ABSTRACT

This chapter describes the largely invisible effects of group membership on the decision-making behaviour of individuals. An understanding of the psychology of groups reveals what really happens to the individual (in this case the director) when they join a group. How does the individual change and how does the group change? What does the individual gain and what do they give up on becoming a group member and how conscious are they of these processes? A group such as a board has an identity into which an individual has to fit. This is not a simple process either for the individual director or the board as a group. Subjective ‘like me’/‘not like me’ categorisations, discussed in Chapter 2, may lead to self-censorship, silencing of doubt and revisions of confidence. These are only some of the behavioural changes that may be required to be accepted by the group. ‘Like me’/‘not like me’ categorisations, which are a wholly human condition, are explained, and strategies are offered for how to deal constructively when encountering their effects. While most directors understand that independent mindedness—a mindset that contrasts with independence, which is a structural construct—is critical, the effects of group membership on independent mindedness can be pervasive.

For example, some directors will possess more board capital than others and, therefore, they may be perceived as having a greater legitimacy to influence. These power differentials may cause subgroups and coalitions to emerge that can materially effect the decision-making culture of the board. These director judgements, although wholly subjective, may have a direct or indirect effect on the director’s behaviour towards a peer perceived to be more or less powerful. This chapter makes visible the hidden power structure that exists in every board through which some directors may be heard over others, potentially compromising the quality of decisions and outcomes. Identity politics (which is largely invisible and subjectively construes everyone’s place in the group) determine if, how and when influence attempts are made or responded to, as well as who listens to who, making every board dynamic unique. Despite being wholly subjective, such perceptions may, at times, lead to unjustified support for the views of a powerful director or subgroup of directors, even if they hold minority views. The chapter also describes how a newly appointed director’s desire for social support from, and acceptance by, the group can undermine their independent mindedness, the very role they were brought on board to discharge. Without a real understanding of this invisible psychosocial ‘architecture’—how a board culture emerges and how it may be changed for the better—boards are unlikely to unlock their potential as strategically influential groups. This chapter is brought alive by director-lived experiences that reflect such political manoeuvrings. It also provides a typology of board culture that helps directors explain their experiences of board culture and what may be needed to transform it.

Other ‘group effects’, such as social distancing, groupthink, pluralistic ignorance, social loafing and social sanctioning, are also explained in the board context to reveal the complex realities of board life. The chapter offers prescriptions for how independent mindedness can be maintained and provides clear-eyed strategies for how these invisible forces can be overcome without compromising processes of influence or board accountability.