Making Board Evaluations Matter

Moving from a tick-box approach to a thoughtful, action-oriented process requires courage, but that leads to stronger boards, better decisions, and more resilient organisations.

- ROOPA KUDVA

BOARD EVALUATIONS are often treated as a regulatory requirement—a necessary annual exercise, usually facilitated by the company secretary or an internal HR team, quickly completed, and just as quickly forgotten.

Yet when done meaningfully, board evaluations can be powerful tools to strengthen governance, enhance performance, and deepen strategic engagement.

There is a stark difference between a perfunctory review and a genuine, reflective process. The former maintains the status quo. The latter drives improvement.

The problem with status quo

Many evaluations today are superficial. Directors fill out forms, rate performance on a numeric scale, and offer general comments. The focus often rests on individual director ratings rather than on how the board or board committees function as a collective.

Moreover, there is a strong culture of politeness in many boardrooms. Directors are hesitant to critique one another, especially in high-status or low-trust environments. This leads to a phenomenon of “polite underperformance”—where everyone is competent, but difficult issues remain unaddressed.

Another challenge is conflict avoidance. Boards are often composed of highly accomplished individuals. The assumption is that if each director is capable, the board must be effective. But governance is a team sport. It is the interplay—how directors collaborate, challenge, and support—that determines effectiveness.

What should a good evaluation cover?

An effective board evaluation goes beyond attendance and general satisfaction. It asks questions like: