Boards love simple formulas. “Nose in, hands off.” “Boards set strategy.” “Independence matters.” “Ask questions, don’t provide answers.” They are memorable, easy to teach, and often directionally right. They are also dangerous when taken too literally. Most governance myths are not wrong because they are false. They are wrong because they are incomplete. They capture one side of a tension while ignoring the other. Yet board effectiveness rarely comes from choosing one side.

Who ultimately determines the strategic direction of a corporation? The board, the CEO, the strategy department, the strategy consultants, or perhaps even artificial intelligence? The obvious answers are tempting, but incomplete. Not the board alone, even though it carries central responsibility for strategic direction and oversight. Not the CEO, although management typically develops and implements strategy. Not the strategy department, although it may structure the process.

Artificial intelligence is beginning to reshape not only how organizations make decisions, but also how governance itself is exercised. Much of the current discussion focuses on the extent to which artificial intelligence can support, augment, or automate human decision-making. Yet the emergence of agentic intelligence raises a more fundamental question: What happens when artificial systems increasingly interact, negotiate, decide, and act autonomously with other artificial s

Boards today confront a paradox. On the one hand, they operate in an environment of radical complexity. On the other hand, directors remain bounded in their rationality despite the emergence of of AI. What is needed is the thinking board that debates assumptions, grounds itself in data, deliberates inclusively, and sustains dialogue with its stakeholders.

AI holds the power not only to improve the efficiency of governance mechanisms but also to democratize corporate oversight by making intelligence accessible and actionable across the corporate hierarchy.

This article proposes a dual-framing approach – combining “what if” and “what if not” perspectives in board decision-making – to address cognitive and procedural biases in risk governance.

The nature of the debate on the role of business in society strongly suggests a cyclical nature, with constant attempts to balance...

What is the best way to integrate sustainability into the corporate governance framework? Boards of directors have chosen two distinct paths: the functional way, which focuses on corporate governance of sustainability, and the foundational approach, which leads to sustainable corporate governance. This article assesses the merits and limitations of both approaches and calls for a transition to sustainable governance. This requires board members to engage regularly with stakeh

Has the Swiss elite model failed in the face of repeated corporate disasters? What needs to change to avoid such shocks in the future?

How to turn the board of directors into a competitive advantage? Three ways to elevate the board to a value-creating governance body.

As corporate boards were obsessed with digital transformation in the 2010s, what is the state of digital governance in 2022?

Mastering ecosystems is increasingly seen as key to strategic value creation in highly dynamic environments. The role of governance has become a key differentiator between organizations that win or lose from the ecosystem game. This article discusses the importance of governance to the successful creation, development, and growth of ecosystems and presents eight challenges to be addressed along the ecosystem lifecycle. It continues with a taxonomy of ecosystem governance that

There is much talk about new organizational forms and paradigm shifts in organizational design. This article argues that what often...

How to improve the compatibility of agile leadership with the principles of effective corporate governance?

Venture boards play a pivotal role in entrepreneurial value creation. History teaches us six principles of excellence in venture governance.

The inherent high level of uncertainty and the dynamic nature of digitalization call for a comprehensive framework for its governance.