Anne de Kerckhove - Technology boards: growth, nominations, the role of the SID and getting board roles

🎙️ You can listen to the full podcast interview with Anne de Kerckhove on Apple Podcasts, Spotify and YouTube.

Anne de Kerckhove is Chair of Eagle Eye Solutions, and SID & Committee Chair at 888 Holdings and Blackbird plc. Tune in to hear her thoughts on:

• How have your exec successes at SAAS scale-ups informed your non-exec work? (2:23)
• What are the key metrics boards need to focus on? (3:54)
• How much detail should boards ask for? (5:44)
• What do boards need to focus on for acquisitions? (6:49)
• Why do people underestimate how long mergers take? (8:33)
• What do you wish you’d known when you started international expansion? (9:20)
• What are the common mistakes organisations make with data? (11:18)
• Do you want to see first-hand data? (12:58)
• What are your key lessons from nomination committees? (14:22)
• Who owns the nominations process? (16:58)
• What have you learnt about asking board members to step down? (19:44)
• What’s best practice for job specs for board positions? (24:27)
• What training do you do for your boards? (27:04)
• Where have you added the most value as a SID? (28:35)
• How do you approach an underperforming Chair? (31:58)
• What advice do you have for those at the start of their board careers? (34:03) 
• How can you differentiate yourself as a board candidate? (36:33) And
• ⚡The Lightning Round ⚡(38:13) 

** This manuscript has been generated by AI and contains inaccuracies**

[00:00:00] 

Oliver Cummings: Hello and welcome to another episode of Enter the Boardroom with Neurol. The business podcast that brings the boardroom to you. I'm your host, Oliver Cummings, CEO of New Roll, the board search specialist and market leader, bringing science to the art of board hiring.

Today's guest, Anna Kirkoff, is chair of Eagle Eye Solutions PLC, a loyalty, promotions and gifting platform. Sid at 888 Holdings, an online gaming company where she heads the nomination and ESG committees. And Sid, an audit chair at Blackbird PLC, a video editing and publishing platform. Anne is also a limited partner at two venture capital firms, CRE and Daphne.

Formerly, she was a CEO of Freespeed, a customer engagement platform and Iron Investment, a startup investment fund. She previously served as a chair of Metail Limited, a private fashion technology business and Ned at Seven Digital Group, PLC. Anne, a huge welcome and thank you so much for joining us today.

Anne de Kerckhove: It's a pleasure, specifically because this whole year we've had quite a few interactions and you've been a big [00:01:00] player in bringing me those wonderful board seats.

Oliver Cummings: I'm really pleased to hear that and you've got an amazing mix of both public and private company experience. I'm really keen to hear about that.

Both. But I'd like to start with talking about your SAS scale up experience. You've grown three SAS businesses over the years as a CEO and Managing Director across Europe and North America. Two of those companies went from loss making, single digit revenue businesses to over 200 million pounds of revenue.

What have been the key lessons that now inform your approach as a board member?

Anne de Kerckhove: Um, so it's it's important to say most of my sas experience is in enterprise selling rather than smes But for me sas businesses is all about super disciplined data driven growth That's what makes a sas company successful.

And that means being very very Clear on what makes you succeed with a customer. Is your software a must have software for that customer? What is the ideal customer profile of that customer? [00:02:00] Don't try to sell to everybody because by definition, everybody has different needs. So really hone down on who that ideal customer profile is and put your sales teams and sales efforts entirely focused on that segment.

And that means having a very effective go to market and build a business where you can grow with your customers, build a land and expand strategy. So you sell once, And then you grow more and more business from that customer base. Those are the key success factors. And if you're on a board of a SAS company, you want to be looking at those metrics and being crystal clear on that positioning of who you represent and who you sell to.

Oliver Cummings: What would those metrics look like? And what would be an example of an ideal customer profile? 

Anne de Kerckhove: I'll give you a typical example. When I joined Frisbee, which was a SaaS company, we were selling to everybody, SMBs, um, the dentist chain, and then, uh, Fiat, massive companies.

And we were churning a bunch of customers and we had to do cohort analysis where we put everybody [00:03:00] in to specific segments of size and sectors, and we realized that actually where we did brilliantly were marketplaces and the automotive sector in smaller companies. We were used but then we were too expensive and then the customers would turn once they had had Some nuggets from the platform.

The minute we changed that is when we stopped Losing money as a business because our marketing efforts were much more focused Because we were selling to the right customer base and we started expanding How much customers would do with us? And it was a much more focused, much more powerful business because it knew exactly who it had to sell.

And therefore our marketing costs were also much more reduced because we could go direct and do account based marketing.

Oliver Cummings: Talk to me a bit more about the metrics. Can you bring those to life? You said a couple of metrics that you want to be really focused on. What would be an example? 

Anne de Kerckhove: Net retention. Are you getting more from your customers than the year before? Landon Expand, when your account started at, let's say, 100, 000, how far did it grow?

Did it grow to a million pound [00:04:00] customer? Did it grow to five million pound customer? Because that gives you predictability. You know how much you can spend in acquiring that customer, because you know what the long term value of that customer, which is another key metric. CAC to LTV, as we call it, we love a good acronym, so which is cost of acquisition to long term value.

Once you have those metrics, you know, how profitable your business is going to be. And of course, I know recurring revenue. That's really the core of a SaaS business. We don't do one offs. We don't do one shot business. We do recurring revenue. So all of the metrics that focus on the recurring nature of your business is what's going to make you a great SaaS company.

Oliver Cummings: And so as a board member, how much of that detail do you get into? I guess there's a real risk that you're going to cross that barrier into the sort of the executive domain that boards often worry about? 

Anne de Kerckhove: No, you don't, because you have one summary slide that always has all of those metrics and the trend.

And so it actually, it's the wonderful thing about being a board member in a SaaS company is that The data doesn't lie. So you just look at the [00:05:00] metrics. Are they improving? Are they weakening? And you know whether your business is going to be in the good next year or not and whether it's going to grow at the rate you want to grow.

And so, um, that's why a lot of SAS businesses are driven by the rule of 40 because that is seen as one of the key metrics of a top performing SAS business, which is, of course, growth and profitability. 

So, You don't switch into being micro managers. Good data is in fact the opposite. If you have a good board pack, if you have the right metrics, that's when a board member stays a board member.

When they start questioning the data because they're not getting the information, your natural human instinct is to go, well, give me more data, give me more data, and then you become intrusive. So that's why I spend so much time with the execs when I join a board, on looking at the board pack and figuring out, does that give me the right information to drive growth for the business and work with the execs without micromanaging.

Oliver Cummings: I want to talk about acquisitions because they've played a big role in your experience, both large, like the 888 acquisition of William Hill, as well as smaller [00:06:00] bolt ons. And I'm curious, what do you feel you know now about where to focus as a board member that a smart executive who's not had that experience might not appreciate?

Anne de Kerckhove: Absolutely. So one of the things, M& A is hard. It is so hard to get right and so easy to get wrong. So you have to start with the fact that. When you do an M& A, you are risking failure just because of the nature of M& A. And particularly if you're in technology, no matter how much due diligence you might have done, the integration plans will not go to plan.

 And sometimes you can be wrong by 18 months, which seems like, you know, a lifetime. And so building buffer. And knowing that your plan is important to do, but it will not be right is important when you go into M& A. Um, the second thing people often don't take full understanding of is how much education and training is needed by the two companies, whether they're the acquirer or the [00:07:00] company that's being bought.

They have to learn the product, the tech, the tech stacks, the tools, the way of working, the culture. And too many people kind of go, right, we've integrated the businesses. It's fine. It's great. We can go on and continue to run the business, but no, the whole organization needs to go through a huge retraining and educational process.

And then the third thing, and that's really important for boards. Is as a board and exec team, before you engage in M& A, do you have the right mindset? And I call that mindset, the culture of transformative change. You have to accept that even if it's a bolt on, your organization is going to change radically, which is good.

That's why you did the M& A in the first place as you were trying to make change, but really setting yourself up for that embracing of culture of transformative change is important. It might be that you need to change your whole board because you built a different organization. And that's absolutely okay, but you have to be willing to go into the process knowing that that might be the case Um same thing for your employees.

Are [00:08:00] they ready for change? Are they ready to embrace new ways of working of letting go of what was the culture of the past? To lean into what the joint organization is going to create

Oliver Cummings: Why do you think it always takes longer than you think is it that people under? Appreciate the complexity or is there something else?

Anne de Kerckhove: Complexity is absolutely a key. Two is people. Are people willing to change? Are they willing to let go of their old ways of working? Are they willing to embrace the openness that you need to do, for example, when you integrate two technologies to say, oh yeah, no, that is, that's actually a weakness in our platform.

You know, and, and the, you want to protect your baby, don't you? That's just the human nature, and therefore there's just a natural resistance to change. Um, and finally, systems. We all have legacy systems, uh, if we're in technology, and, and, you know, you, you run a technology marketplace in many ways, and you know how it is.

Your technology stack gets old really, really quickly, and therefore tech debt, [00:09:00] is, is, is hard to manage when you do an M& A.

Oliver Cummings: Uh, it's a, a very live, uh, discussion. 

Anne de Kerckhove: I can imagine. We all have it every day, almost if we're in technology.

Oliver Cummings: I want to talk also about international expansion, because that has also been something that you've had amazing experience of as MD Videology, you expanded the business across 16 countries, uh, making Europe the leading source of profitable revenues. What do you wish the board had told you at the start of that journey?

Anne de Kerckhove: To do my homework. The first thing is you have to do a lot of research when you enter in your market. Uh, and you have to take, again, I'm going to sound boring, a data driven approach. What is different about the market you're about to enter in terms of buying habits, in terms of competitive dynamics, in terms of how the structural sector is.

If you don't do that research, you can choose absolutely the wrong countries to go into. And as a startup, you always want to go super fast, right? So your board is there to say, Hang on a minute. Show me the research. Show me the thought process that you [00:10:00] have. I think the other thing that now I at least constantly preach when I'm in boards, um, is create a playbook, a repeatable playbook.

Don't reinvent the wheel every time you go into a market. Learn from your failures and your successes and build a playbook that you can share with the team that's in charge of international expansion so that everybody's aligned about the steps to take to make it a repeatable success. And then who you choose to put on the international team, the international expansion team, is critical.

Uh, you have to have a mix of local people and of the people from the mothership, if you want. Um, that's really important. And, I always say, people that do international business have to be meticulous, data driven risk takers. Because fundamentally, when you expand internationally, there's a big chance of failure.

And that's, you have to be comfortable with that. And when you fail, you have to fail fast and move out of the market. But if you launch, let's say, in 10 markets, one will be [00:11:00] a massive success that you really hadn't predicted, another one will just fall flat, and then there's going to be a bunch in the middle.

And your portfolio approach has to be one of looking at the data, and knowing when to give up on a market because it's just not a right fit. And on the contrary, doubling down on the ones that are a huge success where you can really take big opportunities. So meticulous data driven risk takers is what you want on the team.

Oliver Cummings: Data has been a common theme there through all of the points that you've talked about of SAS scale ups, and you've worked in data driven businesses for the last 15 years. I'm curious to hear what You know, as a board member now, what are you looking for from your organizations? And what are the pitfalls people often run into?

I remember a founder once saying to me, look, there are two things you're going to be, you're going to invest late into. One is DevOps and the other is data. Invest earlier than you think. And it was really good advice, actually. Curious to hear what [00:12:00] your equivalent would be.

Anne de Kerckhove: The one thing you need to invest in right now is automation and AI. And not just play lip service to it. And as board members, if you're not familiar with those data driven elements, in strategy, read some books, get on some podcasts. There's a lot of data there out available, but not understanding automation, machine learning and AI right now will not be good for your career as a board member.

And your relevance to that board and the impact that you can have. So yeah, data is really vital for boards. Uh, again, we talked about it. It's a good, a good, a good board pack makes you a good board member. And, um, one of the things I find hilarious is how much time we still spend on annual reports.

When you think about it, annual reports represent what happened 18 months ago. Why do we care so much? Why do we spend 156 pages explaining to everybody what we did 18 months ago? What we need to move towards is much more reporting about the future. And that shift is happening, but not [00:13:00] fast enough. We still spend countless hours looking at the past.

And as a good board member, you're looking for forward, uh, facing metrics. What's 18 months? How can I predict it? How can I build predictability in the business? And that's what data does. So, Building models that help you understand the future are ten times more important than the annual report, which nobody reads anymore, I think.

Maybe they read a few pages, but then they, you know, toss it away and thank God we don't publish them anymore because that was such a waste of the environment where we used to publish these bricks of paper, um, in order to tell everybody what to do.

Oliver Cummings: As a board member, do you expect to be able to interrogate and access the data, uh, first, first hand? As an example, we use a people analytics platform that our board can dive into and start interrogating for themselves. They don't need to get the cut of it that I present to them. But my sense is a lot of board members want it served to them on a platter and aren't often willing to go do that work. What's your approach?

Anne de Kerckhove: It totally depends. [00:14:00] Indeed, some board members weren't taught to use those tools, right? And that's fine. They're not adequately equipped and trained to do the cuts. In any ways, as a CEO, you want to be presenting a certain perspective. That's important because you know the business better than anybody else.

So you want to be cutting the data in a specific way because you want to tell a story, um, that makes sense and helps guide the board. But equally, I do sit on boards where I come from technology. So I like to play with the tools. And being comfortable with that transparency is important. So you have to adapt it.

It's not one single rule, but the role of the CEO and the CFO on a board. It's to make sense of that cut of data, and that's really important. So you don't delegate that to your board. You're always making sure that you're giving a perspective, because that's what you're supposed to do as an exec team.

 Again, that's the difference between an exec role and a board role. The exec role is to present to the board. And to present perspective and to present a conviction of what they think, [00:15:00] how they see the future, how they see the need for, the development and it's for the board to question it, challenge it, add to it, but we're not there to take over the role of the CFO.

Oliver Cummings: Can we move on to talk about nominations committees? Because you've had some amazing experience on nominations committees. A recent penny drop moment for me came out of the podcast I did with Roger Martin. Who Really made it clear for me how the key role for the board is to get the CEO appointment right and if you buy that Then probably the second most important thing has to be getting the board who will appoint the CEO right succession and nomination of a new chair and three new board members at 888. I'm really interested to hear what have been your lessons. 

Anne de Kerckhove: So first of all, it's one of my favorite committees. I love being in charge of nomination because indeed, you're so intrinsically linked to the strategy of the business and finding the right people to Implement that strategy and on top of the board seats that I've had to, [00:16:00] um, find, um, we, of course, at 888 changed our CEO and our CFO.

So I had the chance of leading both sides of that and of really thinking about it precisely like you would a sports team. You know, what are the different skills you need on that team? What do you want from the execs? Um, and what complementarity do you need on the board? 

How are the people that you're putting on the board driving and have the skills for the next three years of strategy? They're completely interlinked. You don't think of a board as nominating a board separately to the underlying strengths of the business or weaknesses of the business and how you might address that.

 So it's a fascinating job where you're not just thinking about the individual, but you're thinking about the whole team and whether they'll play well together as a sports team. Do they have the right diversity? Do they have the right, Respectfulness of your board culture. That's really important.

When I do a brief for a candidate, whether it's on a platform like Neural or another, I spend a lot of time talking about the culture and what is important for us in the board culture. Because [00:17:00] that's what's going to make a fit between the new board members and the old board members. But equally, we were laughing about this with John, our chair at 888 William Hill.

There's a point where the board gets to know each other so well That they can finish each other's sentences. And at that point, you know, you need to bring in new board members because you're just so cohesive that you need fresh perspectives. Um, so that's another thing people think of boards as this.

I've been appointed and therefore I will stay for eight, nine, 10 years. That's not the right approach. The approach is just like a CEO might have to change at one point. Cause they're no longer the right person for the business. The same thing goes for boards. There's a point where you were the exact right person for that stage of the business, but now it's time to bring in new people.

And I think we need to get out of this thought process that a board, once you get appointed, is fixed tenure that has to be quite lengthy because business has changed at a rate that's faster than ever before. And therefore sometimes you need to change your [00:18:00] board and you'll need different skills suddenly and therefore you want to add to your board sometimes.

Oliver Cummings: Who drives that process? We had hosted a recent Mastermind event with a group of chairs where one of them was wrestling with a CEO, founder, who's a majority. shareholder who wasn't buying into a nominations, committee process and, uh, they were wrestling with how do they go about pulling together the, the skills matrix.

And one of the observations from the peer group was, well, actually it should be your CFO, if you've got a good CFO. Who's driving that and they should be bringing that skills matrix to you, which I was interested by because that's not the only way I've seen it done. I'm curious to hear what your experience of actually making that happen is.

Anne de Kerckhove: I actually don't think it's a single individual. I think you bring a people, a group of people together, boards and execs to say, okay, What are we missing here? We also do a lot of evaluations of our own boards, right? And every six months we say, are we [00:19:00] missing certain skills? Are there missing certain personalities, certain diversity elements that we don't have on the board?

Being constantly in Self analysis of are you the right group of people is really important. And if you engage with your execs as well, they're part of the process. So again, if it's top down, one single person trying to drive that process, whether it's your CFO, your chair, your CEO, it's not going to work.

You want to bring across. At the table, all the people that this will affect, and co create, uh, what that board, uh, skill matrix is supposed to be, and what, what needs to, uh, add to it.

Oliver Cummings: So I get that it should be a combined effort, but who's taking the lead on the pen? Is there one person who puts together that first cut of it for the discussion?

Anne de Kerckhove: Totally depends on the skills you have on the board. There will be somebody who's naturally more comfortable with that. I'm probably the person that's closest to it because of all the changes we've had to do in the nomination. So I'm very comfortable doing the first draft in other business.

It could be your chief people officer [00:20:00] who has that perspective because they are, they're really uncomfortable with doing a first draft, right? So again, we tend to put people in, in little buckets because they have a certain title, but actually you have to go to, wow, this person's really good at this kind of stuff.

So let's lean into that. person when we need that. And that's good boards. They don't sit in a little square box. They actually adapt and learn to stretch what their role is based on their competencies and skills. I 

Oliver Cummings: was doing a talk recently for a group of HRDs of large multinationals and one of my challenges to them was, look, boards are one of the biggest value leavers that an organization has.

The problem, most boards are dysfunctional and one of the biggest problems is, is around people. You as HRD should be more involved. I'd not come across many CPOs or HRDs who do get involved in that. Skills matrix at the board level. Is that, that's something you've seen though by the sounds of it? 

Anne de Kerckhove: Oh, absolutely. And I proactively make sure that that happens. You indeed have [00:21:00] HR and people directors whose job it is to understand dynamics, organizational dynamics, skill sets, why wouldn't you leverage them? So absolutely, I highly encourage, your HRDs and your CPOs to be deeply involved in the board, composition, analysis and, and even any nomination process.

Oliver Cummings: One of the responsibilities that you've touched on is not just getting the right people on the bus, but it's getting the wrong people off the bus. Mm hmm. That could be a really awkward discussion, and again, you've alluded to, and it resonates with something actually Reid Hoffman has written, that it's better to have someone great for two years than someone average for ten. How do you go about having those discussions to make sure that That they can happen, and that they are not an unpleasant experience. 

Anne de Kerckhove: One of the things is frequency, right? If in your board dynamics, it is natural to do a debrief on whether we're the right board, are you still interested in [00:22:00] this board, I've seen you disconnect on this thing, are you still, you know?

If you're comfortable having those conversations on a frequent basis, Then they don't become unpleasant, because people expect them, you expect to have them, and people just are very comfortable being transparent about their needs. And remember, a lot of people have a portfolio, uh, career, and therefore, that might have been a perfect role for them at a certain time, but now they want to take another opportunity, and that means they have to get off one board.

Much easier if you're very comfortable having those conversations. So, frequency is important, transparency is important, and a culture. A feedback. So after every board, we have a post board debrief for just the Neds without the chair. We say what worked well during this board. What did somebody not have enough of a voice? Did we present well enough? Did we? And we literally give feedback to the chair after every board meeting. 

Oliver Cummings: I'm so pleased to hear that. I'm a champion of that and it's great to hear that you're doing that. How long do those last?

Anne de Kerckhove: When we had lots of awkward conversations to have, they could last quite a while, as you can imagine. [00:23:00] And other times you finish a new board and you go, that went really good. Let's just wrap it up. We need 15 minutes. But we still do it. We still do the round table because things come out. So even when board member board meetings go super well, Do the debrief and give it the time for the reflection to happen and for a little even smaller topics to emerge.

Oliver Cummings: One of my observations is that people often, because it's done at the end, uh, then having to rush off and therefore it gets curtailed. It sounds like you're spending at least 15 minutes and then longer if, if there's something more complex to be discussed. How do you make sure that you're not running into that thing of, oh, I've got a flight to catch or 

Anne de Kerckhove: So it is scheduled and it's part of the, the, uh, board formal schedule. Um, so we take flights after that. Um, and it's, it's allocated for a whole hour. So if we don't use the hour, it's fine, but it's allocated for a whole hour when, however, you've had, let's say, a day and a half of board meetings. You might not be in the right frame of mind. So I often will say, [00:24:00] Okay, well, let's we're just all exhausted.

Let's schedule a post board call, maybe 24 hours later. So you also have to respect the fact that some board meetings can be absolutely exhausting. If you go through seven hours of presentations, You probably don't have the right frame of mind to question those seven hours. So it's best to sometimes do it the next day.

And, for the chair, it's very important to do that debrief with the CO, but not at the end of the board. A few days later, to reflect on what happened in the board, what worked well, what do we need to deep dive more into? Did we have enough of a strategic conversation? So, um, whether you're, as Ned's doing it, or if you're the chair and you want to do it with the CO, debriefs are critical.

Oliver Cummings: Bring it back to the nominations committee chair role. One of your responsibilities is to review the structure, size, and composition of the board. I'm curious, for someone who's listening to this, who's about to step into their first NOMCO chair role, what are the things that might not be obvious to them that you've learnt?

Anne de Kerckhove: One of the things is go back to [00:25:00] what is the What is the strategy of the next three years? What are the levers for that strategy? And what skills do you need to have to enable those levers? And that's what should define your board composition. And size almost happens because of board composition rather than the other way around.

I mean, obviously there are rules, whether, if you're a public company, about how many NEDs you need. And so we tend to just say, oh, I need three NEDs, so I'm going to make sure we have three NEDs. But that's actually not the right thing to think about. 

You need to think about board composition based on the strategy, the skills you're missing, the sector knowledge, the tech, the AI, the M& A knowledge, the people knowledge, the go to market knowledge, and make sure that you have a well rounded group of people that can address all of the most important ones for the company.

And also, more and more, you have your formal boards, but you can have an advisory committee. For example, very few board, it's changing, but not that many boards come from a tech background. A lot of them will come from finance, right? They will have had a career as a [00:26:00] CFO or at PWC, and then they become board members, they chair audit, and there's just a natural inclination to have more people that come from a finance background than from a tech company, tech company.

And also, even if you were in tech, let's say 10 years ago, before you went plural and stopped your executive roles, You're not that relevant today. I hate to say it. Your technology is about the past, not the future. So one of the things businesses are doing more intelligently this day is also bringing advisors and creating committees that are specialized in a specific topic.

And that allow you to bring some younger, still executive talent that are super knowledgeable about product, about tech, and still contribute to the board without having to take on a full board seat, which might not be of interest to them at that point. So, we have to be creative in how we think of boards and advisory positions and not continue to follow what is either listed in your AIM rules or is just convention. Everything else is changing. Why wouldn't boards change as well?

Oliver Cummings: We just piloted our first pop up [00:27:00] board, which was an absolutely breathtaking experience and to, to watch an individual brought a particular issue and then had, you know, 50 people put themselves forward to discuss it. And we broke them out into groups and it was just magic seeing the power of that. Diversity of thought, and the wisdom, wisdom of the crowd. Uh, something we're very, very excited about. 

Anne de Kerckhove: That's very cool.

Oliver Cummings: What have you learned about preparing a description of roles and capabilities required for a particular appointment as a NOMCO chair? One of my observations is boards sometimes get that wrong because They fall foul of that.

A camel is a horse designed by committee. They end up being reduced to the lowest common denominator of everyone having had their, say in it, and end up with a bit of a lacking, lacking real clarity. 

Anne de Kerckhove: Mm hmm. So, one person should write the brief. Maximum two. What you do is you interview every board member about their, or an [00:28:00] exec about their thoughts about the role, but then you're absolutely right, you need one editorial line, one person who just thinks about it and re reads that brief document five times to make sure it really accurately reflects what you need from the person joining.

I spend a lot of time on the briefing. I think a good brief creates a good search process that creates a good outcome. And that is both skills and culture and attitude and approach. So again, I would use words like the ability to embrace and drive transformative change that de facto move some candidates away from that process.

But if you don't use words like that, how is a recruiter meant to really understand The emphasis that you want from the role. So I completely agree with you. Briefing by committee has never worked in any capacity. What you need to do is get input and then have one person read right through that whole briefing document and think about it.

Like it's, it can't just be a ticking box exercise, you know. Uh, it's a board role, so I'm, I'm going to put the same skills that everybody puts for board role. [00:29:00] No, no. Spend time really thinking about what change that person needs to do to drive the board to be even more performing.

Oliver Cummings: Yeah, it's very striking to us how many boards don't often do the thinking, you know, they will lazily put, oh, needs previous PLC board experience. It's like, well, why do they do it? And they're using it as a proxy for, well, someone credible, but actually there are a lot more credible people who might not yet have had any PLC board experience. 

Anne de Kerckhove: One of the thing that I constantly encourage boards is if there's already four people with PLC experience or three people with PLC experience Why do you need a fourth?

 We've all been first time PLC board members at one point in our career, and we learned from the other board members, but actually, the input we, we brought to that board for strategy technology was way more important than had we done PLC jobs before, and so I completely encourage, um, people on NOMCO to really think about first time board members.

If they don't have enough [00:30:00] PLC experience, bring that on the board. But otherwise, question why you're putting must have PLC experience.

Oliver Cummings: One of the other responsibilities of the NOMCO is ensuring enough time is being spent on development of the board. One of the previous Enter the Boardroom guests, Dr. Sabine Demkowski, highlighted that most boards don't spend enough time on their development. I'm curious to hear, what training do you do on your boards? 

Anne de Kerckhove: So, first of all, I completely agree with that statement and it's almost, easy to say, okay, I'm on the board. That's my job. And to stop learning. So one of the things we do on all my boards is bring experts from within the business. 

And external experts because sometimes the knowledge is actually in the business, but you need to bring them to the board, which they wouldn't be the natural speaker for board, action points or decisions, but they have a lot of knowledge that they need to share.

 I make sure all of our boards have training on, again, I'm going to sound like a broken record, AI and automation on technology and product [00:31:00] that they actually get a demo of the products and the technology, and it doesn't matter if half the room glazes over for a while because they're like, oh, It's technology.

I don't know anything about technology. Once they've had two or three of these deep dives, they don't glaze over anymore. They actually know that it's, that they can contribute even without being a technologist. So I completely agree with that statement. It's absolutely essential to continue to learn ESG and safer gambling, obviously is a massive part of our training at 888 William Hill understanding how technology can help, ESG.

Those are new topics that you need to spend time on, and equally learn from other board members. You know, networking is important for outside of your board. The more networks you can join, the more you can learn from other board members, de facto, you're going to become a better board member. 

Oliver Cummings: The senior independent director role is not one that everyone is familiar with. It's mainly used in enlisted companies. You've held this [00:32:00] role on a number of occasions. I'm curious to hear what have been the most challenging situations you've navigated and where have you been able to add most value as a SID?

Anne de Kerckhove: So it's interesting, right? The SID role is not. Defined as one thing, right? It's it's 100 different things. You have to be the voice for shareholders if they're they don't feel the chair is listening to them.

You have to be the voice of the other board members if they feel they're not getting what they need out of the chair. You're also the sounding board for the chair. John and I will speak on a very regular basis in between boards and and challenge ourselves on the agenda of the board. Topics we need to cover.

So you're also very close to your chair whilst also being a voice Um that has to go to him if somebody thinks they're not doing a good job So it's a really interesting role. You have to be very comfortable with awkward conversation If you're a sid that's almost the guaranteed nature of the role Is you will be brought in when there's an awkward conversation to have either by board dynamics or changes or, or different approaches.

So do not apply for a SID role unless you're very [00:33:00] comfortable with that, where, and you feel that that's actually appropriate. An interesting role. For us, obviously at 888 William Hill, my biggest time that was the most challenging as a SID was when John had to move away from being chair to executive chair when we were without a CO for several months.

 It is so easy to blur the lines then of what a board is versus an exec team. And so I had to be almost that constant watch person to say, are we still A proper board. Are we going too far to the exact? There are some meetings that John can't chair anymore because of his role as exec and, , it wouldn't be right because he's almost correcting his own homework.

 And sometimes that's really awkward to say to somebody, actually, you can't share this part of the meeting, even though you're an executive chair. I'm going to have to do that because there's a natural conflict of interest. But for John, it was really important that I was the one that was going to make sure.

Okay. That we were all winged following that, that important distinction between execs and board. So that was a challenging period. Definitely took me out of my comfort [00:34:00] zone. I think it took John out of his comfort zone to have to take the exec chair role. And it took a lot of patience from the other board members to know this was uncharted territory for us.

We were both navigating it as best we could, but we needed all of them to help us in that process. It wasn't just the CID role. It was the CID plus the other board members helping us through what was completely new to both of us. 

And I think that's another thing, Oliver, is if you join a board for the first time, it's not because you're a new board member. That you go through situations that you haven't lived through before, even as a 10 year board member, it still happens almost once a month where I get, I come across something that I have never experienced before and that I have to work through. So, I always say to new board members, it happens to us even 10 years later, just don't obsess about it, learn through it, but don't assume that board members know everything. None of us do.

Oliver Cummings: We're doing these masterminds and I think we must have now done, I don't know, over 200, 300 of them. And each of them, you get two board members bringing a challenge that they're facing. And then the [00:35:00] other six members of the group share their experiences and advice and insight. And I was asked recently, I've, I've been leading them, uh, because it's been part of our sort of product developments.

And it's something that's really interested me. And I was asked by one of the participants recently, a chair, what, what have been the common Themes across them. And I was thinking about it and I was like, do you know what? There have been over 200, I mean, there'd be one or two recurring themes, but there have been over 250 different problems brought in each of those things. It's quite fascinating. 

Anne de Kerckhove: Yeah, it's absolutely true. And that's it. You have to, as a board member, love the variety of problems that you'll have to address and that has to be in your nature of loving complex problems that emerge and having to react to them very quickly.

Oliver Cummings: We had a SID participating in one these events not so long ago who brought the challenge of a chair who was, Going off the reservation who they as Cid had lost faith in and they were Wrestling with what to do [00:36:00] about it. What would you do in that situation? 

Anne de Kerckhove: You address the problem. If it's not your opinion, but it's an actual fact that the chair is for whatever reason, no longer the right person to chair the board. You have to address it. 

Oliver Cummings: So this situation, 50 percent of the board didn't recognize the problem. 50 percent of the board did recognize the problem but weren't willing to stick their necks above the parapet. What do you do then?

Anne de Kerckhove: You have a lot of discussions. If the 50 don't realize it, is it they just haven't thought about it? Is it that they haven't identified the problems? You ask them to then witness the next board meeting with that in mind.

And if they notice the behaviors because you've alerted them to them, and they're now seeing them in action, most likely they will say, uh, actually I'm wrong, yes, there was a problem. It often takes you a certain time to recognize, especially if you've worked with that person, If they had worked with that chair for years, and that person had been a great chair, but at one point was no longer, it takes a while to, [00:37:00] to get over the, the natural affinity that you have, the natural loyalty that you have towards somebody to say, Oh yeah, change needs to happen.

But that's something that boards need to be much more comfortable with. Um, it's not personal. It's about a fit with the role at that time. And once you put that in perspective, it makes everything much easier. 

Oliver Cummings: Which brings us on nicely to, what have you learned about reviewing the chair's performance as a SID that might help those listening to this?

Anne de Kerckhove: Again, we talked about it, frequency. The chair has to know you will evaluate him or her. And that that's just part of the debriefs of every board meetings. And then, every six months, a deep dive into it. 

And, John as a chair, for example, is incredibly comfortable with it. He knows that we're going to have lunch, and I'm going to have my little list of things that the board members have told me or that I feel need to change, and he is completely comfortable with that.

We have demystified the whole [00:38:00] evaluating of the chair into something that is a completely normal business process. Everybody else in the organization gets feedback. Why wouldn't the chair get feedback? So once you make it just part of normal business, it helps you get much more comfortable with the process. 

Oliver Cummings: Before we go to the lightning round, I want to briefly talk about your own board journey. Uh, I hope you won't mind me saying that I think you first applied for a board role or a new role back in 2020 when, uh, I think you were unsuccessful. And it took you three years before you applied for another role when you applied successfully for the Eagle Eye Chair role, and then a year later for the Blackbird PLC Sid role.

But even in between those two successes, you had a number of applications. didn't succeed and to someone looking on the outside, I suspect they will think that you've only had great success in your non executive career. You've got an incredible portfolio, but it really reminds me of that statistic of Michael Jordan, that as well as being the most successful player ever, uh, he missed more shots than anyone in [00:39:00] NBA history.

Can you just talk those listening through your journey and the highs and lows for those, particularly who are early on in their journey and perhaps wondering if they'll ever get there?

Anne de Kerckhove: So you're right. I've been very lucky. I took my first public company board. In my early forties, that doesn't happen to everybody.

So it gave me natural creds to go into bigger roles like 888 William Hill. Um, and Neural's been a great platform for me, and I'm really grateful about the roles that I found through the platform. But one of the joys of applying to a platform like Neural, Is you can stretch to roles that you might not get.

Um, so I don't see it as, as a low. I'm like, Oh gosh, that business is so interesting. I really don't have all of the qualifications for it, but what if I'm the right person today for them? Because they're really looking for the skills I can bring. So you shouldn't see a rejection on a platform like Neuro as any indicator of your skillset or whether you're a good board member, it's whether you're the right person at that moment for that [00:40:00] board.

Simple as that. Um, it's very, uh, disturbing sometimes for new board members because they're getting rejections, whereas they're used to having been approached by a headhunter, say, would you, I'm going to put you on the shortlist for the CEO role. This is a completely different process, as you know. And so apply for as many roles you want to accept the rejection of not making it to the long list, accept the rejection of not making it to the shortlist, accept the rejection of not getting it to a board.

It's got no reflection about who you are. It's about the right fit for the board culture, the skills they need, the next three years of strategy. And the minute you take that out of your mind, then you're super happy. You go on the platform and you go, Oh no, that really, I have no skills for, but boy, would that be fun?

And you completely change the narrative that you give yourselves. And for first time board members,, I do give this advice a lot. Think about the unique skill that you have rather than your board experience because you don't have them. So focus on putting in your own tv your [00:41:00] editorial line about yourself What you are very very good at because that's what's going to get you to your first board seat

Oliver Cummings: I think a lot about board archetypes and in my mind There are several you get your sort of co whispers people who've been a co before who can Relate to the CEO experience, you get your functional experts, whether they have deep financial expertise, which makes them right for an audit role or deep digital expertise that makes them right for an organization that requires a lot of digital insight.

You have your sector experts, you have your voice of the customer or other stakeholder experts. If that's a regulator or whatever else it might be, uh, you have your futurists, those who are, uh, Has good at looking around corners and anticipating the things that others might be blind to What are the things that for you stand out most in your?

Nominations committee role for people in terms of archetypes if you were advising someone look if you're gonna Create that point of differentiation in [00:42:00] in one or two areas. Where would you counsel people to spend their time?

Anne de Kerckhove: The futurist is really important right now on boards. But so is the voice of the customer. You don't invent what archetype you are. You naturally, if you've gotten to this level in your career, you know, what you're really, really good at. Mine is probably having awkward conversation, and I've done strategy and I've been a CEO, but I'm very comfortable with conflict.

I'm very comfortable with avoiding, making sure the dynamics change to not have conflict. I'm good at awkward conversations. I don't know which archetype that puts me in. Maybe it's the whisper of, the board. Um, but know that about yourself and be comfortable that that's who you are and put that forward.

So it's just got to be aligned with who you are. And you'll notice that it's actually self selecting. I never get approach for board roles that are kind of box ticking exercise. Most of the things will come with a brief that says the business is transforming, the business is at the next level of growth.

The business is looking at complex issues because there's That's literally what I've done all my life for [00:43:00] complex businesses that needed to change.

Oliver Cummings: And it's time for the lightning round where I say a short statement and ask you for a quick response. If you're ready. Sure. Best book. Every board member should read. 

Anne de Kerckhove: There is no such thing. There is no holy grail. One book a board member should read tons of picture, uh, books, tons of articles, different perspectives.

That's how they become a good board member.

Oliver Cummings: Boardroom behavior that irritates you most. 

Anne de Kerckhove: Talking over other people.

Oliver Cummings: Most valuable board ritual. 

Anne de Kerckhove: Uh, the post board debrief, which we talked about.

Oliver Cummings: Most significant professional insight,

Anne de Kerckhove: build repeatable success. Don't build the one shot. That's not how you scale a business.

So always think about repeatability, scale, and repeatable success.

Oliver Cummings: The worst professional advice you've ever received? 

Anne de Kerckhove: And try to blend in more.

Oliver Cummings: What have you changed your mind on about boards over time?

Anne de Kerckhove: I have really learned over time what a massive impact diversity can have. It's incredible if you bring a diverse group of people, how quickly they change [00:44:00] board dynamics.

Oliver Cummings: When was the last time you got a significant judgment call wrong in the boardroom and what did you learn? 

Anne de Kerckhove: We're not gonna tell you the exact example, but it's very simple bad data leads to bad judgment.

Oliver Cummings: And finally three things our listeners should take away from this podcast if they take nothing else 

Anne de Kerckhove: All right, you're not going to be very surprised bring a data driven approach to your every board meeting Uh focus on your ability to embrace that drive that transformative change and then recruit amazing board members. Set the bar high.

Oliver Cummings: And that has been fantastic a whistle stop tour of sass scale up nominations committees and the sid role Thank you so much for taking the time to share your wisdom and experience 

Anne de Kerckhove: Thank you, Oliver. It was a real pleasure just spend this hour with you.

🎙️ You can listen to the full podcast interview with Anne de Kerckhove on Apple Podcasts, Spotify and YouTube.