News


Accelerating Diversity; Spurring Growth For Australian Industrials

September 19, 2018

Just over half of the Australian population (50.7 per cent) is female; just under half of the employee population1 is female (47 per cent).

 

Yet in Australia’s industrial sector women currently hold just 10 per cent of the line roles and 30 per cent of the functional roles in executive leadership.

 

Analysis of the financial impact of more gender diverse and inclusive teams has shown time and again that gender balanced business teams outperform gender-skewed teams in terms of sales and profits2.

A landmark study of more than 2,000 global companies conducted by Credit Suisse has also shown that firms with one or more women on the board have delivered higher average returns on equity, lower gearing, better average growth and higher price/book value multiples over the course of a six-year period3.

For many Australian industrials, improving their record on gender diversity is a clear business goal. There are frustrations that the pipeline of female employees is still slender – women are less well represented in STEM (science, technology, engineering and maths) tertiary education than men – but there are still opportunities to lift the gender diversity of Australian enterprise.

 

As the industrial practice lead with Derwent Executive I work with Boards and CEOs seeking to fill senior executive roles. I’m always keen to field as many strong women candidates as possible. To work out how it might be possible to accelerate diversity in the sector I approached a number of women who have risen through the ranks to the top of their profession to ask them to share their insights.

 

Adelle Howse for example is the ex CFO for Lattice Energy and Deputy Chairman Australian Mathematical Sciences Institute. She acknowledges that the issue isn’t confined to the industrial sector – though she says it does face additional challenges.

 

“Males have traditionally been very dominant in the industrial sector – especially engineering, construction, energy, resources. This is historic but also relates to availability of skills. Statistically about 14-16 per cent of engineering graduates are female and this hasn’t changed much in the last ten years.”


As a result, there simply isn’t a large representation of experienced women rising through the ranks in the sector, she says, and for some managers that can dissuade them from looking for women candidates that may come through a less traditional career route.

 

As Mariela Millington, CIO of Brightstar APAC notes; “Natural bias occurs in that usually you hire in the image you think the role needs to have. Almost always that image is a reflection of yourself,” she says. Since men are often the ones doing the hiring, that can lead to men being hired rather than women.


Andrea Pidcock, Executive General Manager of CSR Lightweight Systems, says that the hiring bias is compounded because male leaders’ role models have been overwhelmingly male in the past. “It leads


1 https://www.humanrights.gov.au/education/face-facts/face-facts-gender-equality-2018

2 http://gap.hks.harvard.edu/impact-gender-diversity-performance-business-teams-evidence-field-experiment

3 https://www.calstrs.com/sites/main/files/file-

attachments/csri_gender_diversity_and_corporate_performance.pdf


them to an innate belief that women are less capable, less ambitious, not as tough and not suited to the industrial environment that they themselves thrive in.”

 

The successful careers that each of these women has carved out gives lie to that belief.


Adelle Howse in any case believes the attitude is changing, especially as a new generation of industrials leaders “recognise the benefits of a diversity of experience and provide coaching and development for particular skills sets needed in the leadership roles in the industry sector,” she says.

 

That approach accelerates the march toward more diverse workplaces and sets up enterprise and individuals for greater success.

 

“Start by recruiting and promoting females into leadership positions – immediately. These females already exist. It shows other females that there is the potential to get to the leadership position,” says Howse.

While there is a way to go, Lee De Winton, CEO of Sydney Metro Airports (Bankstown & Camden) says that it’s important to recognise that although it is taking longer than expected to achieve equal opportunity, there has been progress.

 

“We have come from environments where as recently as 30 years ago in some work streams women had to leave if they were getting married or when pregnant. We are transforming decades of traditional reasonably quickly.


“Is it good enough yet? No. Now it’s time to consider how we accelerate this into a more equitable balance or representation.”

 

No one that I spoke to liked the idea of imposing quotas on the sector – but aspirational targets are seen as a way to accelerate diversity action.

 

Jayne Whitney, Chief Strategy Officer, John Holland, Director and Deputy Chairman, ISCA (Infrastructure Sustainability Council of Australia) neatly sums up the group’s feelings. “Targets are a useful tool when the benchmark is so low – but quotas have a negative connotation.”


Many senior women leaders in the sector believe that aspirational targets will prove critically important for industrials which want to really shift the dial on diversity.


Adelle Howse says that company boards should set targets and hold executive leaders to account as to why those targets cannot be met.

 

Given the mounting evidence of the financial impact that gender diverse teams deliver – it is increasingly hard to argue against the move toward greater equality.


But while targets are useful, ultimately it will be cultures that win out says Shona Fitzgerald, Managing Director of CRC Industries. “Operate an organisation based on good values as this attracts the right people and then diversity isn’t something that needs to be focused on, because it’s a given from the integrity of the people that you attract,” she says.

 

The advice and insight from these women leaders who are already at the top of their game is invaluable for forward looking, growth focused organisations.


The rewards of gender diversity are clear. Yes, the pipeline of female candidates in the industrial sector may be slender, but the opportunity to identify talented women across the enterprise and offer them the training and mentorship that would benefit them and the business is one that should never be overlooked during the recruitment and promotion process.

 

Finally, thanks to all women who engaged with me and whose views I’ll share more broadly in this series, in particular thanks to;

 

• Adelle Howse – Principal, Structuring for Performance; Deputy Chairman Australian Mathematical Sciences Institute


• Andrea Pidcock - Executive General Manager, CSR Lightweight Systems


• Gabrielle Martinovich – Director, Definitude Consulting


• Jayne Whitney - Chief Strategy Officer, John Holland; Director & Deputy Chairman, ISCA (The Infrastructure Sustainability Council of Australia)


• Jennifer Purdie - Chief Executive Officer, Adani Australia Renewables


• Lee de Winton – CEO, Sydney Metro Airports (Bankstown & Camden)


• Mariela Millington - Chief Information Officer, Brightstar APAC


• Shona Fitzgerald - Managing Director, CRC Industries


I’m hoping to add more insights over the course of this series – so please do feel free to share your insights with me at HHall@derwentexecutive.com.au


Helen Hall is a Partner at Derwent Executive

 

About Derwent 

 

Derwent (www.derwentsearch) is an established leader in Executive Search, Board Appointments and Talent Advisory. We specialise in senior executive appointments in private and listed mid-market organisations and the public sector.


With over twenty years of expertise across a range of industries and a strong regional presence, we are ideally positioned to provide high calibre talent and effective strategic guidance to help our clients build strong, dynamic and sustainable organisations.

 

Helen Hall, Partner - Sydney

 

Helen is the Partner lead in the Industrial Practice at Derwent where she has a wide breadth of exposure to executive role types from Boards, CEOs and the C-Suite. She is a passionate advocate for driving diversity, in all its complexity, into the Australian industrial sector and a strong proponent of harnessing the power of digital leadership through the sector. Prior to joining Derwent Helen spent more than 20 years in businesses working across Australia, New Zealand and Asia Pacific. 

 

She holds a Master of Marketing from Macquarie Graduate School of Management and a Bachelor of Business from Charles Sturt University.

 

For more information please contact:

 

Helen Hall + 61 2 90913283

 

Katelyn Ranpaia + 61 2 90913206

Share this Article

Recent Articles

By Lindsay Every • September 23, 2026
By most measures, this is the fastest adoption of a transformative technology in human history, and the pace itself, more than the tools, is what's testing leaders right now. The question we explored at our AI & The People event in Perth last week wasn't whether to engage with AI, it was how quickly leaders could learn to work through the ambiguity it creates – adapting their leadership style and their team's dynamics on the move, without the luxury of mastering every technical detail first. A shift which asked a lot more of leaders than most changes they've led before. We were lucky to have both Peter Tonagh , Executive Chair at Quantium, and Jacky Connolly , Chief People Officer at CBH Group, join the conversation. Five key themes stood out. The energy is there. The paradox is what happens next. Most people aren't resistant to AI, they're cautious, and the caution has more to do with job security than the technology itself. Some roles changed materially enough to bring the challenge of redeployment. For most people though, roles simply changed shape, and the job for leaders is to harness that energy rather than manage it down. Underneath that sits a harder problem. The productivity paradox. Individuals are getting faster and better at their jobs with AI, but those personal gains rarely show up as enterprise level returns. Team members without proper support will find their own workaround – bringing in their own unsanctioned tools or leaving for an organisation who gives them a better one – so the case for organisations investing properly is not really a choice. Lead it from the top. Guard it just as fast. This is an organisational problem before it's a technology one. Business models are set by leaders, not technologists, and senior people being visibly comfortable using the tools is what gives everyone else permission to engage with them. The common myth is that graduate roles are most at risk, however the real risk sits with middle management – executives will become more productive and carry more direct reports, resulting in fewer layers in between. Guardrails need to be set fast rather than perfected in advance, particularly around the risk of losing intellectual property. Starting with a small set of approved tools, and expanding as trust builds, is better than waiting for a comprehensive policy before allowing any use at all. Boards need to be brought in early too, so they understand their own obligations from the start rather than being briefed after the fact. AI tools tend to agree too readily. Adjusting the settings to instruct the tool to push back and challenge assumptions, instead of defaulting to agreement, was raised as a small fix that can help improve decision quality. Bring the whole workforce. Not just the office. AI tools in organisations work when technology and people are treated as one problem. Leaders need to understand the tools well enough to drive change through them, rather than leaving it to IT alone. Frontline and operational team members matter just as much as corporate functions: practical wins like rostering and attendance carry real weight, and leaving teams behind undermines the case for AI everywhere else in the business. There is also a real shift reshaping recruitment. Hiring is moving away from purely skills-based selection towards attributes: curiosity, critical thinking, persistence, agility, and optimism. It's a genuine move back toward classical study, backed by heavier investment in structured training to bring people onto the same page. Claim the gain. Then change how you measure people. The strongest examples of AI delivering enterprise value tend to be simple and specific – one tool that is purposefully built and applied across the organisation, is better than everyone building their own individual version of the same thing. But individual productivity gains don’t redirect themselves. Organisations need to actively claim the time being freed up and decide what it's used for, rather than leaving the decision to individuals. That same discipline needs to extend to how performance is measured. Early adopters should be rewarded for bringing others along and sharing what they’ve learned, not just for their own output. A cost-out mentality, or pitting people against each other, will corrode culture quickly. Redesign the work. Don’t just hand out the toolkit. The most common mistake organisations make is retooling an existing process rather than redesigning the work itself. Give someone an AI tool without rethinking their role, and the result is usually chaos, not efficiency. The real gains come from pairing someone who understands the AI tools with someone who deeply understands the work, then letting them rebuild roles and workflows together from first principles. New competitors are already emerging built exactly this way – a key consideration for any organisations still only automating. One example was given of a leader building a personal "digital twin", an AI trained specifically on their tone, feedback style, and decision-making patterns. It was developed over approximately 200 hours, though the benefit was felt within the first couple of hours of use. Six leadership principles had already been documented; the AI was then used to interview and draw out roughly 30 more. The tool is now used for communications, coaching a wider team, and personally – including when weighing a difficult decision while tired. The organisations that get this right won't be the ones with the best AI. They'll be the ones whose leaders go first – closing the gap between individual and enterprise gains, setting guardrails fast, bringing the whole workforce with them, and redesigning the work rather than just the toolkit. _________________________________________________________________________ Our thanks to Lindsay Every , Group Managing Partner at Derwent, for hosting the morning, and to Peter and Jacky for such generous, on-the-ground insight into what AI adoption looks like. A special thanks to Julie Colvin , Managing Partner – Perth, and our Perth team for their support in bringing this event to life. Continue the conversation For further insights or to explore how Derwent can support your organisation's approach to AI and workforce transformation, connect with our team at perth@derwentsearch.com.au To register your interest in future Derwent events, please reach out to us at events@derwentsearch.com.au .
By Michelle Gardiner • August 19, 2026
The boardroom has changed. Permanently. The issues filling board agendas today are not temporary disruptions. They are the operating environment. AI, cyber risk, geopolitical instability, regulation, climate exposure and cost volatility are reshaping how organisations compete, invest and make decisions. For boards, the expectations have changed. Directors are being asked to understand more, engage more deeply and bring increasingly relevant experience to the table. Regulators, investors and other stakeholders are also looking more closely at whether boards are equipped for what lies ahead. The question is no longer simply whether a board is well governed. It is whether the board has the right mix of capability, judgement and adaptability to lead the organisation into its next chapter. The capability conversation is changing Credentials and experience remain important, but they are no longer enough on their own. Curiosity, adaptability and a willingness to keep learning are becoming equally valuable. AI is a clear example. Directors do not need to become technologists, but they do need enough understanding to ask informed questions about risk, ethics, data, accountability and return on investment. Cyber security and data governance present a similar challenge. These issues now sit firmly within board accountability. Scenario planning, crisis preparedness and understanding where the organisation’s exposures lie are no longer occasional agenda items. They are part of the boards regular rhythm. Renewal cannot wait for a vacancy Strong board renewal starts with future strategy. What capabilities will be required over the next five to ten years? Which risks will become more material? Where does the board need deeper commercial, functional or sector experience? Which perspectives may be missing? These questions are more useful than simply asking whose term is ending next. The most effective boards are moving beyond static skills matrices and periodic succession discussions. They are treating board composition as a dynamic capability plan that evolves alongside the organisation. They are refreshing skills matrices against future strategy, building learning agendas across AI, cyber, ESG, risk and geopolitics, reviewing committee structures and linking succession to capability rather than tenure alone. They are also paying closer attention to board dynamics. A technically capable board can still underperform when trust is low, challenge is poorly handled or directors struggle to work together under pressure. Constructive challenge, sound judgement and the ability to listen, learn and adapt are central to effective governance. The briefs are changing Across Derwent’s Board practice, we are seeing more mandates where recent sector and functional experience is a primary driver of selection. Boards are seeking contemporary expertise in areas including technology and AI governance, audit and risk, renewables and infrastructure, capital allocation and mergers and acquisitions. The profile of who is considered “board-ready” is therefore broadening. Traditional governance experience remains valuable, but boards increasingly need directors who bring current knowledge, diverse perspectives and the ability to contribute to new and fast-moving conversations. Board search and succession planning are not simply about filling a vacant seat. They are about building a board that is ready for the future of the organisation. The strongest boards will be those that renew with intent – bringing together the experience, behaviours and perspectives required not only for today’s agenda, but for the decade ahead. ___________________________________________________________________________ If you're reviewing your board's composition, capability, or succession planning, reach out to Michelle Gardiner , Managing Partner – Board Practice, or contact us here . We'd welcome the conversation. Derwent brings together executive search, interim solutions, and board search, partnering with your organisation to find and connect the right high-impact talent to support your leadership needs, now and into the future.
By Lindsay Every • May 25, 2026
Every leader in the room on Tuesday 5 May had something in common: they are being asked to guide their organisations through a transformation they are still learning to understand themselves. That shared reality – not a technology problem, but a leadership one – set the tone for our AI & The People breakfast in Melbourne, where senior executives gathered to examine what AI transformation actually requires of organisations, their people functions, and their leaders. The internet took decades to reshape business. AI is compressing similar changes into years, sometimes months, and waiting for certainty is not an option. We were privileged to have Peter Tonagh and Jenny Bryant join us as guest speakers – both navigating this transformation firsthand, not observing it from a distance. Five themes shaped the conversation. This is a leadership moment – not a technology decision AI is not primarily a question of which tools to buy. It is a question of how value gets created in an organisation, and who takes responsibility for leading that shift. The organisations pulling ahead are not the ones that have AI figured out – they are the ones learning to experiment intelligently while others hesitate. The most effective leaders are approaching this as conductors of human-AI teams: setting direction, making judgement calls, and ensuring AI amplifies their team's capabilities rather than displacing their critical thinking. That requires adaptive leadership, evolving cultural awareness, and a genuine commitment to bringing people with them through the change. This also reframes where accountability sits within organisations. AI transformation is not an IT project. It is a workforce capability shift – which means HR, learning and development, and operational leaders need to be at the centre of it. Adoption is the constraint – not capability When senior leaders use AI visibly in their own work – for writing, analysis, and decision-making – adoption accelerates across the organisation. Where leaders delegate it to an innovation team, uptake stalls. The tone is set from the top. AI capability is advancing well ahead of organisational uptake. Most businesses already have access to powerful tools but are significantly underutilising them. The gap is not about access or functionality – it is about behaviour, confidence, and whether AI has been genuinely embedded into daily workflows. Many organisations are still treating AI as a procurement decision when it is, in reality, a usage problem. When AI tools are positioned as specialist or optional, adoption stays low and uneven. When they are treated as standard infrastructure – available to everyone, expected to be used, as commonplace as email – adoption normalises quickly. The organisation that emerges looks different As individuals become more capable with AI support, the rationale for traditional management layers is shifting. Where a manager's primary function has been information aggregation and reporting – and AI can do much of that work – the case for that layer weakens. This does not mean fewer leaders. It means leaders operating with broader remits, and decision-making moving closer to the front line. The nature of the work itself is changing too. As AI absorbs routine, process-driven tasks, roles are becoming more focused on judgement, problem definition, creativity, and communication. That shift is not straightforward – the cognitive load on people can increase, and organisations need to be realistic about supporting teams through it. As AI tools become widely available, competitive advantage is shifting to how deeply they are integrated with internal data, knowledge systems, and the specific context of the business. The proprietary knowledge organisations hold becomes more valuable, not less, when AI is properly grounded in it. That grounding requires deliberate effort and consideration – providing AI with the context of the organisation's actual situation, its people, its way of working. The organisations doing this well are building human intelligence into their models, not just deploying generic tools and expecting meaningful results. Beyond organisational structure, AI is also changing how people functions operate in practice. Leaders are using AI to support coaching conversations, sharpen performance management, and improve the quality of feedback to their teams. Used well, AI does not replace those human interactions – it helps leaders show up better in them. Build broadly before you narrow Rather than concentrating effort on a small number of high-impact use cases, the organisations making the most progress are enabling broad, distributed adoption. Hundreds of small improvements across individuals and teams compound into significant productivity gains – individually modest, collectively meaningful. The practical approach: create the conditions for open experimentation without over-structuring it early. Allow teams to test different tools, discover what’s possible for the whole business through different perspectives, styles and responsibilities, share what they are learning, and let value emerge before formalising investment decisions. More mature organisations are beginning to focus on a small number of enterprise-wide priorities – customer experience, supply chain, and contact centres among them – but they arrived there through exploration, not by picking their bets upfront. Explore widely, then narrow with evidence. Talent strategies are evolving – and so is the baseline Hiring is shifting toward the attributes that enable individuals to keep pace with change: curiosity, critical thinking, learning agility, and resilience. Technical skills are increasingly table stakes. The differentiator is how quickly someone can learn, unlearn, and relearn as tools and roles continue to evolve. Building that capability internally is more scalable than chasing scarce external talent. The organisations making progress are treating AI literacy the way organisations treated digital literacy a decade ago – as a baseline expectation built through training, coaching, and everyday use, rather than a specialism held by a small number of experts. The conversation was a reminder that the leaders thriving through this period are not waiting for certainty. They are turning uncertainty into opportunity – experimenting intelligently, bringing their people on the journey with them, and building AI fluency from the inside out across the whole workforce. Our thanks to Lindsay Every , Group Managing Partner at Derwent, for hosting the morning, and to Peter and Jenny for sharing their experience and expertise with such honesty and depth. Continue the conversation For further insights or to explore how Derwent can support your organisation's approach to AI and workforce transformation, connect with our team at melbourne@derwentsearch.com.au To register your interest in future Derwent events, please reach out to us at events@derwentsearch.com.au .
Show More
By Lindsay Every • September 23, 2026
By most measures, this is the fastest adoption of a transformative technology in human history, and the pace itself, more than the tools, is what's testing leaders right now. The question we explored at our AI & The People event in Perth last week wasn't whether to engage with AI, it was how quickly leaders could learn to work through the ambiguity it creates – adapting their leadership style and their team's dynamics on the move, without the luxury of mastering every technical detail first. A shift which asked a lot more of leaders than most changes they've led before. We were lucky to have both Peter Tonagh , Executive Chair at Quantium, and Jacky Connolly , Chief People Officer at CBH Group, join the conversation. Five key themes stood out. The energy is there. The paradox is what happens next. Most people aren't resistant to AI, they're cautious, and the caution has more to do with job security than the technology itself. Some roles changed materially enough to bring the challenge of redeployment. For most people though, roles simply changed shape, and the job for leaders is to harness that energy rather than manage it down. Underneath that sits a harder problem. The productivity paradox. Individuals are getting faster and better at their jobs with AI, but those personal gains rarely show up as enterprise level returns. Team members without proper support will find their own workaround – bringing in their own unsanctioned tools or leaving for an organisation who gives them a better one – so the case for organisations investing properly is not really a choice. Lead it from the top. Guard it just as fast. This is an organisational problem before it's a technology one. Business models are set by leaders, not technologists, and senior people being visibly comfortable using the tools is what gives everyone else permission to engage with them. The common myth is that graduate roles are most at risk, however the real risk sits with middle management – executives will become more productive and carry more direct reports, resulting in fewer layers in between. Guardrails need to be set fast rather than perfected in advance, particularly around the risk of losing intellectual property. Starting with a small set of approved tools, and expanding as trust builds, is better than waiting for a comprehensive policy before allowing any use at all. Boards need to be brought in early too, so they understand their own obligations from the start rather than being briefed after the fact. AI tools tend to agree too readily. Adjusting the settings to instruct the tool to push back and challenge assumptions, instead of defaulting to agreement, was raised as a small fix that can help improve decision quality. Bring the whole workforce. Not just the office. AI tools in organisations work when technology and people are treated as one problem. Leaders need to understand the tools well enough to drive change through them, rather than leaving it to IT alone. Frontline and operational team members matter just as much as corporate functions: practical wins like rostering and attendance carry real weight, and leaving teams behind undermines the case for AI everywhere else in the business. There is also a real shift reshaping recruitment. Hiring is moving away from purely skills-based selection towards attributes: curiosity, critical thinking, persistence, agility, and optimism. It's a genuine move back toward classical study, backed by heavier investment in structured training to bring people onto the same page. Claim the gain. Then change how you measure people. The strongest examples of AI delivering enterprise value tend to be simple and specific – one tool that is purposefully built and applied across the organisation, is better than everyone building their own individual version of the same thing. But individual productivity gains don’t redirect themselves. Organisations need to actively claim the time being freed up and decide what it's used for, rather than leaving the decision to individuals. That same discipline needs to extend to how performance is measured. Early adopters should be rewarded for bringing others along and sharing what they’ve learned, not just for their own output. A cost-out mentality, or pitting people against each other, will corrode culture quickly. Redesign the work. Don’t just hand out the toolkit. The most common mistake organisations make is retooling an existing process rather than redesigning the work itself. Give someone an AI tool without rethinking their role, and the result is usually chaos, not efficiency. The real gains come from pairing someone who understands the AI tools with someone who deeply understands the work, then letting them rebuild roles and workflows together from first principles. New competitors are already emerging built exactly this way – a key consideration for any organisations still only automating. One example was given of a leader building a personal "digital twin", an AI trained specifically on their tone, feedback style, and decision-making patterns. It was developed over approximately 200 hours, though the benefit was felt within the first couple of hours of use. Six leadership principles had already been documented; the AI was then used to interview and draw out roughly 30 more. The tool is now used for communications, coaching a wider team, and personally – including when weighing a difficult decision while tired. The organisations that get this right won't be the ones with the best AI. They'll be the ones whose leaders go first – closing the gap between individual and enterprise gains, setting guardrails fast, bringing the whole workforce with them, and redesigning the work rather than just the toolkit. _________________________________________________________________________ Our thanks to Lindsay Every , Group Managing Partner at Derwent, for hosting the morning, and to Peter and Jacky for such generous, on-the-ground insight into what AI adoption looks like. A special thanks to Julie Colvin , Managing Partner – Perth, and our Perth team for their support in bringing this event to life. Continue the conversation For further insights or to explore how Derwent can support your organisation's approach to AI and workforce transformation, connect with our team at perth@derwentsearch.com.au To register your interest in future Derwent events, please reach out to us at events@derwentsearch.com.au .
By Michelle Gardiner • August 19, 2026
The boardroom has changed. Permanently. The issues filling board agendas today are not temporary disruptions. They are the operating environment. AI, cyber risk, geopolitical instability, regulation, climate exposure and cost volatility are reshaping how organisations compete, invest and make decisions. For boards, the expectations have changed. Directors are being asked to understand more, engage more deeply and bring increasingly relevant experience to the table. Regulators, investors and other stakeholders are also looking more closely at whether boards are equipped for what lies ahead. The question is no longer simply whether a board is well governed. It is whether the board has the right mix of capability, judgement and adaptability to lead the organisation into its next chapter. The capability conversation is changing Credentials and experience remain important, but they are no longer enough on their own. Curiosity, adaptability and a willingness to keep learning are becoming equally valuable. AI is a clear example. Directors do not need to become technologists, but they do need enough understanding to ask informed questions about risk, ethics, data, accountability and return on investment. Cyber security and data governance present a similar challenge. These issues now sit firmly within board accountability. Scenario planning, crisis preparedness and understanding where the organisation’s exposures lie are no longer occasional agenda items. They are part of the boards regular rhythm. Renewal cannot wait for a vacancy Strong board renewal starts with future strategy. What capabilities will be required over the next five to ten years? Which risks will become more material? Where does the board need deeper commercial, functional or sector experience? Which perspectives may be missing? These questions are more useful than simply asking whose term is ending next. The most effective boards are moving beyond static skills matrices and periodic succession discussions. They are treating board composition as a dynamic capability plan that evolves alongside the organisation. They are refreshing skills matrices against future strategy, building learning agendas across AI, cyber, ESG, risk and geopolitics, reviewing committee structures and linking succession to capability rather than tenure alone. They are also paying closer attention to board dynamics. A technically capable board can still underperform when trust is low, challenge is poorly handled or directors struggle to work together under pressure. Constructive challenge, sound judgement and the ability to listen, learn and adapt are central to effective governance. The briefs are changing Across Derwent’s Board practice, we are seeing more mandates where recent sector and functional experience is a primary driver of selection. Boards are seeking contemporary expertise in areas including technology and AI governance, audit and risk, renewables and infrastructure, capital allocation and mergers and acquisitions. The profile of who is considered “board-ready” is therefore broadening. Traditional governance experience remains valuable, but boards increasingly need directors who bring current knowledge, diverse perspectives and the ability to contribute to new and fast-moving conversations. Board search and succession planning are not simply about filling a vacant seat. They are about building a board that is ready for the future of the organisation. The strongest boards will be those that renew with intent – bringing together the experience, behaviours and perspectives required not only for today’s agenda, but for the decade ahead. ___________________________________________________________________________ If you're reviewing your board's composition, capability, or succession planning, reach out to Michelle Gardiner , Managing Partner – Board Practice, or contact us here . We'd welcome the conversation. Derwent brings together executive search, interim solutions, and board search, partnering with your organisation to find and connect the right high-impact talent to support your leadership needs, now and into the future.
More Posts