Skip to content

28 January, 2023

Subscribe Advertise About Us
  • My Account
  • Register
  • Log In
  • Log Out

Board Agenda

  • Governance
  • Strategy
  • Risk
  • Ethics
  • News
    • Categories

      • View All
      • Board Moves
    • stakeholder governance

      Threat to stakeholder governance from Twitter sale ‘overstated’

      Academics and experts argue stakeholder governance will always come second while the law puts the...

    • Davos resilience News round-up: this week in governance

      Lessons from Davos; companies risk sliding back on ethical practices; economics affects everyone; Sir John...

    • audit reform UK Audit reform in the UK risks ‘losing momentum’

      The Financial Reporting Council still awaits the proposed new statutory powers that would allow it...

  • Insight
    • Categories

      • View all
      • Governance
      • Strategy
      • Risk
      • Ethics
      • Board Expertise
      • finance
      • Technology
    • climate litigation

      Climate litigation: how 2022 will shape 2023

      This past year saw a rise in climate litigation, with a focus on the commercial...

    • value whistleblowing

      Why we need to value whistleblowing

      Encouraging staff to speak up and stop harm can reduce legal and reputational risk—both for...

    • HR corporate trust

      HR: How to build employee trust in corporate culture

      The right HR director is essential to lead on a culture that gets the best...

  • Comment
      • View all
    • A week of business moving to the centre of human rights

      A week of events signals the initiatives underway to have companies play a central role...

    • audit reform IIA Why we need audit reform right now

      There is an "urgent need" for reform to the audit landscape as well as internal...

    • climate change energy crisis Sustainability and climate change: the other energy crisis

      The world is addicted to cheap energy. We need to admit this and have the...

  • Interviews
      • View All Interviews
      • Podcasts
      • Webinars
    • Board priorities 2023 Board priorities 2023: tact, trust and transparency

      We asked key figures what would help boards this year. The answers ranged from 'smarter...

    • Group of investors/shareholders in glass building Climate issues likely to figure prominently at next year’s AGMs

      A recent webinar heard that say-on-climate voting is expected to rise, while ESG remains a...

    • NEDs role NEDs ‘needed more than ever’ in times of uncertainty

      The non-executive director’s role is to both challenge and listen to management, agreed the panel...

  • Careers
      • View all
      • Selection
      • Board Moves
    • NED recruitment News round-up: this week in governance

      Your country needs NEDs; governance does not compute; financial firms get more women on board;...

    • HR corporate trust HR: How to build employee trust in corporate culture

      The right HR director is essential to lead on a culture that gets the best...

    • powerful CEOs Boards want powerful CEOs in tough times

      Single-minded chief executives have greater staying ability when business conditions are uncertain, research finds

  • Resource Centre
      • White Paper Downloads
      • Book Reviews
      • Corporate & Advisory Services
    • Edelman Trust Barometer 2023

      2023 Edelman Trust Barometer

      The report is the result of the Edelman Trust Institute's research, which sampled more than...

    • Sophos 2023 Threat Report

      Barriers to entry for would-be cybercriminals are lower, with tools and tactics becoming available to...

    • The C-Suite Outlook 2023: On the Edge

      The Conference Board 2023 C-Suite Outlook survey reveals the events that C-suite executives see as...

  • Events
  • Search by topic
    • Governance
    • Strategy
    • Risk
    • Ethics
    • Regulation
    • ESG
    • Investor Relations
    • Selection
    • Board Expertise
    • finance
    • Technology

Information asymmetry is good for effective boards

by Collette Kirwan, John Redmond and Niamh Brennan

Commentators often complain that non-executives need more information. But recent research suggests that it is information asymmetry that actually makes non-executives effective.

Information gap, jigsaw bridge

Image: danleap, Shutterstock

Why do most boards work well, notwithstanding the information gap between managers and non-executive directors?

Information asymmetry—the difference between the company-specific information available to management and what is presented to boards—is often considered an impediment to board effectiveness.

Information asymmetry paradox

Admittedly, in some cases, governance failure arises because information is deliberately withheld from boards.

However, we argue that, paradoxically, it is by virtue of information asymmetry that non-executive directors can contribute to board meetings.

Information asymmetry creates the context in which non-executive directors are expected to question and challenge managers.

Information asymmetry creates the context in which non-executive directors are expected to question and challenge managers.

In other words, if there was no information asymmetry, and non-executive directors had the full company-specific information of managers, their contributions to the board would be limited. There would be no important questions to ask at board meetings that they could not answer themselves.

We suggest that instead of acting as a barrier to effective board performance, information asymmetry is a necessary condition for effective boardroom accountability.

We call this the “information asymmetry paradox”.

Notwithstanding the external knowledge and experiences that non-executive directors bring to the board, they do not have the detailed day-to-day information of the business operations and/or detailed industry knowledge that managers have.

Managers often complain that the board does not know enough about their business.

Indeed, many consider boards unable to carry out their duties because they do not know as much about the business as management.

This view is alarming, but becomes less so when board and management information are considered to be different but complementary.

Nature of board  

We arrive at our information asymmetry paradox by moving away from what is/is not known by managers/non-executive directors and, instead, by considering the nature of the information sets of the two groups.

Their different information sets allow non-executive directors to make a contribution. We differentiate managers’ information as tacit or implicit, and board information as primarily explicit.

The one complements the other. The tacit-explicit information distinction explains the differences and the interdependence between management and board information.

Management information is primary and direct; board information is secondary and mediated. The stimulus-response directness in managers’ information experience contrasts with more formal board experiences—rush hour compared with rules of the road.

Management information is primary and direct; board information is secondary and mediated.

The significant difference between management and board information is that management information is based on primary, direct experience. It is often incommunicable and ambiguous. Board information, on the other hand, is hearsay derived from secondary sources such as papers, reports and presentations.

Accepted guidelines suggest that, to be effective, board information should be high quality, relevant and clear. It should be distributed in a timely manner to allow non-executive directors to thoroughly consider the issues in advance of the meeting.

The difference between managerial and board information is the difference between originating or initiating the information and receiving or formally processing that information.

This view of management as originators and board members as recipients of information may provide a framework for resolving the information asymmetry paradox. The difference between the live, primary and personal information of management, and the processed and collective information of boards is essentially the difference between implicit/tacit and explicit information.

The importance of tacit/implicit information was also acknowledged in the 2009 UK Walker Review following the banking crisis:

The chairman, EDs and NEDs need to be experts in the ability to observe, interpret and draw conclusions about what people are giving clues about, but not talking about: that is, interpreting what lies just below the surface.

A necessary condition

The paradox is that information asymmetry is a necessary condition for effective boards. By engaging with boards, managers are required to account for their actions and to make explicit what otherwise would be implicit and inaccessible.

Information asymmetry between boards and management is a fact. Management has more company-specific information. Boards depend on management for much of their information.

Accountability, involving the process of transition from the individual judgements of managers to the collective judgements of boards, is the real manager/non-executive director information dynamic.

For some commentators, to be truly effective, directors should overcome information asymmetry so that they will have a firm grasp of the business and its risks.

However, we contend that any demand for information equivalence between boards and management fails to recognise that much of the valuable information in organisations is specific to individuals and is tacit and is not readily communicable.

Conclusion

It is important to understand the distinction between the different information sets available to managers and non-executive directors when deciding on board composition and processes.

Understanding the distinction may assist in establishing and assessing the information-sharing processes and assist in the induction, education and ongoing development of managers, non-executive directors and chairpersons.

The two distinct information streams join in a common outcome and a shared judgement as expressed in the time-honoured minute of decision: “It was resolved…”.

Professor Niamh Brennan is the Michael MacCormac professor of management at University College Dublin; Dr Collette Kirwan is lecturer in accounting at the Quinn School of Business; and John Redmond is company secretary of the Electricity Supply Board.

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • LinkedIn
  • Mail

Related Posts

  • Corporate purpose: reasons for optimism, but vigilance is required
    October 2, 2021
    CEO in face mask

    Many companies have acted in a compassionate manner since the pandemic began; others haven't. Corporate purpose has made the difference.

  • Rethinking boards: what does the future hold for directors?
    February 28, 2022
    A futuristic boardroom

    As companies increase in complexity, directors may struggle to add impact and value. Here are five potential areas for board reform.

  • Is Elon Musk trolling Twitter?
    April 12, 2022

    Tesla and SpaceX CEO Musk has created a tricky governance challenge by buying a 9.2% stake in Twitter but declining a seat on the board.

  • Amazon shareholders call for tax transparency
    March 7, 2022
    Jeff Bezos, founder of Amazon

    Investors want Amazon to use the Global Reporting Initiative’s Tax Standard to disclose its tax arrangements.

For thoughtful journalism, expert insights on corporate governance and an extensive library of reports, guides and tools to help boards and directors navigate the complexities of their roles, subscribe to Board Agenda

board effectiveness, Collette Kirwan, information asymmetry, information gap, John Redmond, Niamh Brennan, non-executive directors, Spring 2017

Search


Sign up to our Newsletter

Receive independent news, thoughtful journalism & expert insights about leadership, corporate governance & key boardroom issues straight to your inbox every week.

SIGN UP

Follow Us

 

 

 

 

Most Popular

  • Audit reform in the UK risks ‘losing momentum’
  • Activist investor campaigns rise back up to pre-Covid levels
  • How to ensure stakeholders trust your sustainability reporting
  • Elon Musk weighs in against ISS and Glass Lewis
  • Climate litigation: how 2022 will shape 2023
 

Featured Partner Profile

Diligent

Diligent

Diligent Corporation, which was founded in 2001, is headquartered in New York, NY with a European HQ in London. Diligent’s modern governance platform empowers leaders and teams at every level of the organisation to digitally transform and create ...

Featured Partner Resources

2022 AGM Season Forecast: An Eye on The Horizon

To help prepare for AGMs in 2022, Equiniti (EQ) hi...

Stakeholder Engagement: A Roadmap for UK Plc Boards

This guide aims to provide directors and their col...

Digital Boards: How Technology Adoption is Driving Culture Change and Resiliency

Digital tools proved their worth to boards during ...
Leadership in AI report

Leadership in AI

This report from Board Agenda and Mazars, in assoc...
Creativity in a Crisis: a Boardroom Map for Innovation

Creativity in a Crisis: a Boardroom Map for Innovation

In the uncertain times at the height of any crisis...
Board Directors Guide to D&O Liability Insurance - November 2020 - AIG & Board Agenda

Board Directors' Guide to D&O Liability Insurance

Directors face liability over a range of new threa...
Leadership-in-Risk-Management-Board-Report

Leadership in Risk Management: Board Report

Board Agenda, in association with Mazars and INSEA...
Director's Guide to Internal Investigations

A Director's Guide to Conducting Internal Investigations

An internal investigation must be handled meticulo...

 


 

ADVERTISE – FREE CORPORATE LISTING

FREE - Add your company profile to our Corporate & Advisory Directory.
ADD

ADVERTISE – PROMOTE YOUR REPORTS & WHITEPAPERS

FREE - Add your company profile to our Corporate & Advisory Directory.
Add Resource

Register Free

Register to receive free article views, selected resource downloads, and all the latest news alerts straight to your inbox. Register


  • Editors & Contributors
  • Editorial Advisory Board
  • Corporate & Advisory Services
  • Media Marketing Solutions
  • Contact Us
  • Careers
  • Board Director Network
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookies
  • Sitemap
|