However, after being confronted with the issue of the president`s shortcomings, they remained on the board of directors, when it would have been less troublesome not to be identified with a company facing high management problems. They gave more time to the troubled company`s business and acted as responsible corporate citizens by taking over the de facto control powers previously held by the president on an interim basis. During my interviews, many plausible reasons were put forward for having insiders on boards, for example.B. Confers on the Board of Directors the prestige of insiders and contributes to a high morality throughout the Organization; Board membership contributes to the training of insiders by enabling them to participate in the high-level management process; external directors will be able to calibrate insiders as potential presidential candidates; and insiders at board meetings can answer questions about their respective responsibilities. At the other end of the spectrum is the widespread large corporation, where the chairman and board members typically own few shares. Here, de jure control powers are distributed among thousands of shareholders, who are generally both unorganized as owners and essentially inorganizing. With this lack of control or influence on the part of business owners, the president usually has the de facto powers to control the company, and with these control powers, it is the president who, like the managers of family owners in the small business, largely determines what the board of directors does or does not do. First, when the president dies suddenly or becomes unable to work, the board of directors has the responsibility to choose his successor. Management runs the company and board members serve as sources of advice and guidance to management. In addition, most chairs use the board sources represented on the board, both at board meetings and outside. And some thoughtful presidents identify, when selecting new board members to fill vacancies, the particular qualities or areas of advice desired – general or specialized – that presidents think will add something to their management choices. 3.
Determine the criteria by which the Board of Directors must annually evaluate the President`s performance on a formal basis. Proponents argue that term limits offer a non-confrontational opportunity to fire ineffective board members. Opponents of term limits believe that misguided board members may be led to either improve their behavior or silently and silently resign from the board. . . .