In recent years, a new category of training has been consolidated in major business schools. Programs for access to administrative boards, corporate governance certification, preparatory itineraries for boards. The information is clear and necessary. Marco Legal, Fiduciary Responsibilities, Committee Structure, ESG, CEO Relationship, Asset Management. Everything is essential. But the strategic question is different. Is being technically ready to occupy an environment the same as being ready to drive around accelerated disruption? It is one thing to understand the formal architecture of the board and quite another to decide when technology, regulation, geopolitics and stakeholders will change the rules of the game faster than traditional strategic cycles.
Various recent analyzes of the functioning of councils agree on a central idea. Classic strengths—solid, powerful strategy or prior strategy experience—are still valuable, but have lost focus on other capabilities. Synthesizing large volumes of information, identifying patterns in complex data, reconciling divergent perspectives, and constructively managing stakeholder tensions. It is not about replacing experience with technology. It is about expanding the government’s cognitive repertoire.
Context explains this development. International studies on new skills in the digital economy show that skills related to artificial intelligence, data and digital technologies are most exposed to transformation. on average a significant majority of digital skills will change in the form in which they are applied in the next few years, while more human skills develop with less intensity. Meanwhile, only a minority of business leaders believe that education systems are adequately developing AI and big data capabilities, meaning a large majority expect them to be critical by 2030. We are facing structural tension. Technological maturity advances faster than the organizational capacity to strategically manage it.
In addition, there is a rare dimension that occupies the center of these programs that must be kept in mind. My advice is that it is not just a position of influence, it is a position of personal responsibility. In most developed jurisdictions – including Spain under the Companies Act and the European Corporate Governance Code – advisers are subject to fiduciary duties such as the duty of care and the duty of loyalty. Any breach of these obligations may, in accordance with the circumstances of the case and applicable legislation, lead to liability to the company, to the shareholders and also to third parties. In certain cases, there may also be administrative or criminal consequences. Liability may be assessed jointly if there is no reasonable objection in the conduct. In a context where technological, regulatory and ESG challenges are multiplying, Passivity or a failure to supervise effectively can be interpreted as a failure of care. Accepting the board’s position means assuming that decisions made in this area may have legal, economic and reputational consequences.
And it is because of this increasing exposure that the invisible abilities of the current council are becoming accessories.
First example strategic synthesis based on uncertainties not linear. Contemporary advice operates in areas where artificial intelligence is changing business models, climate regulation is redefining coastal structures, and a digitally enhanced social media presence can disrupt value in hourly issues. The usual response is to increase reporting and sophisticated indicators. However, more data does not necessarily mean better governance. Control involves deciding which signals are strategically relevant when the system generates more information than can be comprehensibly processed. Synthesis is not simplification, it is the disciplined integration of wholeness.
Second qualification e.g manage structural contradictions using deliberative management. Today’s councils face tensions between financial profitability, environmental sustainability, digital transformation, regulatory oversight and social legitimacy. The most effective government bodies do not eliminate disappointment but channel it through cultures of learning, constructive debate and the search for informed consensus. Modern management does not eliminate compromises, it makes them explicit and manages them transparently.
Third competence, e.g Strategic creativity applied to government. In an environment where artificial intelligence optimizes processes and reduces information asymmetries, the problem is not only inefficiency, but also strategic convergence. When multiple actors access similar tools, the opportunity comes not just from the technology, but from the ability to formulate different questions. What scenarios are we considering? This hypothesis is assumed without sufficient evidence. What system solutions could materialize outside of our models. Creativity in a record is not aesthetic, it is anticipatory.
La cuarta habilidad e.g Professional intuition came to light. Advanced analytics and generative AI have increased the predictive capacity of organizations, but models operate on historical and explicit data. In new or highly uncertain situations, human judgment continues to be decisive. Artificial intelligence offers probability, advice must carry feeling and responsibility. Strategic intuition does not replace data, it occurs when data is insufficient, ambiguous or potentially misleading.
Fifth competence e.g Design the whiteboard as a continuous learning system. The most reliable government bodies promote regular evaluations of their own functioning, promote psychological safety, and avoid formal authority as a substitute for reasoned debate. In the context of increasing functional, geographic and generational diversity, this deliberative architecture is not decorative. The quality of government depends both on the composition of the council and on the internal dynamics that articulate it.
It is best to avoid oversimplification. To think that the solution to the new environment is only to invite technical experts to evaluate the quality of the debate. Or idealize human abilities because they were immune to error. The network should not choose between technology and criteria, but integrate them into a responsible decision-making architecture. The same international research that has been conducted in the field of digital transformation has shown that it is highly valued in terms of analytical thinking, creativity, resilience and teamwork. The board of the future will not be one that gathers the most trained experts, but that lacks strategic coherence between technical knowledge and collective juiciness.
The formation of counselors is positive. Professionalization of the approach to counseling is essential. But Forming strategists capable of integrating technology, ethics, creativity and intuition under pressure is a distinct endeavor. The council table is not a status symbol, it is a space for collective interpretation of the future with real consequences. In an environment where artificial intelligence amplifies analytical capacity and accelerates decision-making, the difference value of the councilor will not be able to accumulate more information until the criterion is applied where information is sufficient but clarity is lacking. This combination — technical rigor, judicious diligence, and assumed responsibility — will determine whether the XXI. century will be the best verifiers of trends, or authentic Rumbo architects.
***Paco Brea He is a professor at Deusto Business School, Advantere School of Management and an advisor at Innsomnia Business Accelerator
Leave a Reply