The first time I walked onto a plane carrying all my papers in my ultralight iPad instead of printed papers in heavy binders I thought I was in heaven. I didn’t have any problems reading though the papers in the plane (yes, even in economy), where struggling with my big folders in the past had been just painful. I actually had space in my carry-on luggage for shoes to go for a morning walk, instead of just materials for a long meeting. I knew that I had the most recent version of every single paper. How much better could it get? Little did I know that gradually, my “papers” would get bigger and bigger.

Much has been written about the challenges that non-executive directors face arising from information asymmetry. For example, McKinsey argues that one of the greatest challenges that directors face is to stay fully informed about the companies on whose boards they serve. Without doubt, board members must be able to interrogate management positions and delve into the assumptions underpinning recommendations. I’ve certainly observed boards whose members receive scant papers with little information, making decisions almost impossible.

What contributes to the overload of “paper”?

The first is that virtual papers are just that—virtual. If at no time does the person compiling the papers print them, then they have no dimension. Where once we could say it was a 0.5kg meeting, or a 2kg meeting (once I hit a 2.5kg meeting) now our papers are as large as our devices. There is no visual clue that the papers have got out of hand.

Yes, but where do all the papers come from? My hypothesis is that many of the papers are there “just in case…”. Board members ask questions—as is their right—and the next time round management attaches more information to forestall requests. “Let’s drown them in paper” is a tactic I have seen people employ when they want to minimise interference.

Why don’t board members challenge the issue? No doubt in some cases they do. Some board members understand that legally they are deemed to have read and understand any and all board papers supplied in their pack; a difficult challenge when the board papers are so lengthy. But others may like the comfort of having that additional information. After all, it’s interesting to know what a specific division of the organisation may be doing, even when it is of no relevance to the decisions at hand. And the settings for modelling are fascinating. And—as we know from the problems of information asymmetry—it is good to have access to information.

There can be serious consequences from too many papers

Nevertheless, I do think this is a serious concern because it can have serious consequences, including:

  • Misuse of members’ time. Whether boards, management committees, intergovernmental committee or other governing bodies, members have limited time and many competing demands. It places an undue burden on members to expect that they will have read, digested and understood every page of the papers supplied if they are beyond what is reasonable.
  • Placing undue expectations on board members. Let’s remember the legal assumption that the duty of care and diligence means that members have read and considered every paper. Down the track, if there are legal challenges to the actions of a board, it will certainly be assumed that directors have read their papers. Not reviewing the incidental papers can set directors up for issues down the track.
  • Possibly the most important issue: too many papers interferes with good decision making. When all information is presented as equal, when there is too much detail, it detracts from the most pertinent information. It’s just as hard to make the right decision when there is too much information as when there is not enough information.

Boards and committees are there to make decisions. Good decisions.

The most desirable intent for all boards and committees is that the members make good decisions based on clear and pertinent information. That is, that the board or committee is positioned to interrogate activities at appropriate level. And too much “virtual” paper gets in the way of good decision making.

What should papers look like? It’s a fine line. And it isn’t possible to be definitive about what would be included in board papers because it varies so much between organisations. But it can be managed.

The first step lies with management, specifically the company secretary or whoever is compiling the board papers. For every single paper that is included in the board pack, you should ask: “is this information, in this format, relevant to the decision or activity being asked of the board? Is it presented concisely? Does it raise irrelevant issues that realistically can’t be addressed in the time allocated to the board meeting? Is it complete?”.

And then, as the AICD has observed, board members themselves need to challenge when there is superfluous information. It’s easy to go along with papers that are presented but never discussed or used in any way. But I’m hoping you can see the harm that is possible when a little extra information becomes a virtual tidal wave.

Let’s not let the availability of apps and devices that support dimensionless paper contribute to bad decision making. Let’s take control and maintain an elegant sufficiency of paperwork, even when we have gone paperless.

Want more resources on building up meaningful board packs? This AICD article covers most bases and the AICD website has loads more useful information. If you want personalised assistance, The Insight Partnership can work with you to refine your approach.