Boards are experienced. So why do CEOs still feel at sea?

In uncertain and disrupted times, boardroom discussions are expected to evolve. Most boards today are composed of highly experienced individuals—former CEOs, financial experts, operators with impressive track records.

And yet, many CEOs feel increasingly overwhelmed.

Recent data highlights a striking contradiction:

• 87% of CEOs believe their boards and investors have the right knowledge to handle disruption
• Yet 72% struggle to set priorities
• And 85% say they need more support

So what’s missing?

The missing expertise no one talks about

When communications and reputation are not embedded at the decision-making level, a structural blind spot emerges.

Business decisions are made in isolation from stakeholder perception.

The result?

• Announcements that land poorly with investors
• Client communication that creates unintended consequences
• Internal messaging that undermines trust
• Strategic decisions that trigger avoidable reputational risk

This is not a failure of intelligence.

It is a failure of perspective.

The trust gap inside organisations

There is another, less visible issue.

In many organisations, communications is still seen as an execution function—not a strategic discipline. As a result:

• In-house communications leaders are not always fully trusted or empowered
• CEOs do not (consistently) encourage meaningful “pushback”
• Critical reputational risks are identified—but not always acted upon
  

As many spokespersons will agree with me: 

“CEOs still ask for a press release. They don't consider how business decisions or client communication will impact the broader stakeholder group and the company’s reputation.”

This disconnect has existed for years—and it continues to limit the effectiveness of internal teams.

Why external perspective is increasingly essential

In disrupted environments, the stakes are higher and the margin for error is smaller.

What’s needed is not more information—but a different lens.

An independent, senior-level, outside-in perspective can:

• bridge the gap between business decisions and stakeholder perception
• challenge assumptions at the right level
• translate complexity into clear, strategic communication choices
• ensure reputational impact is considered before decisions are finalised

Not as an add-on.

But as part of the decision-making process itself.

From communication to judgement

This is ultimately not (only) about communication.

It is about judgement.

• What should be said
• What should not be said
• When to act
• When to hold back
• How decisions will be interpreted—not just intended

These are board-level considerations. Yet they are rarely treated as such.

Where I come in

As an independent senior advisor, I work at the intersection of:

• business decisions
• stakeholder perception
• and reputational impact

I support CEOs, boards, and communications leaders by providing:

Reputation oversight – identifying risks when reputational impact is underestimated

Strategic communication guidance – shaping what to say, how, and when

Direct, honest feedback – challenging assumptions and strengthening decision-making

My role is not to replace internal teams—but to strengthen them, particularly in high-stakes or complex situations.

Support can be:

• a few hours of focused input
• interim involvement
• or part of a broader, more complex project through trusted partnerships

A final thought

Boards are highly experienced. But experience alone is no longer enough.

In a world where perception moves markets, shapes trust, and defines long-term value, the question is no longer whether communications matters.

The real question is:

Who, at the table, is responsible for understanding its impact?


Source:

Boards need to rethink how they advise CEOs