Traditionally, boards establish goals and methods for their firms, decide upon key policies and review and approve monetary statements. Additionally, they appoint older management make compensation rates, and they at times create committees that focus on specific functions including auditing, staff and reimbursement, or mergers and acquisitions. They also identify the amount and timing of dividends to shareholders. Mother board members are supposed to be unbiased and have no material ties to the enterprise. A family member of a major executive or possibly a person with substantial organization dealings with all the company may be considered to have got material jewelry and thus not qualify as being a board member.

Most presidents profess that they can want directors to query their choices, plans and operations, but I have learned that this is a lie. Presidents do not read want to be questioned with critical questions in public places, and they will often make the uninformed movie director feel that they may have not been granted adequate leeway by board get togethers.

Occasionally, the advice of an wise aboard member will lead to a reconsideration or modification of the management commitment or decision. But that is not very often. Generally, directors don’t have the authority to invert any of these decisions except in very rare cases. Most importantly, a director should be capable of weighing the interests of this shareholders and other stakeholders against the needs and goals of the company. Otherwise, the board’s role has to be mere custom that does not ensure that the company.