One of the fundamental skills of any successful person is the ability to learn, unlearn and relearn. We know that what was true five years ago, may well be false tomorrow. We’re living in a world where research, innovation, science, and technology enable greater discoveries each day and the savvy ones among us work hard to stay open-minded, apply critical thinking and evaluate these new data points or assets, and either embrace and work to embed them or file away for now if there’s little convincing being done.
Either way – the magic is in having an open mind, and then what you take on, you take to the metaphorical table to share the insight or operate in a new way so you, others and the ventures you work with, reap the rewards.
An area I have always loved, and often been one of the crazy few talking about, is the emergence of new connected but decentralized systems and other breakthrough technology trends. We live in a global society, and now we’re only really connected digitally, so I do suspect even more weightless magic will happen as bright minds beaver away in all corners of the globe as we all move through this pandemic.
Through the last few years being hands-on building a new SaaS venture, sitting on varied Boards, and working alongside amazing people and companies, it’s become clear that the digital divide in our established businesses is widening. Not in an accessibility way, but the knowledge gap.
This may be anchored in two of my own personal and strong views about Governance though so you’re welcome to skip ahead to the tech-specific content! The first view I hold is that the Governance model promoted in NZ is not fit-for-purpose for today’s organizations, nor does the heftily-priced Certificate in Company Direction Course from the Institute of Directors (IoD) even touch on the areas needed to be a good leader, founder, executive manager or Director in a successful venture.
It’s almost as if when the IoD formed in NZ in 1989 they had a playbook (well with one of their Four Pillars of Governance being ‘Hold to Account’ , it’s more like a rule book), and have been rolling it out ever since.
1989 was when Lucy Lawless first became well-known as she won the 'Mrs New Zealand' title, Simply Red's "If You Don't Know Me By Now" was the #1 song for the year, and it's also when one and two-cent pieces ceased in Aotearoa. 1989 was 33 years ago and ironically, is also when the internet first came to NZ. It seems the human capital in NZ has developed since then, our economy has moved, technology has leaped ahead, and yet what “good” Governance looks like is still a ‘one size fits all’ model and one that’s dated. Let’s get onto the second point though as this probably deserves it’s own post.
The second will be no surprise as I’ve often discussed this - that the lack of diversity around the Boardroom table (Exec, Founders, and Directors) is a fundamental issue. We all know the indisputable facts that more diverse Boards deliver more profitable ventures (if profit is the measure of success).
But let’s assume the room is filled with diverse thinkers, there are seasoned professionals and people from all walks of life who have the right mix of skills to lead and govern the organization. I don’t feel confident that even then, there would be enough voices asking the questions and enough open-mindedness to allow discussion and actions to then develop the answers for the future-focused strategic opportunities and risks that emergent technology will inevitably push up.
The reality today is that most Boards are filled with people whose knowledge of legal and financial compliance is solid, yet their understanding of entrepreneurship and innovation, and tech and its implications for strategy and risk seem to be rare and extremely important.
Our Board make up is ridiculously conservative. According to Bryan Gaynor in a 2021 NZ Herald article, the average age for a Director in NZ or Australia is 58. We’re also keen to appoint those that live in ‘our neighbourhood’. He says:
“We have a strong bias towards locals when it comes to director appointments. For example, all nine of the 12 companies based in Auckland have a majority of Auckland based New Zealand directors whereas the three companies outside Auckland - Contact Energy, Infratil and Ryman Healthcare - have only one Auckland director between them.”
Age is not the issue. Location is not the issue. Homogeneity is the issue. Especially when operating models and base operations for all businesses have evolved, are we allowing them to continue to do so by shaping the Governance and guidance team using a dated model and largely local minds?
That was a long way of getting to the point of this post which is that there is a massive gap in the level of technology know-how, and the implications for this. Organizations are missing the upside of embracing a new way of working, a new technology stack, designing a new weightless product and more, as well as potentially exposing themselves to unnecessary additional risk – all because the right questions aren’t being asked at the right tables.
It’s also short-sighted not to see what this means for the new industries and new jobs that are being created where today’s valuable talent move into. Understanding what’s evolving around us and what’s next enables good strategic decision making, and better decision making today.
So, while I want to keep having conversations about these two issues, I also really want the dialogue to shift now. As Directors, there are some significant developments that we need to be comfortable discussing – so a ‘know enough to be dangerous’ approach is recommended, as then we can all understand if the environment we’re in might be impacted by them, and can then ask the right people into the room and/or to do the work to determine what that looks like. It’s about being informed enough to draw the lines between today’s business model and environment and what the future could be and being able to have a meaningful discussion about that.
If we’re working with organizations that develop strategies over several generations, it’s almost certain many of the ventures operating today will be impacted by emergent tech, and likely look and operate vastly differently even ten years from now than they do today.
I was greatly amused to see my first Bitcoin transaction happened in 2015.
At that time talking to most people about digital currencies and the power of blockchain was hard work. There were the technologists and gamers who championed it, a few financial folks who watched with interest and yet the vast majority of professionals I spoke with were dismissive. It’s seven years later and the Blockchain is nearly a commonly understood concept in Aotearoa, but maybe that’s my view and an echo chamber due to who I choose to follow, like, engage and spend time with.
Needless to say we can’t wait seven years to be comfortable discussing the following topics at the Board table. I’m not going to explain them, instead I really encourage all of us to learn about these to an appropriate level for the space we’re in, and to keep following what’s emerging and add to the list. It’s more important as Directors that we do that, than tick the ‘CPD’ boxes at the IoD by heading along to another lunch chat about accounting standards or the Privacy Act.*
So please investigate these, read up about them, ask others to share their views then work out what’s relevant to the space you’re in, and ask some great thought-provoking questions to enable discussion at the next Board meeting.
Here’s the ones to start with
- Web 3.0
- The Metaverse
- DAOs
- NFTs
- Roblox
- Self-fertilizing crops
- Breath sensors for diagnosis
- IoT devices and what’s powering them
- Low carbon transport
*it’s probably an AND conversation – do the lunches if you wish as those things matter of course, AND build knowledge and capability in current and emergent technologies.
References:
https://www.iod.org.nz/resources-and-insights/4-pillars-landing-page/#
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2022/01/tech-trends-in-2022/
