This paper relies on a “trinity of menetypes” of group knowing which captures the essential decision‐making dynamics of board membership. Formal, corporate decision‐making processes require higher commitments of time and cognitive energy of directors – certainly, the requirement is of non‐executive directors to make more formal contributions to the “political” process that determines corporate commitment to appropriate courses of action. There is a fundamental shift from “managerialism” to “politicism” in the corporate dynamics of organization – a shift in “menetype” driving governance dynamics. This wholesale shift in orientation has accentuated personal and group values as key determinants of corporate efficacy. The paper proposes structural reforms to corporate/agency governance conventions, including a greater focus on performance and strategy, greater independence of more effective and extensive audit processes and a greater transparency in the nomination and remuneration of top‐executive appointments.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cutting et al. (2002) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: