Summary
The Next Board by Thomas Keil and Marianna Zangrillo argues that boards need to rethink their composition, skills and ways of working as their responsibilities expand. For HR leaders the book raises a practical question: should board capability be reviewed with the same seriousness as executive and workforce capability?
Key takeaways
- Board responsibilities now extend well beyond traditional oversight into AI, cybersecurity, workforce transformation and sustainability.
- Future-ready boards require a mix of governance expertise, strategic thinking and emerging capability knowledge.
- HR leaders can help boards assess whether their composition reflects the organisation's future direction.
Most organisations know far more about the capability gaps in their workforce than they do about the capability gaps in their boardroom.
There are skills matrices for employees, succession plans for executive teams and increasingly sophisticated workforce planning models for the years ahead. Yet the group responsible for governing the organisation through AI adoption, cyber risk, workforce disruption and geopolitical uncertainty is often assessed through a narrower lens: previous board experience, financial expertise, sector knowledge and availability.
In The Next Board Thomas Keil and Marianna Zangrillo argue that board work has changed significantly. Based on interviews with more than 100 board chairs, directors, CEOs and investors they write: “The role of the board of directors in corporations has never been more important than it is today.” They also point to a much broader agenda, with digitalisation, cybersecurity, AI, sustainability and ESG now sitting alongside the board’s traditional duties of oversight, CEO succession and strategic challenge.
HR has a useful role to play here. Board composition is usually treated as a governance issue but it is also a capability issue. Five questions can help start the conversation.
What expertise does the board have in AI and digital transformation?
AI is now a board-level issue because it affects strategy, risk, productivity, workforce design and trust. Directors do not need to code or choose software vendors but they do need enough understanding to ask better questions.
Keil and Zangrillo describe digitalisation and AI as part of the wider shift forcing boards to prepare their companies for future challenges. Their concern is that boards can become weighed down by oversight demands while the organisation needs more strategic foresight.
The key question is whether the board can discuss AI as an organisational issue. A board may hear regular updates on AI investment or data risk while spending less time on job redesign, employee adoption, skills, workforce trust or the new forms of management discipline needed when human and machine work become more closely connected.
The role of the board of directors in corporations has never been more important than it is today.
2. Does the board understand workforce transformation?
The future of work is often discussed as a management issue. It deserves board attention, however, because workforce transformation now affects business resilience, productivity and value creation.
Many boards have strong financial, legal, operational and commercial experience. Fewer have deep expertise in workforce strategy, organisational design, culture change or skills transformation. This matters when major strategic choices increasingly depend on how well organisations can redesign work, redeploy talent and sustain performance through change.
Keil and Zangrillo argue that board composition should be shaped by purpose, company need and strategy. In practical terms this means asking whether the board reflects where the organisation is going rather than where it has been.
3. Are future skills discussed before the shortage appears?
Boards are used to discussing risk but skills risk needs to be more visible in that conversation. A shortage of critical capability usually builds over time through weak workforce planning, underinvestment in learning, slow internal mobility or a lack of clarity about how technology will change the work itself.
The authors describe the modern board’s “dual challenge”: delivering value today while preparing the board and company for tomorrow. Future skills sit directly inside that challenge. If the board is serious about long-term value creation it needs a clear view of the capabilities the organisation will need and how quickly current roles are changing.
If this board were being designed today for the organisation we are becoming, would it look the same?"
4. Does the board have enough diversity of thinking?
Board diversity is usually measured through visible representation and, while this remains important, the next stage of board effectiveness also depends on cognitive diversity: different experience, judgement, professional backgrounds and ways of interpreting risk.
Keil and Zangrillo are clear that the board’s people dimension cannot be separated from its purpose and roles. The right board is a team with complementary expertise rather than a collection of impressive CVs.
This is especially relevant for AI and workforce transformation because both cut across disciplines. A board dominated by similar career paths may miss the human, ethical or operational consequences of decisions that look sensible on paper. A more cognitively diverse board is more likely to spot secondary effects like how an AI tool shifts accountability or how a skills strategy affects the organisation’s ability to compete.
5. Is board succession linked to future strategy?
Board succession is usually triggered by vacancies. A future-ready board works further ahead.
If an organisation expects to transform its operating model, reshape work with AI, expand internationally or manage a more complex stakeholder environment then these priorities should influence future board appointments. The board as a whole needs the breadth, curiosity and judgement to govern the next phase of the business.
This is where HR can add value. CHROs already understand capability planning, leadership pipelines and the relationship between skills and strategy. Applied carefully this expertise can help boards think more rigorously about their own development.
What HR leaders should take from this
The board skills audit nobody is doing starts with this premise: the board is part of the organisation’s capability system.
This does not mean HR should try to take over governance. Rather HR leaders can bring a sharper people and capability lens to board effectiveness. They can help connect workforce strategy, executive succession, organisational design and future skills to the composition and development of the board itself.
The question leaders should ask is, if this board were being designed today for the organisation we are becoming would it look the same?
FAQ: Board skills and future readiness
What is a board skills audit?
A board skills audit assesses whether the board has the expertise, experience and perspectives needed to govern the organisation effectively today and in the future. It typically reviews areas such as finance, risk, technology, strategy, workforce transformation and governance.
Why should HR leaders care about board capability?
Board decisions increasingly influence workforce strategy, AI adoption, skills investment, culture and organisational design. HR leaders can help boards understand whether their composition reflects the challenges the organisation is likely to face over the next five to ten years.
What skills are becoming more important in boardrooms?
Research suggests there is growing demand for expertise in AI, digital transformation, cybersecurity, workforce transformation, sustainability and organisational change, alongside traditional governance, financial and sector knowledge.
About the author
