Governance can be tricky, if not impossible, when board members have something important to say, but face barriers to being heard.

Formal whistleblowing means trouble, not only for the obvious reason, but because it shows the organisation failed to address valid concerns.

Even the best non-executives shouldn’t presume they can solve all the board’s difficulties, especially those symptomatic of wider issues.

Ensuring the right things are done while not being overly fussy is a tricky balance. But relaxing one’s guard can also be the wrong approach.

When it comes to the selection of non-executives don’t be dazzled by shiny baubles: a highly sought-after NED may not be the most reliable choice.

I’ve been using my private email for company business. Will there be calls to “lock me up”—even if I’m actually protecting my best interests?

Non-executives must hold management to account—but there are also times when they should give unstinting support.

The new non-exec on the board has to have something to do. Cue the comi-tragic process of how to find a new chair.

Board leaders exist on stormy seas of change. The question is, can they stay afloat by adapting to the way the wind is blowing, or will they go down with the ship?

A new corporate governance code is all well and good, but will it be an improvement on the last? Only if it asks the right questions.