Do You Train Your Board Leadership Muscle – or Hide Behind Your CV?

Written by:

Anne Malberg Horsager – Director and Cofounder‍

^{DTU Board Education & Certificates, Danish Technical University DTU} 

^{Board Member | Ecosystem Builder | Partnership | Entrepreneurship | Innovation}

Board leadership is today one of the most powerful roles in modern organisations. Boards are expected to navigate increasing complexity, challenge executive management with insight, and make decisions whose consequences extend far beyond the next financial reporting period. Yet there is one question that is rarely asked, and even more rarely answered:

‍

How do you train your judgement as a board leader?

‍

In every other performance domain, the question would be self-evident. An elite athlete who does not train. A musician who does not practise. A researcher who does not update their methods. This would not be regarded as experience, but as unprofessional conduct.

And yet we continue to accept that board leadership is something one can “simply do” once sufficient experience has been accumulated. This is a dangerous assumption.

‍

Experience is not expertise

‍

In the boardroom, experience often functions as a form of credential. Years listed on a CV, former CEO positions, and repeated board appointments become markers of quality. Experience serves both as an entry ticket and as a defense. But experience is not the same as training.

Board work is not merely an extension of executive leadership experience. It is a distinct discipline with its own demands on judgement, role clarity, interaction, and strategic responsibility. Experience may be an important starting point, but without systematic training it risks becoming a hindrance rather than a strength.

All too often, we see boards where experience is confused with competence. Familiar patterns are repeated, new challenges are addressed retrospectively, and complexities such as technology, regulation, and sustainability are handled using mental models from another era.

Board work requires the ability to ask the right questions rather than to deliver answers; to operate strategically without interfering operationally; and to lead a collective where authority cannot be exercised through hierarchy. These capabilities do not develop automatically with seniority.

‍

An untrained elite

‍

Historically, board leadership has been shielded by status. The role has functioned as the culmination of a professional career rather than as a discipline requiring continuous development. Once seated at the head of the table, one is expected to “know how”.

In elite sport, this would be inconceivable. No one would accept a national coach saying:
“I no longer need to train – I have been doing this for years.”

Yet this is precisely the logic that often prevails in the boardroom. Executive management is systematically evaluated. Leadership teams are sent on development programmes. Employees are expected to improve their skills. But the board’s own judgement is treated as something static – something achieved once and for all.

The result is a peculiar construct: a high-status role with no obligation to train. An untrained elite.

‍

Experience as a defence mechanism

‍

The lack of training rarely manifests itself dramatically. It appears gradually. In strategy seminars where conclusions resemble last year’s. In board meetings where complexity increases but the questions remain the same. In consensus that is mistaken for quality because disagreement is perceived as inefficiency.

When someone suggests that board leadership can be trained, the response is often: “I have done this many times before.” In any other performance field, this would be considered a warning sign. An athlete who responds this way to their coach is not experienced – they have stopped learning.

Without feedback and reflection, experience easily becomes repetition. And repetition without learning is not experience– it is stagnation.

‍

Responsibility directed towards the future

‍

The role of the board is more complex today than ever before. Boards are expected not only to provide oversight, but to contribute actively to strategic direction, risk management, and long-term value creation in a world characterised by technological acceleration, geopolitical uncertainty, and new business models.

Many board members have strong professional backgrounds. They have led organisations and made difficult decisions. But board leadership is not an extension of day-to-day management. It is a distinct discipline requiring a different mindset and different competencies.

Experience is always shaped by the past. The board’s responsibility is directed towards the future. That is precisely why it is risky to believe that experience alone is sufficient.

‍

Training as a professional responsibility

‍

Elite performers do not train because they are inadequate. They train because margins are small, consequences are significant, and demands continue to rise. The same applies to board leadership.

Training one’s board leadership muscle is not about insecurity, but about professional maturity. It is about recognising that judgement is not a static attribute, but a capability that is either maintained or eroded.

Training in board leadership involves, among other things, the ability to:

‍
• Ask better questions

‍
• Handle disagreement constructively

‍
• Remain strategic even when operational pressures intrude

‍
• Work consciously with role, mindset, and interaction

‍

If we accept that continuous development is a prerequisite for legitimacy in all other professional roles, we should hold at least the same standards for those with the ultimate strategic responsibility.

The question, therefore, is not whether board leadership can be trained. The question is why we still pretend that it does not need to be.

‍

Epilogue

‍

An elite athlete who does not train loses their edge. A musician who does not practise loses their sharpness. A researcher who does not update their methods loses their relevance. Board leaders are no different.

Judgement in board work is not a static quality, but a capability that is shaped, challenged, and maintained over time. In a world of increasing complexity, it is not enough to have been competent once. The question is how we remain competent.

Perhaps it is time we began to speak about training in board leadership with the same naturalness as we speak about the development of leaders, specialists, and employees. Not as an expression of insecurity, but because of the responsibility inherent in board work.

‍

By Anne Malberg Horsager, Co-founder of DTU Board Education & Certificates

I have written this article because, time and again, I encounter capable and experienced board leaders who take on significant responsibility yet rarely discuss how their judgement is actually maintained and developed. Experience is important, but in a world marked by growing complexity, it is not sufficient in itself.

The article can be read as an argument for board education – and it is. But to me, training in board leadership is just as much about what happens in practice: in the boardroom, within professional networks, in confidential sparring with board coaches, and through a deliberate culture of learning and evaluation in board work.

When executive management, owners, and board members develop their judgement together, I repeatedly see this create tangible impact – not only for the board itself, but for the organisations they are responsible for leading and strengthening.

‍