In Part One of our look at bank board leadership, we examined the merits and criticisms of the “Jeopardy Jerk,” Arthur Chu. He bucked the traditional game show system by board hopping with no apparent process logic. Chu deployed a perfectly allowable and extremely effective technique, yet it was criticized as a system hack because it was different, and (more to the point) other players were nearly defenseless against the strategy.
As we think about the banking industry, “hacking the system” is a very relevant leadership strategy.
Traditionally, bank boards have been comprised primarily of influential shareholders and community leaders. Since the recession, the banking landscape has experienced seismic shifts caused by new rules, regulations and significant changes in customer behavior regarding financial decisions.
A few years into the recovery, it’s clear that the banks that are thriving are those whose leadership teams represent their customer profiles and bring together diverse expertise into a unified, strategic perspective.
Consider these questions and best practices on board composition as you work to position your bank for sustainable growth and success.
A well-rounded board with fresh, unbiased perceptions about the marketplace is more likely to provide advice and oversight in ways that meet the needs of all stakeholders, including customers, employees, shareholders, and the communities you serve.
It is clear that the status quo is no longer an acceptable business model for banks. How will you respond?
If you’re already subscribed, the next installment will be delivered to you just like the rest of our content. If you aren’t, go ahead and subscribe here, so you don’t miss a thing.