Independent directors may undermine democratic process

28 August 2013
| By Staff |
image
image
expand image

There is no evidence to suggest that structural independence improves superannuation funds' financial positions or board directors' decision-making, according to a senior academic at Queens University in Belfast.  

He statement comes as the Coalition has signalled it will revisit the issue of super funds' board structures and seek to impose a requirement for three independent directors. 

Speaking at an Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia (ASFA) luncheon, Queens University's head of school at its faculty of law, Professor Sally Wheeler, said structural tests of independence may produce boards that are separate from interpersonal or business parties, but it may not lead to the kind of behavioural independence its proponents seek. 

The gender diversity argument had sprung from a failure of structural independence, Wheeler said. 

"There's real confusion there I think between independent ideas and thinking and independence as an identity, and what we want surely is independent ideas and thinking rather than people who have independence as some sort of identity," she said. 

"You're trying to solve a demographic deficit argument with issues about cognitive skills and behavioural attributes and that just doesn't work." 

According to Wheeler, research on psychological and group decision-making show that structural independence may actually work against behavioural attributes of independence. 

Debates around policies and procedures and interpretation of facts - 'task conflict' in psychology - is a good thing in decision-making but is being phased out by structural independence, she said. 

"It's trying to get rid of people who have values and shared norms; however research from psycghology tells us that actually you get much more discursive, teased-out decision-making if you have exactly those groups," Wheeler said. 

Group members are more likely to raise ideas and discuss different opinions because it is deemed appropriate or safe. 

Groups that lacked social cohesion are prone to relationship conflict, she said, which had a negative effect on the performance of groups. 

Read more about:

AUTHOR

 

Recommended for you

 

MARKET INSIGHTS

sub-bg sidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

Squeaky'21

My view is that after 2026 there will be quite a bit less than 10,000 'advisers' (investment advisers) and less than 100...

1 week ago
Jason Warlond

Dugald makes a great point that not everyone's definition of green is the same and gives a good example. Funds have bee...

1 week ago
Jasmin Jakupovic

How did they get the AFSL in the first place? Given the green light by ASIC. This is terrible example of ASIC's incompet...

1 week 1 day ago

AustralianSuper and Australian Retirement Trust have posted the financial results for the 2022–23 financial year for their combined 5.3 million members....

9 months 2 weeks ago

A $34 billion fund has come out on top with a 13.3 per cent return in the last 12 months, beating out mega funds like Australian Retirement Trust and Aware Super. ...

9 months ago

The verdict in the class action case against AMP Financial Planning has been delivered in the Federal Court by Justice Moshinsky....

9 months 2 weeks ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND