Board Advisory That Comes From The Boardroom

A board advisor provides strategic guidance and expert perspective on board-level challenges, governance, and decision-making. Unlike a Non-Executive Director (NED) who holds a formal position with fiduciary duties, a board advisor works in an advisory capacity to help boards be more effective.

Board advisors typically support with: governance design and board effectiveness reviews, helping boards understand how well they're functioning and where improvements can be made; strategic decision support on complex or high-stakes issues where an experienced external perspective adds value; stakeholder relationship navigation, particularly when there's conflict or misalignment; and board dynamics assessment, addressing issues like dysfunction, poor meeting culture, or lack of psychological safety.

The value comes from lived experience in the boardroom. Craig has extensive board-level experience across multiple sectors—NHS, technology, financial services, and manufacturing. This means board advisors don't just bring theory; they bring pattern recognition from navigating similar challenges across different contexts.

The fundamental difference is accountability and formality. A Non-Executive Director holds a legal position on the board with fiduciary duties, governance responsibilities, and personal liability. They attend all board meetings, vote on decisions, and are accountable to shareholders or stakeholders. A board advisor, in contrast, provides strategic counsel without formal board membership or fiduciary responsibilities.

Engagement flexibility: NEDs typically serve fixed terms (often 3 years with renewal options) and have structured commitments. Board advisors can engage on specific projects, time-limited challenges, or ongoing advisory relationships tailored to the organization's needs—offering more flexibility.

Independence and objectivity: Because board advisors don't hold formal positions, they can sometimes provide more candid challenge without the political dynamics that can affect NED relationships. They're not navigating internal board politics in the same way.

Cost and commitment: NED appointments involve significant time commitments and ongoing fees. Board advisory can be scoped to specific challenges, making it more accessible for organizations not ready for or not needing a full NED appointment.

Importantly, these roles can be complementary. Some organizations engage a board advisor before appointing NEDs, or use board advisory to address specific gaps the existing board doesn't cover.

Organizations typically engage board advisors when facing specific governance challenges that require experienced perspective. Common scenarios include: board dysfunction or conflict that's impacting decision-making; strategic uncertainty where the board needs support thinking through complex options; governance structure changes, such as moving from informal to formal governance or preparing for external investment; board effectiveness concerns, where meetings feel unproductive or directors aren't adding sufficient value; and stakeholder tension, particularly between founders, executives, investors, or other board members.

Early-stage and growth companies often benefit from board advisory before they're ready to appoint NEDs. When you're scaling rapidly and governance needs are evolving faster than your board composition can keep up, a board advisor can provide immediate support without the commitment of a permanent appointment.

Established organizations use board advisors when facing one-off challenges: major strategic decisions, leadership transitions, crisis response, or preparing for significant change (such as mergers, restructuring, or regulatory shifts).

The question isn't about organization size—it's about the value of experienced guidance. If your board is facing challenges that could benefit from someone who's navigated similar situations, that's when board advisory makes sense. The discovery conversation with Craig will quickly clarify whether board advisory is the right intervention for your specific situation.

The most critical qualification is extensive board-level experience. Theory and credentials matter, but lived experience in boardrooms—actually sitting in the chair, making the calls, navigating the dynamics—is what creates real value. Look for advisors who've served on multiple boards across different contexts, not just managed organizations.

Professional credentials signal depth and commitment. Look for Fellows of professional bodies (such as FCMI - Chartered Management Institute or FRSPH - Royal Society for Public Health), which represent the highest level of professional achievement. Recognition within governance circles, such as being an IoD (Institute of Directors) Ambassador, indicates standing in the board advisory community.

Cross-sector experience provides pattern recognition. Someone who's only worked in one sector may miss insights that come from seeing how different industries approach similar challenges. Craig's experience spans NHS, technology, financial services, and manufacturing—this breadth creates unique perspective.

Specific expertise matters for specialized challenges. If you're addressing wellbeing governance, organizational transformation, or stakeholder conflict, look for advisors with proven experience in those areas. Craig combines governance expertise with Fellowship-level credentials in wellbeing and management—a rare combination.

References and track record are essential. Ask for examples of similar challenges they've navigated and outcomes they've helped achieve. Board advisory is intensely personal—chemistry and trust matter as much as credentials.

Board advisory fees depend on scope, frequency, and complexity of the challenge. Following the initial discovery consultation, Craig provides a clear proposal outlining the investment required. Engagements can range from focused project work addressing specific governance challenges to ongoing advisory relationships providing sustained board support.

Board advisory is a significant investment, but governance failures are far more costly. Poor board dynamics, strategic missteps, stakeholder conflict, and governance crises often cost organizations multiples of what effective advisory would have cost. The value calculation should focus on risk mitigation and improved decision quality, not just the advisory fee.

Typical engagement structures include: project-based work for specific challenges (board effectiveness reviews, governance design, crisis response); retained advisory for ongoing support (monthly or quarterly sessions); and intensive support during critical periods (leadership transitions, major strategic decisions, organizational change).

Investment is discussed transparently during the discovery phase, ensuring alignment before any commitment.

Board advisory focuses specifically on governance, board dynamics, and director-level decision-making—it's about helping boards be more effective as governing bodies, not improving operational performance. Management consultants typically work with executive teams on operational strategy, process improvement, and organizational change. Board advisors work with directors on governance, strategic oversight, and board effectiveness.

The perspective is fundamentally different. Craig has sat in your chair as a board member and chair—he brings lived experience from the boardroom, not theory from the sidelines. This means understanding the political dynamics, the weight of fiduciary responsibility, the challenge of holding executives to account while maintaining productive relationships, and the reality of making decisions with imperfect information.

Board advisory addresses challenges like: board dysfunction or conflict; strategic decision-making and oversight; stakeholder relationship navigation; governance structure design; board effectiveness and dynamics; risk oversight frameworks; and director development. These are distinctly different from operational challenges that management consultants address.

The right intervention depends on where the challenge sits. If it's about board performance, governance, or director-level challenges—that's board advisory territory.

Board meeting attendance can be arranged when it adds value. Some engagements involve observation of board meetings to understand dynamics, assess effectiveness, and identify improvement opportunities. This is particularly valuable when addressing board dysfunction, meeting effectiveness concerns, or governance design challenges.

Other engagements are purely advisory—regular strategic sessions outside formal board meetings where directors can explore challenges, test thinking, and gain external perspective without the constraints of formal board processes. This can create space for more open conversation.

The approach is tailored to your needs and the challenge being addressed. During the discovery phase, we discuss what level of board involvement makes sense. Some clients value an advisor who observes board dynamics firsthand. Others prefer advisory support that doesn't require meeting attendance.

Where board meeting observation occurs, Craig attends as a non-voting advisor, providing perspective on meeting effectiveness, board dynamics, and governance practices. All observations remain confidential unless specifically agreed otherwise.

All board advisory work is strictly confidential. Craig is bound by professional codes of conduct from the Chartered Management Institute (FCMI), Royal Society for Public Health (FRSPH), and Institute of Directors. Discretion and trust are foundational to effective board advisory—without them, the work simply cannot succeed.

Board challenges are often politically sensitive. Stakeholder conflicts, leadership concerns, governance tensions, and strategic disagreements require careful navigation. Craig has extensive experience working in these environments, understanding when to challenge, when to listen, and how to maintain relationships while addressing difficult issues.

Confidentiality protocols are established upfront: clear agreement on what can be shared and with whom; understanding of any reporting requirements; protocols for handling sensitive information; and boundaries around external disclosure. If the engagement involves multiple stakeholders with conflicting interests, we agree on how confidentiality will be managed.

Your board challenges stay confidential. That's not negotiable—it's the foundation of trust that makes board advisory effective.

Engagement duration depends on the challenge and objectives. Some board advisory work addresses specific issues and concludes when those are resolved—this might be 3-6 months for a board effectiveness review, governance structure redesign, or addressing a particular stakeholder challenge.

Other engagements provide ongoing strategic support, with regular advisory sessions (monthly or quarterly) continuing as long as they deliver value. This is common for organizations navigating sustained growth, significant change, or complex strategic challenges where having experienced counsel available makes a material difference.

Common engagement patterns include: project-based (3-6 months) for specific governance challenges; transition support (6-12 months) during leadership changes or major organizational shifts; and retained advisory (ongoing) for strategic support and governance counsel.

We agree scope upfront and review regularly. If the engagement isn't delivering value, we discuss it openly. If objectives are achieved earlier than expected, we conclude. The focus is on outcomes, not artificial timelines or unnecessarily extended engagements.

The discovery conversation will clarify likely engagement duration based on your specific situation.

Yes, Craig provides guidance on board composition, skills matrices, NED recruitment strategy, and succession planning. This includes: assessing current board skills and identifying gaps; developing director role specifications; advising on recruitment process and candidate evaluation; supporting NED interviews and assessment; and planning board succession and knowledge transfer.

Craig doesn't recruit directors directly—that's the role of specialized search firms or recruitment consultants. However, he can guide the process, help evaluate candidates, advise on board composition strategy, and support the integration of new directors once appointed.

Board composition and succession work often reveals deeper governance questions: What skills does the board actually need? Are we recruiting for today's challenges or tomorrow's? How do we balance continuity with fresh perspective? What diversity (of thought, background, experience) will make the board more effective? These strategic questions require someone who understands boards from the inside—not just recruitment specialists.

If board composition, recruitment, or succession planning is part of your governance challenge, Craig can provide experienced guidance on navigating these critical decisions.