Keith Dorsey [00:00:00]:
When you serve on boards and you only see each other four to six times a year, you don’t have that ability to develop the same sort of trust and relationship that you are able to do with your peers on the management team. The ability to reduce the level of uncertainty is very, very high when it comes to getting on a board and finding your next board member. They tend to ask the same question every time they’re looking for someone. They ask all their existing board members, who do you know? And the way to reduce your uncertainty is to bring on someone you personally know and trust, or you get a referral from someone, and that’s how it tends to happen. And it looks like cronyism when they’re just really trying to reduce the level of uncertainty.

KB [00:01:07]:
Joining me today is doctor Keith Dorsey, founder and executive advisor at Boardroom Journey. And today, we’re discussing charting an intentional path toward corporate board services. Keith, thanks for joining, and welcome.

Keith Dorsey [00:01:25]:
Thank you, KB. It’s great to be here.

KB [00:01:28]:
Okay. So let’s start maybe right there. How do you or how would you, Keith, sort of chart an intentional path toward corporate board services?

Keith Dorsey [00:01:38]:
Wow. That’s a deep question. And and, I guess you can start many different places, KB. But the bottom line, I challenge people before they even try to figure everything out to spend some time reflecting. And I truly mean reflecting on why they want to be on a corporate board to begin with. And how did they get to this point where they said, this is important to me. And so I want people to really spend time just analyzing their career, reflecting on their why, and then I want them to think about their purpose. You know how as executives, we spend time for corporations working through a corporate vision, mission, and value statements.

Keith Dorsey [00:02:33]:
And I want people to transfer those skills that they have learned on the job and those that practice, building your vision, mission, and value statements. I want them to transfer that to their own personal well-being. And by doing that, begin to uncover their purpose. What’s their vision for themselves? What’s their mission? How they wanna go about this, you know, getting and accomplishing that vision? And what are their values? And when they begin to reflect on all those things, they it’s only then can they begin to figure out when they are successful, what makes them successful. When they fail, what are some of the ingredients as to why they fail? I want them to figure out their secret sauce and their superpowers and what most importantly, what brings them joy? Once they begin to figure those things out, only then should they begin to think about what type of board and why a board, but really reflect on what works, what doesn’t work, where do I add the lowest value.

KB [00:03:46]:
Okay. So there’s a couple of questions in there. So do you think people just take board positions because they’re like, it’s the next thing I’m supposed to do according to some arbitrary career trajectory? Or what sort of the reasoning that people wanna get on boards?

Keith Dorsey [00:04:01]:
Many think that that’s just what the next step is. Some don’t even understand at the time they’re actually stating that they would like to serve on a corporate board. Some don’t even understand the duties of the corporate board member and what exactly are they supposed to do. What’s this fiduciary responsibility you speak of and so on and so forth. And then you have others that are incredibly intentional. They knew in their twenties that when they reached a certain point in their career that they wanted to serve on corporate boards, and they were very intentional throughout their career as to what positions they took and why and what human capital they hope to gain from out of that position and actually orchestrated a perfect plan to serving on corporate boards. And then you have some that three months before they retire or six months after they retired because they’re now suffering from a little imposter syndrome or identity crisis and things like that, It’s not until then that they decide they would like to serve on a corporate board. And it’s almost too late, and it’s very difficult.

Keith Dorsey [00:05:18]:
So you have many different avenues as to why people are interested in boards and how they go about getting on boards, and some are perfectly orchestrated and others, sometimes it ends up being just luck. And so when tapped them on the shoulder who knew them, you know, from twenty years ago and said, I would love for you to come serve on my board because I remember this, this, and this. So it varies.

KB [00:05:46]:
Yeah. Okay. So this is interesting. I wanna get this a little bit more. So in terms of someone like luck and tapping them on the shoulder, like, come and work on my board, what’s your sort of view? Do people need to sort of actively pursue these board positions? Do people sort of stand back and wait? How does it how do you sort of see it? I know that the whole we’re gonna get into this a little bit more, but the whole dynamic of boards are changing.

Keith Dorsey [00:06:10]:
Yes.

KB [00:06:11]:
But do you think that people just think that someone’s just gonna hit them up and say, hey, come and join this board? Or do you think that now people do need to be a little bit more aggressive in approaching companies and, you know, these board positions more directly?

Keith Dorsey [00:06:26]:
You know, when it comes to boards, you can’t go after a board the way that you would go after another leadership or or executive position. You can’t go to a board and just say, hey. I wanna serve on your board. That doesn’t seem to work. And you can’t be over enthusiastic about serving on that board. People will question what’s your objective, what’s in it for you, so on and so forth. But you can orchestrate a a good plan to get on boards. But in the past, you will run across the way that people typically will find a board.

Keith Dorsey [00:07:09]:
The board members that served on the board would ask other board members, who do you know? We need we we need to find another board member. Who do you know? And because of that, people would tend to pick people that they knew and trusted, and they didn’t ask second, third, and fourth level questions about what skill sets would this person bring, or what are the competencies of this person, or would this person be a great fit based on the gaps that we have on our board? Though, those weren’t the questions that were asked back in the day. It was more of a club of elite executives that may have been CEOs, former active CEOs, or former active CFOs, And they will get people that they gulp with, that they went fishing with, that they hunted with, or that they were in some elite club with. And it came down to trusting that person and feeling like that person would fit them socially. And because they were a former or active CFO or CEO, of course, they’re going to have good business acumen. We didn’t they didn’t peel the onion back as much as to, okay, what type of gaps are we trying to fill on our board? Where do we need help on our board? We just surrounded ourselves with people like us that had a similar background, and I like them. Or I know someone that I trust that like them. That was the way people got on boards.

Keith Dorsey [00:08:52]:
It was this cronyism sort of way. And one thing they all had in common, they typically were skilled at running a business as a CEO. Nowadays, things have changed. And what people are are, being challenged to do is to really look at the skill sets of their existing board members and think about the strategy moving forward and things that are happening in the world today that makes this business dynamic, whether that’s supply chain issues, geopolitical issues, you know, various things that are happening today or the strategy is changing. The business is transforming and going through this transformation. And because of that, they are saying, okay. These are the skill sets that we have on our boards today on our with our board members today, and these are the competencies of our board members. We have a redundancy of the these skill sets and competencies, and we have a few gaps.

Keith Dorsey [00:09:58]:
We’re dealing with you know, during the pandemic, many boards figured out that they had gaps around supply chain issues. With the whole return to office type situation, many boards are figuring out, you know what? We have gaps around our talent strategy. We’re not challenging the c suite and the management team as much as we could because maybe we’re not as skilled at at some of the issues around talent these days, whether that’s around return to office or whether that has something to do with the transformation the business is going or the industry is going through. We we may need certain functional skills, cybersecurity skills around around AI, different things like that. And so boards nowadays are asking different questions of their board members, looking at their strategy, looking at how dynamic things are, and beginning to ask search professionals, find me someone that fits this mold. What they’re also not asking for is just a one trick pony, if you will. Someone that is very, very deep in AI, but doesn’t have the business acumen that to participate in conversations outside of AI. That’s been a problem where people may go too deep, but not be not have the business acumen to dive into the other components that a a really good active board member would need to dive into.

Keith Dorsey [00:11:33]:
So you have found boards in 2021, ’20 ’20 ‘2 going too deep with some of their candidates, and now they’re beginning to pull back and say, yes. I want someone that can go deep, but wide. The inch deep and a mile wide in most areas, and we call those individuals corporate athletes, but also can go very deep in cybersecurity or very deep in talent management or in and so on and so forth. Hopefully, that makes sense.

KB [00:12:04]:
So just going back to this elite club, would you say that so if I look at Australia, I don’t know that The US is always ahead in these sort of things, but this whole elite club thing, it just draws parallels. That’s still what’s happening out here in Australia. Oh, I know someone. I know a mate. I know his dad, and I play, you know, golf with them. They live in my neighborhood. There’s all that sort of commentary that goes on. But would you say that’s still the case then? You’re still just hiring their mates or who they know or their mates’ mate or, like, there’s a lot of that still happening.

Keith Dorsey [00:12:37]:
It is, unfortunately, and and some are being challenged to think that differently. There’s something there’s this term, KB, called uncertainty reduction theory. This theory is about and boards typically are thinking this way where they’re trying to reduce their level of uncertainty when finding another board member. And that’s where similarity theory comes into play and how we end up with boards that are homogeneous because we’re trying to reduce the level of uncertainty. When you think about the management team in the c suite, they often, even when they travel a lot, will see each other two to three days a week on the and the their offices are on the same floor of the same corporate building. And because of that, they develop an incredible relationship over time. And that uncertainty when it comes to knowing each other and fitting is is way low at that particular point because of the relationships you for because you all work in the same building on the same floor. Well, when you serve on boards and you only see each other four to six times a year, you don’t have that ability to develop the same sort of trust and relationship that you are able to do with your peers on the management team.

Keith Dorsey [00:14:05]:
And so the ability to reduce the level of uncertainty is very, very high when it comes to getting on a board and finding your next board member. They tend to ask the same question every time they’re looking for someone. They ask all their existing board members, who do you know? And the way to reduce your uncertainty is to bring on someone you personally know and trust, or you get a referral from someone you know and trust, and they trust that person they’re referring. And that’s how it tends to happen. And it looks like cronyism when they’re just really trying to reduce the level of uncertainty. And sometimes it looks like malicious behavior, and that’s how you may end up with all men on the board because that’s who you know, especially if you have a prerequisite that the person had to be a CEO of, Fortune 500 company. Well, most CEOs of a Fortune 500 company are men. And if that’s the prerequisite, then the chances are you’re going to bring on another man and another man that I know from my club.

Keith Dorsey [00:15:19]:
And so could there be Melissa’s behavior in the recruiting? Yes. But oftentimes, it comes down to who do you know and and reducing the level of uncertainty. Now that we’re trying to move out of just CEOs and just CFOs to actual other CXOs in in an organization to come serve on a board, that opened up the door to bring on more women and people of color and because they tend to be in executive roles that may not be CEO and CFO. And by intentionally setting out to fish in different ponds, I think women boards are finding extremely qualified women to come serve on their boards because they’re being challenged to fish where the fish are, if you will, in different ponds. But you have to intentionally set out to do that. And more and more boards are beginning to do that, but they have to be challenged to step out of their comfort zone, and they get different results, do things differently moving forward.

KB [00:16:33]:
So one of the observations and insights that people have been sharing with me is more boards now asking people to come on their board that have a background in cybersecurity technology. Reasoning for that, majority of companies are built on technology now. So if they are having a board with someone that doesn’t understand technology, that’s a blind spot. Equally, I would say in cybersecurity, there’s a lot more focus for cybersecurity executives, etcetera, to come on their board as well because of the breaches and managing data and responding to incidents. There’s a lot more of that. So I would you agree then in terms of what you’re seeing and the work that you’re doing, do you see it now as an advantage to people with a cybersecurity technology background that probably might get a a board position perhaps over some of their their other peers? Or how do you see that sort of playing out?

Keith Dorsey [00:17:24]:
You know what? It’s happening more and more where boards are being challenged to bring on people with that background. But when I challenge people that have cybersecurity experience outside of just getting a certificate after a three month program. But people who have been working executives that have been working in in that with that functional experience for many years, when you are interviewing for a board role, I highly recommend that you talk about your functional experience, answer the questions that they are asking you around your functional experience, but pull up at the 30,000 foot level and make certain that you ask them questions outside of your area of expertise and not so much to ask them so that you can learn about it. But to ask more thought provoking questions that proves your human capital goes beyond just technology and cybersecurity. Because boards today in 2025 are being challenged not to bring on one trick ponies that will only participate in the board level conversations during the boarded committee meetings when it’s around their area, specialty. Now boards in 2020, ’20 ’20 ‘1, they were being challenged to bring them on because of they they wanna mitigate the risk. But now they’re saying, I need someone that can be a corporate athlete and participate in all conversations, but can go deep in cybersecurity if and when. Or we’ll just hire a firm that will act as a board advisor and will bring on another CEO or CFO.

Keith Dorsey [00:19:24]:
But we can bring on the board advisor where we need to go deep in cybersecurity. And so I’ve had people that have interviewed, went too deep in their functional area, and then have a debrief conversation with me after the interview, and that person will say the interview was perfect. They loved me. I’ve really liked them. I think they’re gonna make me a offer to serve on their board. Then I debrief with denominations and governance committee team and members, and they said, look. We like that person. And if we were looking for another CXO, we would wanna make that person offer because we loved them.

Keith Dorsey [00:20:09]:
But we don’t think that person will be great for a board because we think they’re too focused on their one area of expertise. So I challenge people that if the interview is going too well from the candidate’s perspective, then maybe they’re too deep into their comfort zone and need to pull back up 30 to 30,000 to 50,000 feet and show your true business acumen as a core corporate athlete and not just your area functionality and experience. And I challenge aspiring board members to move from their unconsciously competent executive zone and intentionally move into their consciously competent governance zone. So take off one hat and put on the other. And I often was when I’m in front of a large group, I will ask people, have you ever gone how many of you have gone for board interviews and got offered a c suite position? And I get a show of hands, and that’s the reason why they were on autopilot. They were in their comfort zone. It felt really nice, and they were able to just nail every question, but didn’t realize that the company and the board was addressing it in governance, not their functional experience solely not solely their functional experience.

KB [00:21:40]:
So I sort of wanna explore a bit more like a dynamic of boards and where they’re at today because you’ve obviously spoken around, you know, the elite club and then hiring your friend or your mate or someone that you trusted, etcetera. What do you think is sort of happening now? And then I also wanna maybe extend on that to explore when you mentioned it’s a bit hard if you if you go and approach these companies directly, because it sort of rattles them a bit. And, like, they’re starting to question your motivation, etcetera. So what do you think is sort of happening instead into the lay of the land as you see it today?

Keith Dorsey [00:22:17]:
I see it shifting towards the corporate athlete side. Now they once were just just wanting those CEOs, but they are interested in people. Once challenged, once the board itself is challenged and to thinking differently, they’re really beginning to think about who can I bring on to the board that I trust and can help us mitigate risk from a risk management standpoint, can help us disrupt a bit more so that we can show up in the marketplace a little differently, can help us seek new blue oceans that are out there? And sometimes by having a large amount of former CEOs, they have are proven solid executives that have done this, been there, done that, but may not have dealt with when they were active CEO cybersecurity issues. May not have dealt with some of the challenges that we’re having to deal with that from a geopolitical standpoint. So some of the things that are germane and unique to doing business today will require a active CEO, but maybe not a former CEO, and it may require someone that is a chief procurement officer. It may require a chief human resource officer or a people officer. And that’s where I see things going today. When you really begin to peel the onion back to get to the core of what we’re going to want to do on a board when it comes to mitigating risk disruption and seeking blue oceans, we’re going to require different characteristics.

Keith Dorsey [00:24:14]:
And I see that happening once boards are challenged. If they’re not challenged by a consultant or a search professional or someone on their non gov team, if they’re not challenged to think differently, then they’re just gonna continue to remain on autopilot and bring on someone they know and trust and like and reminds them of themselves.

KB [00:24:38]:
Don’t you think primarily a lot of people don’t like being challenged? They just like doing the same old thing, and I’ve done this for twenty years. No one likes to rock the boat. I mean, probably less so in The US, but I would say definitely in Australia, we’re quite a reserved market. People don’t like change. They don’t wanna, you know, ruffle any feathers or anything like that. So how do we get to the point where we’re comfortable to start to institute the change without people sort of being on the back foot? But then also one thing that sort of is that illuminates to me in this space is companies that are like, oh, yeah. We wanna do something different.

Keith Dorsey [00:25:13]:
Yeah. It it’s just comfortable, to remain on autopilot, and that’s how, unfortunately, some businesses get left behind. It’s those small, agile, boutique firms that are single monthly focused on one industry or single monthly focused on one product. And they show up, and they’re so sexy, and they think differently. They’re outside the box, and they catch these businesses that have cast have been cash cows for the longest. They catch them off guard. You think about Netflix. You think about block you know, how Netflix disrupted Blockbuster, how Kodak just got disrupted, and, you know, all these businesses that have a model, Sony Walkman, and Apple disrupted them.

Keith Dorsey [00:26:06]:
When you have a board that just a chair of a board that just wants to run a meeting on time, on schedule, and get through the agenda without really questioning what are we trying to accomplish? What’s our goal? To have a just a successful meeting? Or is our goal to work on a strategy or just go over and have a history lesson? There are some hoards that really just focus on what’s happened instead of where are we going and why. And so you have a good set of consultants out there that really begins begin to look at what should a board be doing, and are we happy with our performance as a board? And when it comes to diversity on boards, unfortunately, when you bring in diversity of thought via whether it’s observable or demographic diversity or intention you’re intentionally focused on bringing in that diversity of thought. It will disrupt the way things are run. It will slow things down within the organization because different questions are going to be asked when they weren’t before, and some boards aren’t gonna like that. And and some boards just want status quo. As a board member, as an independent director or a nonexecutive director, we have a fiduciary responsibility to not only our shareholders, but the other stakeholders and the challenge thought processes. It’s the candidate’s job during the interviewing process to truly ask questions that make certain that they believe that board is a right fit for them. Because once you come on to that three year term or whatever it may be, you’re gonna wanna stay there that entire time, and it could be the worst three years of your life if it wasn’t the right fit for you.

Keith Dorsey [00:28:15]:
And so as much as a person may want to get on their first board, especially if it’s a paid board, and and maybe don’t ask all the due diligence questions that they should. I challenge people to make certain it’s a great fit. I do ask second, third, and fourth level questions. I I not just to hear myself talk, but I like to get to the root cause of things at times at a strategic level. And will that be a problem with this board? I think every candidate should talk to every as many board members as they possibly can and ask those thought provoking questions that make certain that where you are try the board you’re trying to get on is a good fit for you, and they should be doing the same to make certain you’re a good fit for them. Because sometimes boards don’t want people to be provocative. They don’t want to challenge status quo. But when you surround yourselves with that diversity of thought on a board, that’s when those true revenue producing opportunities that that grow and, to make a better return, bring a better return to your shareholders, provide a better experience for your stakeholders.

Keith Dorsey [00:29:36]:
That’s when you know you’re doing your job as a fiduciary independent director or a nonexecutive director. And if that’s not what that board’s interested in and that’s important to you, you have to have the intestinal fortitude to say thank you, but no thank you.

KB [00:29:53]:
So then just go back on diversity. Where would you say Keith is the biggest sort of blind spots at the moment? Because there is sort of two there’s two worlds. Like, a false people advocating it, but then there’s other people out there saying, oh, well, now we’re just getting diverse people on board to tick a box. So how do you sort of see this now? Because there’s a lot of people that are really in two minds.

Keith Dorsey [00:30:21]:
It’s a sad time, KB, especially here in The US, because, I guess, via the media, via, you know, certain political organizations, and there’s this anti diversity equity and inclusion movement. It’s to the point where the organizations that are anti DEI or or diversity are confusing the confused. And there is this premise out that’s out there that diversity and meritocracy can’t coexist. In fact, you know, our president recently signed a executive order stating that we are getting rid of discrimination via diversity and moving back to merit. And that’s an interesting concept to the point where certain companies that are doing business with the federal government cannot even have DEI mentioned anywhere in the organization if they expect to get funding from the federal government. Because the premise is, if you have diversity, you will be bringing on someone that is not qualified if you’re really focused on these DEI efforts. And we need to move from demographic and observable diversity to merit, whereas merit has always been a part of DEI efforts. The goal is that’s just table stakes that make certain that the person that you bring on, first of all, is qualified, but sometimes you may direct your efforts to find that qualified person to a different pond.

Keith Dorsey [00:32:11]:
If we naturally all go fishing in the same pond all the time, and it only has the one type of fish, But bring that diversity, we need to go for different fish in different ponds, but it’s still we’re still going after the very best. The misnomer and and what’s wrong with the the anti DEI, I guess, effort here in The US and other parts of the world is that premise, that diversity and meritocracy can cannot coexist. They do. And so I’ve had the opportunity to to speak around the world about this topic, and I’ve recently was at a location talking about this whole topic and that boards and organizations need to have the courage to do what’s right for that organization regardless of the pressure that they’re facing via legislation, via lawsuits, via political campaigns, different things like that, to have the intestinal fortitude and the courage to continue to hire the people that they believe will help them grow their business and hire the right people that will be able to bring that cognitive diversity to the table. And the way that I try to get people to realize that diversity and meritocracy can coexist is by having them go through this exercise, and I’m I wanna share this exercise with you. One of the things, unfortunately, that’s happening in the news, you see it from time to time, and I was sickened when I learned about this. People were taking this co anti DEI thing so far to the point where they will walk on certain people will walk on a airplane for their flight, look to the left as they’re walking on into the cockpit. And if they saw a woman pilot, they would then turn to their spouse and question whether or not we should fly and allow our children to go on this flight because there’s a woman pilot.

Keith Dorsey [00:34:27]:
And, apparently, this airline cares more about DEI than the safety of its passengers because there’s a woman pilot there. That’s just something that’s absolutely nonsensical. We have no idea what type of training that woman pilot had. We had no I have no idea that that pilot who happens to be a woman had been in the military for twenty years landing a a jet, a fighter jet on a aircraft carrier that’s going certain knots and bobbing up and down. One of the best pilots in the world, but we will walk on a plane, look to the left, see a woman, and question if that person is qualified to be in there. That’s nonsense. So I start off my conversation by giving that example, then I ask everyone in the audience to close their eyes. And what I I said, we all in this room have one thing in common, something in common.

Keith Dorsey [00:35:34]:
And this this something is we all have incredible women in our lives that we know are just exceptional. It could be our mother, our daughter, our sister, our aunt, our cousin, our best friend. I want you to picture someone, a woman in your life that brings all those care you know, those sorta exceptional characteristics to the table. They have incredible human capital. And then I’m going to want I’m gonna tell you that that person you’re picturing happens to work for a company that really pushes diversity, equity, and inclusion. Do you now think that exceptional woman that you’re picturing with your eyes closed only got their job because the company cared about diversity, equity, and inclusion? Or did they get the job because they’re exceptional? They went to the greatest schools. They’re smart. They work very hard.

Keith Dorsey [00:36:36]:
And then open your eyes. I want you to see based on what you just went through because you fought a song when you know and love and you know their story. You now know that’s true, that diversity and meritocracy can coexist. And I ask you to do that just with a woman because we all have that in common. What we might not have in common, you might not know someone of a different ethnicity or a different age as well as you know that woman that you were just picturing. But the same thing applies. Just like you now know that woman that you know and love deserves the position that she’s in regardless of whether her company sponsors the DEI or not. And now you can transfer that feeling to other categories of diversity, equity, and inclusion.

Keith Dorsey [00:37:32]:
Whenever I go through the exercise, KB, I have people that will say, thank you, Keith. I never really thought about it that way before. But by personalizing it, I now get what diversity, equity, and inclusion is about, and meritocracy and diversity can coexist. But, unfortunately, what’s happening in society right now, unfortunately, people have confused to confuse and that people are having to pick whether or not I want merit or I want diversity to check a box, and that’s just nonsense.

KB [00:38:12]:
So looking forward, Keith, where do you think we go from here? What do you think happens now?

Keith Dorsey [00:38:16]:
What I’m experiencing out in the marketplace, there are some firms that in the social justice movement that started in 2020 through the end of twenty twenty three, better 2024, that jumped on it because they didn’t wanna be the one company that wasn’t doing something about it. And so they were just checking the box. Those companies are quick to communicate publicly that they are getting rid of all their diversity, equity and inclusion type of programs, personnel and communication. Those that’s happening, But they never were really in. They just checked the box because they didn’t wanna be the one company that wasn’t doing the right thing from a moral imperative standpoint. Then you have the majority of the companies well, you have some that are very, very vocal about their stance on diversity, and they’re gonna continue to do what they’re doing. And so they’re being very courageous and very, very vocal about that. And then you have this group in the middle, and it’s that group in the middle that we say are green hushing.

Keith Dorsey [00:39:32]:
They instituted their diversity programs for all the right business and moral reasons. They stand behind it, but they’re not going to shout it from the rooftops anymore. They’re not gonna put it in their ten and eight kens. They’re not going to advertise it as much as they were in from 2020 to 2024 on their websites, but they’re gonna continue to do it because it works. It makes sense, but they’re not gonna shout about it. So when you take that large group that’s in the middle and the small group that’s on the right, the shouting still shouting it from the rooftop, the majority of the companies still believe in it. And there there are those that say we’re done with it, but they never really were in it. They were just going through the motions.

Keith Dorsey [00:40:21]:
And so what I challenge people to do right now that are still in this diversity, equity, and inclusion sort of business is to talk about the business imperatives around bringing diversity of thought and observable and demographic diversity. I call that and I write about it in my book, optimal diversity. Optimal diversity is where you have a combination of that demographic diversity coupled with diversity of thought. And that applies to everybody. Everyone has optimal diversity in themselves and how, regardless of your ethnicity, regardless of your age, regardless of your gender, everyone brings that to the table. And I challenge people to talk about optimal diversity and the benefits, but the base of the around the business imperative, not the moral imperative. Because the language of business is business. It’s revenue.

Keith Dorsey [00:41:31]:
You know, revenue growth, shareholder growth. And, unfortunately, we were riding this incredible wave that was around the moral imperative, and that was smart to ride that wave for that four year period. But shame on the industry for not disrupting itself during that wave before we hit drop, we actually hit dry sand. And by riding that wave and disrupting ourselves to begin to talk about the business imperative, if we would have done that, we wouldn’t be where we are right now because there are solid business reasons as to why you want optimal diversity in your companies and on your boards. And it’s been proven. But, unfortunately, the wave for the moral imperative was so right, and it felt so good, and it was so accepted that we stayed on that wave a bit too long. Is it important? Absolutely. But business in in business, we should be talking about the language of business, using the language of business, and bring in the business case and the business imperative for diversity to the decision makers.

KB [00:42:46]:
So, Keith, do you have any sort of closing comments or final thoughts you’d like to leave our audience with today?

Keith Dorsey [00:42:51]:
Whether it’s around diversity or whether it’s around boards, my book that I put together was based off of years of research, and, really, I interviewed, you know, over the years formally and informally hundreds of women executives and board members to hear about their journey. And I wanted to hear about their journey in five areas that I call the five capitals. I wanted to hear about their human capital, which is their education, their expertise, their experience, their social capital. I wanted to hear about what kind of networks they had, how they were able to use their social capital on their networks to get on boards and to bring value to boards. I wanted to hear about their cultural capital, which is the lens shaped by their experiences, what they learned and where they were, how they see the world. What was their world like growing up, and what lessons did they learn growing up that they were able to innately or intentionally use throughout their career? Their director capital, the the things they had to learn and hone to be most attractive to actual boards. And the last leader, commitment capital, their ability to show up, stay present, and stay the course regardless of what was going on around them. And so I would interview them to get all that information, and that’s what I ended up putting in my book.

Keith Dorsey [00:44:24]:
In my book, to all of those experiences of those hundreds of women, and I created four fictitious women, and I call my protagonists, that are in different stages of their career. A 25 year old brand new manager in a company, a 40 year old new senior manager in the corporation, a 55 year old executive who says she’s gonna retire in the next three to five years, and a 62 year old second generation CEO of a family business. And she was a CEO for twelve years, and she’s now gonna turn the business over to her much younger brother. And all four women have stated that at some point they’re going to want to serve on a private or a public corporate board. So what should they be doing at these stages of their career to best position themselves throughout their corporate career for board service down the road. And so what should the, you know, at twenty five forty fifty five and 62? What should they be doing? What what instead of taking every single promotion that’s put in front of them to actually think about begin with the end in mind. I eventually wanna serve on a corporate board. What type of roles should I take as, you know, this 25 year old when I’m down the road to be best positioned? As a 62 year old ceo of a family business company.

Keith Dorsey [00:46:00]:
What should I do? Because I’ve been a executive director on my own board to twelve years, but I’ve never been an independent or non executive director. What things should I do before I leave to make certain that I can be the best independent director moving forward for someone else’s company? And so that’s what I’ve done throughout the book. At the end of every chapter, I’m able to say what they learned from the chapter, how they implemented and executed that, and people can begin to find themselves in one of those four women or a combination of those four and take what they’ve learned and see how it was actually executed so that they could do the same for themselves.