CEOs may be the most sought after candidates for board positions, but I've met a lot of CEOs who are bad directors.  Why is that?

I want to make the argument that board diversity is about more than the list of who's in the room.  And I *try* to make that argument here.  Tune in to see what you think.

In some ways, board diversity is just a numbers game.  Does that mean diversity is a box ticking exercise?  And isn't ticking boxes "bad" governance?

I find talking about board diversity terrifying and exhilarating.  

How can group think be so wrong when it feels so right?

Managing unconscious bias in the boardroom is harder than it seems.  It helps if we remember that "unconscious" means we have no idea what our biases are.

If we think about governance as box ticking, we miss the point completely.

One of my pet peeves is when managers ask their board if anyone has any questions.  In my experience, it never (ever) turns out well.

If "Noses In, Fingers Out" isn't the ultimate rule, then when, exactly, is it OK for directors to dive in?

"Noses in, fingers out" has become a bit of a governance cliche, and it makes sense.  But shouldn't directors sometimes get their fingers in at least a little?