spent time in, say, marketing. Or engineering. Or both of those, plus others. However, there is still such a thing as too much variety: Switching industries has a negative correlation with corporate success, which may speak to the importance of building relationships and experience within an industry. Switching between companies within an industry neither helps nor hurts in making it to a top job.

These are some of the big findings in a new study of 459,000 onetime management consultants by the social network LinkedIn. Experience in one additional functional area improved a person’s odds of becoming a senior executive as much as three years of extra experience. And working in four different functions had nearly the same impact as getting an M.B.A. from a top-five program. … Similarly, Burning Glass, a firm that scours millions of job listings to detect labor market trends, has found a surge in demand for what it calls hybrid jobs, incorporating expertise in, for example, both technology and finance. And researchers have found that M.B.A. holders with a variety of experiences get more offers and higher bonuses from investment banks than those with narrower experience.

Read more