- by Jane Halford & ChatGPT

Boards spend a great deal of time discussing strategy, risk, and performance. But there is another factor shaping board performance that is rarely discussed explicitly: dignity.

Donna Hicks, author of the books Dignity and Leading with Dignity, describes dignity as the fundamental human desire to be treated as worthy and respected. When dignity is honoured, people engage openly, take responsibility, and contribute fully. When dignity is violated, people withdraw, defend themselves, or undermine others.

In the boardroom, dignity matters in two critical relationships:

• Between board members

• Between the board and the CEO

When dignity breaks down in either of these relationships, performance and governance suffer.

Halford Consulting polled more than 200 corporate directors and asked them which dignity-violating behaviours they default to when they feel that their dignity is violated (regardless of if it was intentional). The results clear.

The top three defensive behaviours were:

1. Avoiding conflict

2. Saving face

3. Resisting feedback

These behaviours show up in situations when there isn't even a clear conflict. They are often subtle and socially acceptable on the surface. But over time, they quietly erode trust and the ability of the board to perform. 

Regardless of your role, watch for a change in others around the table. Here's how these behaviours show up.

1. Avoiding Conflict

This was the most frequently cited behaviour by a wide margin.

Many boards pride themselves on being collegial. Respectful conversation is important. However, when collegiality is actually conflict avoidance, discussions don't happen and decisions are not necessarily supported. Silence does not mean support if there are unspoken and unresolved conflicts.

Conflict avoidance often appears as:

• Directors hesitating to challenge questionable assumptions

• Sensitive issues being discussed informally (outside of the room) rather than at the board table

• Difficult conversations about CEO and/or board performance being postponed

• Directors “going along” with the majority rather than raising concerns

When boards avoid conflict, they unintentionally send a signal: protect harmony, not pursue excellence.

Healthy boards recognize that exploring different perspectives and alternative pathways improves decision making. Those discussions can preserve dignity and explore complex and difficult topics.

2. Saving Face

The second most common behaviour identified by directors was saving face.

Saving face occurs when individuals prioritize protecting their image rather than addressing issues honestly.

In the boardroom, this might look like:

• A director defending a past decision rather than reconsidering it

• Leaders avoiding admitting mistakes

• Board members softening criticism to avoid embarrassment

• Conversations being framed carefully to avoid discomfort rather than to solve problems

Saving face can also affect the board–CEO relationship.

If a CEO feels they cannot admit uncertainty or mistakes without losing credibility, the board loses access to critical information. Similarly, if directors fear appearing uninformed, they may avoid asking important questions.

A culture where people feel safe saying “I may have been wrong” or "help me understand more" is a culture where better decisions are made.

3. Resisting Feedback

The third most common dignity challenge directors identified was resisting feedback.

Boards operate in an environment where feedback should flow in multiple directions:

• Board to CEO

• CEO to board

• Directors to each other

Yet many boards struggle with this. In fact, many don't have clearly defined and regularly scheduled feedback loops to build up this competency.

Examples include:

• Directors becoming defensive when feedback is provided with respect

• Avoiding annual board wide and/or individual director performance assessments

• Feedback being delivered indirectly through the board chair rather than through direct dialogue

When feedback is resisted, learning slows down and problems grow quietly.

Strong boards understand that feedback is not a threat to dignity; it is an investment in improvement. Providing opportunities to share continuous improvement ideas during in camera sessions or in 1:1 discussions increases frequency of feedback, and reduces the stress and anxiety related to more formal processes.

Dignity Between Directors

While much governance literature focuses on the board’s relationship with the CEO, director-to-director dynamics are equally important.

Directors who feel their perspectives are dismissed or ignored may disengage. Others may dominate discussions without realizing they are diminishing colleagues.

Simple behaviours help maintain dignity between directors:

• Listening fully before responding

• Acknowledging differing perspectives

• Challenging ideas without attacking individuals

• Taking responsibility when one’s behaviour contributes to tension

These behaviours create the psychological safety necessary for boards to do their best thinking.

Dignity Between the Board and the CEO

The board–CEO relationship is one of the most dignity-sensitive relationships in governance.

CEOs rely on the board for oversight, guidance, and evaluation. Boards rely on the CEO for information, execution, and leadership.

Dignity violations in this relationship often appear as:

• Boards surprising CEOs with criticism rather than seeking clarity or providing alternative perspectives

• CEOs withholding difficult information

• Directors speaking about the CEO rather than with them

• Performance discussions becoming personal rather than constructive

When dignity is preserved, the relationship becomes one of respectful accountability. This means we're one team with shared goals, yet different roles.

In a dignity-centred situation, the board can challenge the CEO without undermining them, and the CEO can be transparent without feeling threatened.

The Governance Implication

The dignity challenges identified by directors—avoiding conflict, saving face, and resisting feedback—are not governance technicalities.

They are human defensive behaviours.

Governance ultimately succeeds or fails based on how people behave with one another.

Boards that intentionally build cultures of dignity tend to demonstrate:

• More open conversations, encouraging a wide range of views

• Better CEO relationships

• Greater accountability

• Stronger decision-making

In short, dignity is not a “soft” issue in governance.

It is a performance issue.

A Question for Your Board

If you asked your directors privately which dignity behaviours appear most often in your boardroom, what would they say?

And perhaps more importantly: Would your CEO give the same answer?

Further Reading:

Donna Hicks, PhD, Donna Hicks

Lead with Dignity, Harvard Business Review

How Does Dignity Fit Into Your Leadership?, Harvard Business Review

Resources - Jennifer Griggs, Jennifer Griggs

Have a governance or transition question on your mind?
Ask Jane, our free AI tool is designed to give you instant guidance on leadership transition, governance, and family business.