Most of us try to buy low and sell high but all too often our Boards display a fantastic ability to do the opposite and inmany cases they hold only a pittance of shares in the company that pays them quite well for a few hours per month.
At an AGM I was at yesterday, a female director was proud of the fact that she was on 5 boards, and had had a great career as an executive in some large banks. But she was never a CEO. She did not appreciare my questionning her on her capacity to do justice to the board in question.
Maybe she never was cut out for it and didn't put in the hours necessary, so why would we expect her to be better when going gets tough, (which it is for the company in question), as she spins plates, and ploughs through (or skims-reads) board papers? I sadly believe that too often it is gender quotas that create these situations.
I have worked with some excellent female executives. I feel these quotas and mandates work against everyone (ie shareholders, other board members and staff, good femal directors and CEO's like Amanada Lacaze) other than a few dolts' interest. All women can be under the cloud of being a probable gender quota pick, which is unfar and harmful. For many of the dolts the best investment they ever make is to put themselves through an AICD course, and sit back and wait for the phone to ring. Don't wvwn get me started on those with hyphenated surnames!
(20min delay)