LinkedIn Twitter YouTube Facebook Search

The 2017 Non-Executive Directors’ Association Debate - The Debate Report

Monday 15 October 2018

The 2017 Non-Executive Directors’ Association Debate - The Debate Report

The Debate

The Non-Executive Directors’ Association (‘NEDA’) in association with Smith & Williamson ran a formal debate that questioned whether board performance evaluation lacks real purpose and conviction with directors too often ending up patting themselves on the back rather than putting the boardroom under the microscope.

The Debate motion was:

" This house believes that board performance evaluation is failing to improve effectiveness in the boardroom "

The Chairman

 Barry Gamble, an experienced Chairman of debates and of companies 

The Debaters

Proposing the motion:

  • Sharon Constancon, CEO, Governance specialists, Genius Methods; seconded by
  • Guy Wilson, Independent NED Fresnillo plc

Opposing the motion:

  • Barbara Moorhouse, NED, Balfour Beatty plc, Microgen plc and Idox plc; seconded by
  • Ian Davies, NED, Harvey Nash plc and BMT Group. Visiting fellow Cranfield University

The end-result

The debating teams were energised by a pre-debate indicative vote by a packed audience of 64% FOR the Motion. By the time the debaters and many participants from the floor had provided their insight and had their say 52% were AGAINST which defeated the motion. Some doubt was certainly sown with 5% of the vote abstaining. What could have been considered a rather dry topic proved to be a ‘hot potato’ and a lively debate ensued.

Read how the debate unfolded here

The Non-Executive Directors’ Association (‘NEDA’) in association with Smith & Williamson ran a formal debate that questioned whether board performance evaluation lacks real purpose and conviction with directors too often ending up patting themselves on the back rather than putting the boardroom under the microscope