In the post-pandemic environment, are some board members “phoning it in”?
The term quiet quitting has been coined by culture experts to define what we as Gen Xers and Baby Boomers used to call “phoning it in.” Meaning, someone who wasn’t quite putting in the full effort or showing up in person unless absolutely required to keep their job. This new phenomenon not surprisingly comes on the heels of a two-year work-from-home forced experiment in corporate and professional America.
As many companies face serious backlash from efforts to get employees back in the office even just a few days a week, some are caving to the pressure, while others are pushing for a return to some type of normal productivity in the office. It’s not surprising that these younger generations, used to connecting via devices and networks and platforms found the convenience of no commute and working in leisurewear attractive.
It's easy for we Gen Xers and Baby Boomers to tout the importance of working hard, being in the office, face time and networking as the secrets to getting ahead despite personal sacrifices because that’s what we had to do and what we know worked. But it may not necessarily be true for this next generation and that’s what is causing a lot of disruption to the discussion about the future of work and new models of incentives, compensation, work-life balance and benefits that no longer fit the old school mode.
I could spend hours writing about and discussing this topic. But, what I find equally interesting and worth noting is the “quiet quitting’ that may be occurring in the boardroom. The average age of a corporate director is 62 with many serving into their 70s. Some directors are still in a full-time operating role, but most are retired from their prior c-suite operating roles and now functioning as a director of one or more boards and developing a portfolio of work for multiple companies. In the last couple of years, most boards functioned primarily over zoom or other platforms and did not have in-person meetings. This derailed the momentum and rhythm for many directors in their travel schedule and management of their portfolio of work. It allowed them to experience semi-retirement as they retreated to second homes in resort-like locations.
While some have joyously embraced the return to the hustle and bustle of travel and in-person interactions, others have quietly begun to say, they are re-evaluating their priorities and what’s really worth it for them. Commercial air travel has become increasingly less convenient and more difficult changing the experience of the director. The TSA pre-check line is often longer than the regular security line. American Airlines announced it is discontinuing first class service on some flights, and Delta now limits the amount of time you can spend in their lounge. This is all occurring while airports dramatically cut flights from their schedule, delays and cancellations become more frequent and the non-business traveler becomes more and more brazen and rude. Even if some companies can budget for private travel, increasing scrutiny on carbon footprints may make that a non-starter to fly directors all over the country multiple times a year from multiple locations. The reality of business travel in the future is that it may not be as attractive or quite frankly, as fun, as it had been.
At the same time, the requirements of directors have increased dramatically including understanding more and more complex topics such as cybersecurity, technology and disruption, as well as a cultural shifts in what is valued by employees alongside increasing regulatory and liability pressures. This means directors may find the amount of time required to be prepared more demanding than in prior years.
It’s not surprising that as a massive paradigm shift is occurring in the rank and file employees that some paradigm shift would occur in the boardroom at the same time.
Board refreshment has been increasingly top of mind awareness to seek out skills that are needed in areas such as cybersecurity, technology, and human resources, as well as to meet increasing demands for diversity, but now may be a more important time than ever to really ask directors if they are committed to the needs of the organization and the role of the board. It’s important to remember, the role of the board is oversight of the leadership team and to protect the interest of shareholders and other stakeholders. It requires continuous education, continuous questioning of the status quo, and diligent preparation for robust conversations.
If you are the chair of your nominating and governance committee, consider these questions and steps:
· Have you conducted a thorough 360 review now that things are somewhat returning to “normal” to evaluate if board members remain committed to the work that is needed in the future and not the past?
o Do you have a current skills gap analysis of your board?
o Have you considered mandatory retirement or term limits?
· Are there some directors who continuously have trouble with either effectively participating remotely or traveling to attend meetings?
· Are you surveying members to determine what may work best for in-person meetings in terms of both location, travel logistics and timing?
· Have you considered planning a board retreat or offsite to strategically discuss how your board will work into the future and how “quiet quitting” may be impacting your organization from top to bottom?
· Is your CEO and leadership team getting what they need from the whole board or just a few members?
· Are you concerned about some directors being over-boarded or over-committed in an increasingly complex environment?
If you would like help in evaluating these issues, conducting a 360 review or planning an off-site retreat, please contact me at jwolfe@consultwolfe.com or 513.238.4348. If you’d like a free guide to planning an effective board retreat, I’d be happy to send one to you. I am also available for education sessions either in-person or remotely to meet your scheduling needs.
