Excellent and inferior director performance explained
Board Benchmarking has drawn on more than 24,000 comments in relation to the strengths and suggestions for 1,276 directors to provide new insights into director effectiveness. In this article we reveal what excellence and inferior director performance feels and sounds like using the Board Benchmarking’s new DRIVE Framework of director effectiveness.
This article applies this new and contemporary DRIVE Framework Framework (Direction, Relationships, Insights, Values and Execution oversight) to explore what superior and inferior director effectiveness feels and sounds like. This article uses quotes chosen from the 1,276 director evaluations to highlight behavioural contrasts and inform director and board development. The quotes have been slightly adapted for consistent tone and to remove individual and organisation names to protect anonymity.
D – Direction (and Strategy)
Highly effective directors bring clarity of vision, industry foresight, and commercial judgement. They help the board navigate uncertainty with confidence and purpose. In contrast, underperformance in this domain is characterised by vagueness, a lack of strategic curiosity, and discomfort with forward-looking discussions.
What excellence looks and sounds like:
- ‘Brings deep understanding of sector trends and applies it to long-term planning.’
- ‘Always keeps our board focused on the future, not just compliance.’
- ‘Anticipates shifts in industry direction and flags them early.’
- What poor performance looks and sounds like:
- ‘Avoids contributing to strategy conversations.’
- ‘Struggles to connect board topics to long-term priorities.’
- ‘Speaks in generalities, not grounded in market context.’
R – Relationships (and Influence)
Great directors engage with others well, fostering a respectful, collaborative atmosphere and influence without domination. Poor performers may isolate themselves, dominate discussion, or erode trust among colleagues.
What excellence looks and sounds like:
- ‘Provides supportive challenge while strengthening group cohesion.’
- ‘Respected and inclusive, ensures all voices are heard.’
- ‘Calm, constructive and builds strong rapport with peers and management.’
- What poor performance looks and sounds like:
- ‘Interrupts and undermines others during meetings.’
- ‘Seems disengaged from team dynamics.’
- ‘Trust and rapport with peers is noticeably absent.’
I – Insight (and Contribution)
Directors strong in this area bring specialist expertise, prepare thoroughly, and elevate discussion quality. Weak contributors may hesitate to speak up or offer little value beyond their domain.
What excellence looks and sounds like:
- ‘Always well-prepared and asks insightful questions.’
- ‘Offers relevant examples that sharpen our decisions.’
- ‘Challenges with logic and adds depth to our thinking.’
- What poor performance looks and sounds like:
- ‘Rarely prepares or reads board packs thoroughly.’
- ‘Does not participate in meaningful discussion.’
- ‘Comments feel surface-level and reactive.’
V – Values (and Conduct)
This pillar reflects integrity, humility, and maturity. Effective directors model the organsiation’s values, ethical behaviour, composure, and authenticity. Problematic behaviour includes dismissiveness, arrogance, or volatility.
What excellence looks and sounds like:
- ‘Consistently models integrity and fairness.’
- ‘Sets the tone for professionalism in the boardroom.’
- ‘Earns trust through humility and ethical conviction.’
- What poor performance looks and sounds like:
- ‘Has been described as dismissive or combative.’
- ‘Lacks emotional control under pressure.’
- ‘Behaviour undermines boardroom trust.’
E – Execution oversight
Strong in this area means directors are disciplined in monitoring performance, risk, and fiduciary duties without micromanaging. Weak performance appears as inattentiveness, overreach into operations, or an overly technical mindset that misses broader implications.
What excellence looks and sounds like:
- ‘Brings risk and accountability to life without overwhelming detail.’
- ‘Balances compliance with strategic relevance.’
- ‘A disciplined contributor in audit and governance forums.’
- What poor performance looks and sounds like:
- ‘Gets lost in technical detail.’
- ‘Overreaches into operational issues outside of governance.’
- ‘Rarely engages in performance or risk discussions.’
