Skip to content

7 December, 2023

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

Board Agenda

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

      • View All
      • Board Moves
    • workers on boards

      ‘Workers on boards’ idea is back on the table

      European-style two-tier board system may help to end stagnation in the UK, reports the Resolution...

    • AI catastrophe Avoiding AI catastrophe is ‘beyond corporate governance’

      It is ‘inevitable’ that the risks from artificial intelligence require public governance, according to a...

    • sustainability Where next for sustainability?

      An expert panel discussed their view of global trends for the business world in Board...

  • Insight
    • Categories

      • View all
      • Governance
      • Strategy
      • Risk
      • Ethics
      • Board Expertise
      • finance
      • Technology
    • AI priorities

      AI priorities for the board

      To reap the benefits of artificial intelligence, boards will need to work on their organisational...

    • purpose statement

      On purpose: crafting an authentic statement

      Purpose statements define how organisations align purpose and people. Here’s how to make a statement...

    • first-time CFO

      How to succeed as a first-time CFO

      The remit and responsibilities of the chief financial officer have changed, which can seem daunting...

  • Comment
      • View all
    • uk corporate governance

      Why UK corporate governance needs tightening up

      The LSE’s response to the government’s panicky U-turn on governance regulation is not helpful to...

    • faith in the UK Audit reform is essential to restore faith in the UK

      When it comes to understanding what attracts investors to a capital market, the London Stock...

    • U-turn on audit reform An uncomfortable U-turn on audit reform

      The government’s bonfire of the regulations expected for audit reform creates a source of uncertainty...

  • Interviews
      • View All Interviews
      • Podcasts
      • Webinars
    • sustainability Where next for sustainability?

      An expert panel discussed their view of global trends for the business world in Board...

    • reporting elements Boards urged to retain ‘beneficial’ reporting elements

      Although the government cancelled the requirement, resilience disclosures ‘cannot be wasted effort’, says senior auditco...

    • energy transition Collaboration is key to UK energy transition

      Communication, innovation and engagement are needed for the move to net zero, an expert panel...

  • Careers
      • View all
      • Selection
      • Board Moves
    • gender diversity study Academics criticise BlackRock gender diversity research

      Its methodology came under fire, with some critics also pointing out it was wrong to...

    • diversity of thought How to boost diversity of thought

      Companies benefit from diverse workforces, but also from having the input of different opinions and...

    • minority NED Number of minority NEDs drops

      Although there is some progress in diversity in other board roles, research suggests that boards...

  • Resource Centre
      • White Paper Downloads
      • Book Reviews
      • Corporate & Advisory Services
    • Risk Map: Top Risks 2024

      Control Risks' Top Risks for 2024 cut across the geopolitical, security, operational, regulatory, and cyber/digital...

    • A Director’s Guide to Conducting Internal Investigations 2023

      An internal investigation must be handled meticulously to avoid legal exposure, regulatory or criminal prosecution...

    • Spencer Stuart UK Board Index Highlights 2023 cover

      Spencer Stuart UK Board Index Highlights 2023

      The 2023 UK Spencer Stuart Board Index is a review of board composition and governance...

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

New ISS benchmarks increase the pressure for diverse boards

by Elizabeth Saunders

The US ratings agency recommends voting against directors of firms without racially or ethnically diverse board members from 2022. But details are lacking.

Paper faces with different skin tones

Image: Lightspring/Shutterstock

Despite a lack of clear guidelines, Russell 3000 and S&P 1500 boards will need to demonstrate diversity or risk anti-management proxy votes.

In the wake of a turbulent year where racial inequalities in America rocked the nation with ripple effects from Main Street to Wall Street, ISS is making history by becoming the first ESG rating agency to take a hard stance to increase ethnic and racial diversity in publicly traded American companies.

The impact is clear: corporations can no longer merely talk the talk when it comes to diversity and inclusion. Indeed, they have a little more than a year to get their boards looking a lot more like the rest of the country. Or they could reap the repercussions of anti-management proxy votes in 2022.

US corporations have a little more than a year to get their boards looking a lot more like the rest of the country

The fact that ISS is traditionally seen as a middle of the road, usually-pro-management rating agency makes the new benchmark proxy voting policies it released on 12 November 2020 that much more notable. The policies, which will be applied for shareholder meetings taking place on or after 1 February 2021 specifically recommend voting against (or withholding votes from) directors for companies in the Russell 3000 or S&P 1500 “where the board has no apparent racial or ethnically diverse members, and no mitigating factors are identified”.

While ISS is putting more teeth behind its recommendations than usual, it’s not the first time an ESG ratings agency has played a role in influencing board makeup. Gender diversity has been steadily increasing over the past decade as rating firms advocated first for one woman on the board, and now require at least 33% of all board members to be female.

While reports are mixed as to whether or not board diversity improves market performance, gender-diverse boards have been found to consistently deliver other critical benefits, including supporting innovative activity and organisational change.

In most corporations, however, the women elected to the board are white women. Companies that are making progress in one area are further widening the ethnic/racial gap in corporate America at the same time.

Open-ended questions

While the case for ethnic and racial diversity at the board level is increasingly well understood—it’s the only way to ensure boards are representing the ideas and perspectives of the wide range of people their companies serve—the specifics on how to achieve diversity and how to disclose it are still somewhat fuzzy. Because ISS has not provided a framework for ethnic/racial board makeup disclosure, many open-ended questions remain on the table.

The US can look to its neighbours to the north for some insight. In Canada, public companies have been required to disclose the ethnic/racial makeup of its boards for several years. Canadian companies disclose this by designating board members as “visible minorities” and “aboriginal peoples”.

In America, however, things are a bit more complex. One of our greatest qualities as a nation is that we are a melting pot made up of people from all kinds of ethnic and racial backgrounds. Because that melting pot has been mixing for hundreds of years, it begs the question—is classifying someone as “white” or “non-white” really appropriate?

America is a melting pot made up of people from all kinds of ethnic and racial backgrounds… Is classifying someone as “white” or “non-white” really appropriate?

The whole idea of “white passing” complicates this even more. Passing happens when someone who is classified as a member of one racial group is accepted as a member of another based on appearance alone.

You can see the potential problems just waiting to boil over. If ISS will decide who is and who isn’t ethnically or racially diverse based on appearance, that implies that it will not consider “white passing” candidates as diverse, regardless of their background or heritage.

This, in turn, opens the door to tokenism, a problem that many female board directors can attest to personally. As boards have been required to appoint more women, females in these roles often report that other members do not take the time to review their experience or ask for their opinions on important business decisions. Behaviour like this uncovers troublesome assumptions among some who believe that women are only there to check a box, rather than because of their unique qualifications.

We could see this same problem manifest with diversity appointments. If companies must look for and choose clearly diverse candidates based primarily on appearance rather than consider any and every candidate who is qualified for the job, it undermines the very purpose and benefits of the diversity requirements in the first place.

Investors can help build diverse boards

As companies try to navigate the requirements and make changes that will allow them to reap the benefits of diversity at the governing level of their organisations, they are not alone. Investors often can be a source of support. Those with more significant ownership or long-term stakes may be able to recommend qualified candidates who can bring diverse thinking to the table.

Other less supportive activist investors attempting to nominate a winning opposition slate will also be under the same onus as the company to identify diverse candidates.

Traditionally, most activist slates have been very light on diversity, and very strong on alignment with the activist investor’s perspective. Now to win the support of shareholders (and ISS’s own positive recommendation), they will need to look further afield for strong and diverse candidates.

Companies can’t afford to wait

Yes, there are unanswered questions and the formula is far from perfect. But companies cannot afford to wait for more direction and clarify to take action on diverse boards.

ISS will provide a grace period for boards that do not currently have any ethnically/racially diverse members. But that grace period is compressed. Companies will need to disclose by 1 February 2022—about 14 months from now.

It’s up to boards and their investors to work together to build out the standard that ISS has left open-ended

If they do not, or if they cannot demonstrate ethnic and racial diversity, the companies will most likely see an increase in “no” votes during proxy season against one or more directors.

It’s up to boards and their investors to work together over the next year to build out the standard that ISS has left open-ended and decide how they will thoughtfully and purposefully classify their board members as ethnically and racially diverse.

While there is room for interpretation, the end goal should be this: ensure diverse thinking at the highest level of your company by onboarding people with unique backgrounds and perspectives. Then, give equal weight to every voice at your table.

Elizabeth Saunders is a founding partner at financial communications strategy firm Clermont Partners.

Related Posts

  • 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.

  • The storm before the calm: how boards can make better decisions
    October 18, 2021
    Businessman looking at stormy sky

    Behind every apparently calm surface lies a mass of board member interests, beliefs and emotions. How these conflicts can be managed?

  • A remixed roadmap for the future of board leadership
    October 18, 2021
    Team climbing a mountain using collaborative leadership

    A recent report identifies the need for a new governance model that reflects the changing responsibilities of boards and their leaders.

  • The war for talent: creating competitive advantage through diversity
    December 7, 2021
    Magnet attracting diverse talent

    Companies that strategically invest in diversity and building an inclusive culture will become talent magnets in today's challenging market.

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 composition, board diversity, diversity & inclusion, Elizabeth Saunders, ISS, proxy voting, Russell 3000, S&P 1500, US

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

  • Sustainability governance is on the rise
  • Why UK corporate governance needs tightening up
  • Proxy adviser warns LSE over governance
  • News round-up: this week in governance
  • How to future-proof your board

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

Leadership ESG

Leadership in ESG Integration: a study into UK board oversight, implementation and disclosure

This research report is based on detailed response...
The Engagement Appeal: The Path to Inclusive Investor Engagement

The Engagement Appeal: The Path to Inclusive Investor Engagement

This is the inaugural white paper from The Engagem...
Mazars c-suite 2023

Mazars C-suite barometer 2023

The Mazars C-suite barometer is based on responses...

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...

A Director's Guide to Conducting Internal Investigations 2023

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
|

Copyright © 2023 Questor Media Group Ltd.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Sitemap