Competent directors carry out their duties successfully, effectively and
efficiently. Competence implies knowledge, skills and ability to do what is
required. Personal development is thus core to ongoing competence. King III
requires directors to be behaviourally and technically competent, as well as
being competent in terms of governance.
Challenges can arise for Boards when individual directors are extremely
competent technically, but lack governance and/or behavioural competencies. The
inverse applies too. Determining areas for training and development can be
problematic, as can assigning the required time for Board development.
Director competence poses opportunities and difficulties for extremely
small and extremely large organisations. In small organisations, the required
competence might not be available at Board level. In very large companies,
monitoring an appropriate mix of competencies can become problematic.
King Code of
Governance principles (King III)
- Principle 1.1: the board
should provide effective leadership based on an ethical foundation
The actual individual problems to be mentored will be raised during the
Circle. The following are intended to serve as thought-starters only:
- What are the most
challenging areas for Board competence: technical, behavioural or governance?
- What are the biggest
hurdles to ongoing personal development in all competency areas?
- Are competencies related to
sustainable development adequately represented at Board level?
- Is the behavioural
competence of potential directors assessed during recruitment processes?
- What are the biggest gaps
in director competence, and how should these be addressed?
- How should competence be
assessed at Board level: as individual directors, as a group, or both?