GCs Should Be on Boards, Just Not Their Own

Sep 18, 2013

Reading Time : 1 min

Ben Heineman, currently a Senior Fellow at Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs and formerly General Counsel at General Electric, is a brilliant man, a respected academic and a thought leader on corporate governance matters and the changing role of the corporate general counsel.  But he missed the mark in his recent post entitled “No, GCs Should Not Be on the Board,” which you can access here.

Mr. Heinemen rightly opines that GCs should not be both client and lawyer, which by definition is a conflict of interest no matter whom you ask.  But the question and answer as to whether a GC should or should not aspire to sit on a board is by definition too narrow.  The question needs to turn on the board on which the GC wishes to sit.  It is undeniable that GCs of sophisticated, well managed and well governed companies have experience and expertise that would prove beneficial in almost all board scenarios, including assessment and analysis of risk management, regulatory and tax compliance, strategic planning, compensation matters and governance issues, just to name a few hot topics for all boards and the GCs who counsel them.  Who better to have as a member of your board than a person who has delved into, and analyzed, these issues for a living? Lawyers, as the saying goes, think differently.  Leaving the jokes aside, lawyers with critical thinking skills that have been practiced and mastered over a career can only lead to broader discussions and better informed decision-making as boards provide direction and advice. I nominate Ben for Chairman.

Share This Insight

Previous Entries

Deal Diary

April 12, 2023

Read More

Deal Diary

2022-12-15

On December 14, 2022, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) adopted amendments regarding Rule 10b5-1 insider trading plans and related disclosures. The amendments aim to strengthen investor protections concerning insider trading and to help shareholders understand when and how insiders are trading in securities for which they may at times have material nonpublic information (MNPI). In light of these amendments, issuers should review and revise, if needed, their insider trading policies and equity grant policies.

Read more.

...

Read More

© 2024 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP. All rights reserved. Attorney advertising. This document is distributed for informational use only; it does not constitute legal advice and should not be used as such. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Akin is the practicing name of Akin Gump LLP, a New York limited liability partnership authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under number 267321. A list of the partners is available for inspection at Eighth Floor, Ten Bishops Square, London E1 6EG. For more information about Akin Gump LLP, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and other associated entities under which the Akin Gump network operates worldwide, please see our Legal Notices page.