Building future-ready boards

Being a director has never been more challenging – or more vital – with boards facing a perfect storm of intersecting disruptions, including rapid advances in AI, shifting geopolitical and market dynamics, accelerating climate risks and rising stakeholder expectations. These disruptions are reshaping how organisations create and protect value.

Directors are being asked to make long-term, high-consequence decisions in an environment where the pace of change often exceeds the board’s collective expertise. Navigating this landscape demands boards are committed to continuous learning, upskilling and strengthening their collective capability.

The 2024 Director Sentiment Survey shows only 48.7% of New Zealand directors are confident their boards have the capability and experience needed to effectively oversee emerging risks and opportunities. So, how do we lift our collective governance capability to meet the challenges of 2025 and beyond?

In research undertaken as part of my Masters of Professional Practice, I found:

• • 68% of directors learned governance primarily through experience, having not undertaken any training before their first role
  • 46% started in not-for-profit roles
  • Nearly half (49%) were shoulder-tapped

While many respondents valued governance experience, 83% had undertaken training after securing a governance role. Only 37% believed mandatory qualifications or training would have helped them secure their first roles, but 67% agreed it would lift the quality of governance in New Zealand.

Formal training and mentoring were seen as key enablers of development. Nonetheless, this reliance on experiential learning can leave many directors underprepared for complex and evolving risks.

Too many boards still treat governance development and evaluation as optional rather than essential. Less than a third of first‑time directors reported receiving an induction, and many said formal mentoring arrangements were rare, despite it being highly valued.

These findings align with global trends. The Global Network of Director Institute (GNDI) reports on climate change and AI governance  highlight that many boards lack subject matter expertise in these critical areas.

• • Nearly 40% of boards have no AI expertise across the organisation – only 22.4% have AI expertise
  • 28.9% have climate expertise, and nearly a third have none at all

Across the insights from GNDI member institutes’ surveys, lack of knowledge and confidence in their boards’ ability to oversee these disruptive forces effectively was low.

Many boards lean heavily on management or external advisors, rather than developing their own strategic literacy.

Capability gaps matter because directors cannot meet their fiduciary duties without understanding the issues most likely to impact long-term value creation. Whether it’s testing the assumptions underpinning climate transition plans or interrogating the risks of AI-driven decisions, boards need structured learning, diverse skills and the confidence to adapt.

Director development cannot stop at induction or basic governance training. In a disrupted environment, learning must be ongoing, deliberate and strategic. Boards should treat professional development as a strategic investment, not a cost.

This means prioritising structured learning on material risks and opportunities, from strategy and risk to climate, AI, supply chain fragility and cyber resilience. It also means valuing diversity of thought and lived experience as critical enablers of foresight and innovation.

In my research, directors frequently cited mentoring and sponsorship as a crucial enabler of confidence and capability, especially for women entering governance roles. Despite this, access to mentoring and training remains uneven, often not supported by boards. Yet if boards want to widen their talent pool and bring in fresh perspectives, they must play an active role in building capability, not just recruiting it.

The skills needed for effective governance are constantly evolving. Capability gaps and outdated knowledge are increasingly holding boards back from integrating risk and strategy. Yet independent board evaluations – a critical tool for identifying these gaps – are still underused or treated as a compliance exercise.

Best practice recommends external evaluations every two years, but many boards fall short, missing the opportunity to assess effectiveness, align on strategy and culture, and future-proof capability.

External evaluations provide a candid, evidence-based perspective on whether the board has the right mix of skills, experience and perspectives to deliver on its purpose. They can highlight whether areas such as technology, stakeholder activism, geopolitics and climate are receiving adequate oversight, or whether blind spots and overconfidence are creeping in.

Evaluations can also feed directly into director development plans and succession strategies, ensuring capability evolves in line with the organisation’s needs.

Boards that avoid rigorous evaluations risk complacency. Without honest feedback, it’s too easy to assume the board is performing well simply because there are no visible failures. In a disrupted world, where risks can escalate quickly, that assumption is dangerous.

Directorships are not static roles. Expectations are growing, the environment is more complex and the consequences of governance failures are more severe.

Meeting this challenge requires boards to invest deliberately in their own capability. Too many boards are underprepared for the challenges ahead. This is not about criticising individual directors. It is about recognising that good governance requires continuous learning, adaptation and self-scrutiny.

---

To support ongoing governance development and effectiveness, explore our board evaluations service – helping boards identify strengths, gaps and opportunities for growth.