Boards overpopulated with narrowly focused specialists are undermining corporate strategy and resilience.

The approach of filling boards with technical experts across finance, cybersecurity, marketing, or ESG may appear to be the obvious choice on the surface, but research has shown that it often creates silos, authority bias, and fragmented decision-making.

Instead of structuring boards around domain expertise, what some call the “Noah’s Ark” model, and as a member of the Advisory Board at the Corporate Governance Institute, I believe it’s time to prioritise generalist leaders with operational track records and broad enterprise oversight.

Boards risk becoming floating zoos of expertise – every function has a voice, but no one is steering the ship.

Generalists – rather than specialists – make for great board directors. They are better prepared to govern in times of uncertainty.

Over-reliance, outdated skills and authority bias

The warning is grounded in several observed failure points. Firstly, expertise in fast-moving fields has a short shelf life. A director whose reputation is grounded in their achievements from a decade ago may no longer be equipped to handle contemporary challenges in that domain.

For example, a cybersecurity director whose credentials date back five years or more may no longer be aligned with current threats or regulatory realities. This groupthink is not just theoretical. In their 2024 study, Nili and Shapira (2024) found that directors labelled as specialists often experience a depreciation of influence over time, especially when their technical knowledge fails to align with emerging trends or technologies. In effect, these directors may become liabilities rather than assets.

Over-reliance can also be equally as dangerous. When boards rely heavily on domain specialists, they risk developing a cognitive dependency on those individuals, leading to authority bias.

This creates a boardroom dynamic where certain directors dominate conversations within their area of speciality, and other members hesitate to challenge or even question their inputs.

Who’s got it wrong – and how to get it right

Credit Suisse is a cautionary example of what happens when Noah’s Ark goes wrong. Prior to its acquisition by UBS in 2023, Credit Suisse’s board was heavily populated with specialists in risk management, compliance, and technology. The lack of generalist leadership contributed to challenges in strategic oversight and cohesive decision-making. We all know what happened here.

In contrast, companies such as Best Buy, Nestlé, Microsoft, Unilever, Procter & Gamble, ABB, and UBS have adopted generalist leadership.

These firms have prioritised former CEOs, CFOs, and global operational leaders who bring not just insight into a vertical, but the experience of running complex, cross-functional enterprises.

In Nestlé’s case, the board includes zero Swiss nationals, despite its Swiss headquarters, demonstrating that governance quality is taking precedence over token representation.

The problem isn’t specialists themselves – it’s making them permanent fixtures. What boards need today are strategic navigators who can steer through complexity, not passengers who specialise in reading one part of the map.

Hybrid is the way forward

That philosophy is reflected in the emerging preference for a hybrid model. Instead of embedding all subject matter knowledge within the board, companies are now turning to standing advisory councils and specialist panels, which are brought in on a quarterly or as-needed basis.

This model maintains up-to-date expertise without compromising the board’s strategic cohesion. As noted in a 2024 Harvard Law School report, “Adding a director with a narrow range of expertise may reduce the quality of board discussions on other, more prevalent topics on the agenda.”

The future of governance belongs to generalists who can think systemically, act decisively, and challenge from a position of enterprise leadership – not siloed expertise.

Dr Robert Straw is a member of the advisory board at the Corporate Governance Institute.

Read more

After a company dispute, what are the options for appointing a new director? – Director appointments are typically straightforward and uncontentious, but the situation can be less clear if there is a deadlocked board or an underlying dispute between directors and/or shareholders

5 effective strategies for managing change in business – Oxford Business College’s Sarwar Khawaja guides us through navigating change in your business, from vision to digital transformation

Are we training leaders for yesterday’s problems? – Simon Phillips discusses how to future-proof leadership development to meet modern business needs