What Chairs and Headhunters Really Want From a NED with Marianne Macdonald

How do board careers actually get made, and how much of that can a candidate control?

In this episode of The Boardroom Path, host Ralph Grayson speaks with Marianne Macdonald, founder and CEO of The 350 Club and The Board Directory, about the hidden board market and why between a half and two thirds of board appointments never involve an intermediary. Marianne spent seven years as a board headhunter at The Zygos Partnership before building three platforms for senior board talent, so she sees both sides of the table.

They look at the myth that you cannot become a NED until you have been one, why a strong executive record does not transfer on its own, and how style, preparation and plain courtesy decide who reaches a shortlist. With Spencer Stuart reporting that just 21% of non-executives appointed across the top 150 FTSE companies in 2025 were first-time directors, down from 44% in 2022, the odds have tightened. Marianne sets out what aspiring NEDs can do while still serving to improve them.

• (00:00) - Welcome to The Boardroom Path
• (02:08) - From Journalism to Board Headhunting
• (04:37) - The 350 Club, Boardhouse and the Board Directory
• (11:50) - External Board Roles as Executive Development
• (14:33) - The Myth That You Need a NED Role to Get One
• (17:55) - Why a Proven Executive Record Is Not Enough
• (20:31) - The Maths of Board Shortlists
• (22:28) - Inside the Hidden Board Market
• (26:08) - How to Approach a Search Firm
• (28:07) - Researchers, LinkedIn and Real Networking
• (33:56) - What Makes a NED Candidate Stand Out
• (43:47) - Board Trends and When to Start Planning

Marianne Macdonald: Marianne Macdonald is the founder and CEO of The 350 Club, a private members community for board members and executive committee leaders that now has more than 1,000 members and representation across most of the FTSE 100, and of The Board Directory, a closed database of senior board talent searched by leading board and private equity headhunters, launched in 2025. She also founded Non Executive Directorships Consulting in 2016, which has worked with around 350 senior leaders on building non-executive careers, and Boardhouse in 2024 for next-generation leaders below board level. Marianne read English at Oxford and spent around 20 years as a broadsheet journalist before moving into non-executive search at The Zygos Partnership, where she spent seven years; Zygos later became the core of the Russell Reynolds UK board practice. In February 2026, The 350 Club announced an exclusive partnership with FGS Global, adding to a partner group that includes Egon Zehnder, Advent International, BCG, Capgemini, Latham & Watkins and AlixPartners.

Ralph Grayson: Ralph Grayson is a Partner in the Board Practice at Sainty Hird & Partners, bringing extensive experience in board-level recruitment, assessment, and advisory services. With a deep understanding of the corporate governance landscape, Ralph specialises in guiding senior executives as they transition into impactful boardroom careers. His thoughtful approach, combined with a passion for developing effective leaders, enables him to facilitate insightful conversations that equip aspiring and newly appointed Non-Executive Directors with the tools they need to succeed. Through The Boardroom Path, Ralph leverages his extensive professional network and expertise to empower listeners on their journey into the boardroom.

Episode Insights:

• Between a half and two thirds of board appointments never reach a headhunter, so private networks and sponsors do more work than any application process.
• The first commercial non-executive role is the hardest to win, and taking a charity seat purely as a tactic reads as inauthentic to chairs.
• The odds are longer than most executives expect: shortlists have grown, and everyone on them is already appointable, so style and chemistry decide the outcome.
• Researchers, not just partners, are the gatekeepers in board search, and their notes on how you behaved stay on the database for years.
• Technology is now the dominant board recruitment theme, with geopolitical judgement rising and the diversity push of recent years having levelled off.

Action Points:

1. Map your network before you map the roles: List the chairs and board members you already know and, more usefully, the people they know. Ask them for advice rather than introductions, then compound each conversation by asking who else you should meet. Thank people twice, once for the time and once after you have met the person they suggested.
2. Treat the headhunter meeting as the real interview: Prepare for it as you would a chair interview, because a search partner can run you across multiple processes over many years. Know the business in detail and be able to talk about your own career without hesitation. Show what you want to contribute to the board rather than what the board can do for you.
3. Give the researcher your full attention: Researchers comb through thousands of names and decide who reaches the long list. Answer their questions carefully, take the sourcing calls even when the role is not for you, and offer useful names. Their notes on you sit on the database permanently.
4. Build board-relevant credentials while still serving: Volunteer for the committees and work streams tackling the issues boards are wrestling with, such as AI, technology risk or quantum. Consider whether your role title accurately reflects that scope. Marianne is sceptical about paid NED training and school governor roles as shortcuts, so put the effort into evidence instead.
5. Keep your LinkedIn profile current: Headhunters check it as the most up-to-date snapshot of what you are doing, which informs judgements about capacity and conflicts. Fill in the senior roles properly and keep the tone professional. Treat it as a professional record rather than a social platform.

The Boardroom Path is the essential podcast for aspiring and newly appointed Non-Executive Directors (NEDs) navigating the journey from executive leadership to the boardroom. Hosted by Ralph Grayson, partner at Sainty Hird & Partners, each episode offers insightful conversations with industry leaders, seasoned board directors, and governance experts. Our guests share practical strategies, valuable perspectives, and actionable advice on how to effectively transition into board roles, maximise your impact, and build a rewarding NED career. 

Subscribe now, and take your first confident step along The Boardroom Path. Learn more about Sainty Hird & Partners at saintyhird.com.

The Boardroom Path is produced by Story Ninety-Four in Oxford, UK. 

Creators and Guests

Host

Ralph Grayson

Guest

Marianne Macdonald

Producer

Matt Eastland-Jones

Producer

Story Ninety-Four

What is The Boardroom Path?

Welcome to The Boardroom Path, the essential podcast for aspiring and newly appointed Non-Executive Directors navigating the journey from executive leadership to the boardroom. Hosted by Ralph Grayson, partner at Sainty Hird & Partners, each episode offers insightful conversations with industry leaders, seasoned board directors, and governance experts. Our guests share practical strategies, valuable perspectives, and actionable advice on how to effectively transition into board roles, maximise your impact, and build a rewarding NED career.

Marianne Macdonald: I remember one chair saying to me that he had asked somebody why they wanted to join his board, and they didn't have an immediate answer and he thought, "Well, we might as well stop the interview right there."

Ralph Grayson: Welcome to The Boardroom Path by Sainty Hird & Partners. I'm your host, Ralph Grayson, a partner in the board practice. In this series, we'll offer practical steps and useful perspectives for aspiring and newly appointed NEDs. My guest today is someone who has built one of the most influential and best connected communities in the boardroom landscape. Marianne Macdonald is the founder of the 350 Club, an exclusive community bringing together chairs, non-executive directors, and executive leaders from many of the world's largest companies. Alongside it, she has created Boardhouse for the next generation of board leaders and the board directory, a platform connecting senior board talent with the board search market. Through Non Executive Directors Consulting, she's also advised hundreds of senior executives, CEOs, and partners as they develop their portfolio careers.

What makes Marianne's perspective so valuable is her view of the market that produces our board leaders. She understands how reputation, judgement, relationships, and capability, all combine to shape who is ultimately chosen to sit around the board table and has studied the development of portfolio careers for over two decades.

So today, we're going to explore the hidden board market, how great board careers are really built, what search firms and chairs are looking for today, how candidates can influence their outcome, and what good board directors really look like. So Marianne, welcome to The Boardroom Path.

Marianne Macdonald: Thank you for having me.

Ralph Grayson: Perhaps you could just start and set the scene and the context here on how your own career has developed into this space. The evolution of your career from the search firm Zygos, other search firms are available, and then into Non Executive Directors consulting.

Marianne Macdonald: Sure. I read English at Oxford and that took me into a 20-year broadsheet journalist career. Then broadsheet journalism became really impossible to continue with the advent of the internet. So then I had a big career change, my first big one, and moved into non-executive headhunting with somewhere called the Zygos Partnership, which had a very prominent reputation in the non-executive space at the time. It's now become the core of the Russell Reynolds UK board practice through M&A and I spent seven years there before going on to found various things, a career advisory really focused on senior leaders creating non-executive careers, and then my board community and one or two other things.

Ralph Grayson: So let's maybe just get into all of these highly accomplished people with significant influence you've met over the years. What have those encounters really taught you about the attraction of people into a board and a portfolio career?

Marianne Macdonald: Well, very accomplished people have done a lot. They are often very curious, often quite global. They really don't want their career to end at 55 or 60, which is often built in kind of obsolescence almost from an executive point of view. Or they get a bit tired of being an executive at a higher level, actually, for a whole range of reasons. And, then, of course, if you're a big four partner or so on, you have to leave at 55 to 60 in that phase of your career. And so what they want to do is carry on working in some form, being active, contributing, and what they want to continue having is access to really interesting companies and really accomplished people.

So the non-executive career is a perfect way to solve all of that. Obviously, some people want to stop altogether, but I think a great many people do like the idea of a plural career with different parts to it, as advisory, the actual sort of more formal non-executive work, investment can play a part, mentoring and so on. So for them, I think it is a very powerful attraction. It's something they're often very, very keen to do and it's actually not very easy to do. So there's a bit of a tension there.

Ralph Grayson: So we're going to pick apart a lot of those different aspects but let's maybe just start with the three different, I think it is verticals. You've got the 350 Club, Boardhouse, and the Board Directory. So what's distinctive and distinct about each of those? And how are they valuable to aspiring and established NEDs as they build their portfolio careers?

Marianne Macdonald: Those three all came from the same root, actually, which was the non-executive career advisory business I set up after I left Zygos, 10 years ago, there was no place in the market for very senior leaders to get really hands-on, knowledgeable advice that was completely focused on creating a non-executive career at a high level.

So I set up my advisory firm in non-executive directorships consulting partly because the URL was easily available and I just started working with people who I'd typically met as a head hunter, actually, and then increasingly through word of mouth, others. We've now worked with about 350 senior leaders across all sectors and sort of roles and functions. That is really just a three-month intervention where we press every possible lever to increase their chances of success and accelerate their trajectory.

And I was five years into that when COVID happened and that led me as a project initially, actually, to start my 350 Club. That is a community for the most senior board members and leaders. It was called the 350 Club, because it was originally intended for people who were in the top 350 listed businesses in the UK. Six years on, it's grown very considerably. It has about 1,200 members. It is really quite international now. We have quite a number of members from other major indices and it's for those who sit on FTSE 100 or FTSE 250 or equivalent boards or FTSE 100 or equivalent ex-executive committees. We have quite a lot of people from private businesses and private equity businesses as well.

The point of that is really to bring people together so that they can connect much more easily, share learnings across sector. Because often this group of people are trying to solve the same problems, but they don't have any kind of inherent ways to connect and share information other than on a rather ad hoc basis if they happen to meet each other at an event or something and they're often very siloed by sector. So I was wanting to solve all of those things.

Now at this point in its evolution, it's really focused on the connection part. You can message any member. It's full transparency over who's on the club and right through to FTSE five chairs through to those who are earlier in their non-executive careers, and indeed those who sit on FTSE 100 executive committees as a CFO for example. The other part of it is career advancement, actually. So there's a piece around mentoring that we can put our more senior members together with our more executive members. We get access to the best commercial non-executive vacancies and there's a whole piece around learning. Some of our most accomplished members in their fields will do events for our other members. We've got one coming up on Quantum, which is proving of enormous interest, for example, and then we also work with some of the best blue chip advisory firms such as Egon Zehnder or Latham and Watkins, Capgemini, who themselves host events and contribute content and knowledge from the market, as it were.

Ralph Grayson: So that's 350.

Marianne Macdonald: That's 350. So then and I'll be quicker now. Boardhouse is a subgroup of 350 or sub-club, I should say, and that is actually for next-gen leaders. So it's a really interesting, again, unique community for those who are on a FTSE 100 ExCo minus one is how I think of them. So they report to a FTSE 100 ExCo member. So often run very large businesses in their own right. Or people who sit on a FTSE 250 ExCo, but not on the board. And again, we have very many members with the same club taxonomy. They can see who else they are. They can message each other. They can share learnings. They can attend events. And they can get some mentoring from the main club members as well. Both of these are sort of online communities with a physical component.

The Board Directory is a bit different. So the Board Directory is newer. It's six, seven months old now, and it arose from my experience of both running the club and continuing to work with clients in my advisory business, Non Executive Directorships, and that is really trying to be another thing that fills a gap in the board space, because it seems to me at this level, it's full of gaps. This is a directory where you can have a profile which you control and create and that profile will be seen by all of the board headhunters en masse.

So the Board Directory, in a way, is the inverse of the club. It's nothing more than a closed database that currently around 80 of the best board headhunters search for candidate ideas. So that's different in itself. That doesn't exist or didn't exist before. It's very inexpensive to have a profile in the directory. You have to be of a certain seniority to have a profile. So there is a curated element. You can be a professional services partner or a leader in effect. And the other part of it is that the filters are comprehensive and state-of-the-art and somewhat AI-driven. So you can be found right across all of your skill sets. So this, the three, four things all come together in different ways to help people create and advance non-executive careers.

Ralph Grayson: All makes sense. So just so I'm clear, you have to apply to join each separately? Costs involved, how does the process work?

Marianne Macdonald: So it's all quite visible online. You can Google the 350 Club. You can Google the Board Directory. They'll come up. And there's a way to apply on the landing page of them. And you just fill in the small form. For the 350 Club, it is obviously quite an exclusive community. But if you qualify, you can have a place at no charge. The Board Directory's a little bit different. That's a subscription service, but we've kept the price point really low. If you sit on a FTSE 100 or 250 board, then there's no charge to be on that directory and actually, we have many very senior chairs and non-execs who are.

If you don't, but you are senior, maybe you're part of a major professional services firm, maybe you chair a Remco of an Oxford College or maybe you sit on the board of an AIM company or something like that. Then you can join for £250 a year or a little bit more if you want a fuller profile.

Ralph Grayson: One of the things I'm fascinated by. Some of the more far-sighted Heads of Talent and Head of HR are looking at their executive teams, and particularly to develop some of the younger cohort and faster track cohort, and are seeing the benefits of their executive team members being on external boards, and that's part of their personal growth, personal development.

An HR person who's listening to this or talent person who listens to this should also be thinking about potentially connecting with you in terms of how they can develop their existing teams by taking external board roles. First of all, I mean, what do you think about that premise? And secondly, how do people go about it?

Marianne Macdonald: Yeah, so I wholly endorse that premise. I think the development is really clearly apparent when someone takes an external board role, very often, you're looking at executives, and this won't surprise any HR director, obviously, who have spent their career entirely or at least significantly in one organisation. Consequently, there's a sort of narrowness perhaps of sector of board experience, of business model experience, and sometimes quite simply geography. I was talking about an executive who's based in a certain area of England and how that was probably limiting that person in terms of their ability to run a large company because they did not necessarily have so strongly a global perspective and that perhaps a US board would be a really interesting addition for that person.

So, yes, I think it can be enormously helpful. Also, obviously, retention. Quite often, you get the executives who you very much don't want to lose. Perhaps they don't have a chance at the top job, and they may not necessarily want it, but you are working hard to retain them. Giving them the opportunity to have a non-executive role, which it won't be lost on most of them, that if you take one while you're still executive, it will move you greatly further forward if you then want a plural career in due course.

It is a very useful lever all round, really, and there aren't many CEOs who will stand against it and say that they don't want their senior leaders to have them. I think in general, it's viewed as a positive.

Ralph Grayson: Interesting observation, I'm not sure most people listening to this would necessarily think that. It segues beautifully into some of the myths that I want us to hopefully explode and address. First of which, and the most important, the elephant in the room, how board careers really happen. So I'd just like to get your perspective on some of these myths versus reality, if you like, common perceptions and what you're actually seeing.

First myth, you can't be a NED until you've been a NED. From what you've observed, what separates those who are appointed from those who aren't? And what does that mean on that most important first NED position?

Marianne Macdonald: This chicken and egg idea, I totally accept that. And in fact, I just had lunch with a chair who was saying the same thing. The first non-executive role, at least commercial non-executive role, is generally the hardest to get. Although, I had a call this morning from a CTO who said, "Yes, I decided I wanted a non-executive role. I was still serving. I worked out which businesses I wanted to join. I got some introductions. I went off to see the chair, and in the same breath, he offered me a role on the board." So sometimes it can follow quite easily, but that's usually for people who have tremendous experience, which is tremendously in sync with the zeitgeist, and usually that's coupled with a very good style.

For those who don't, yes, the first one will be usually a bit of a campaign and a mission to get. Once you have got it, actually, I don't think the difficulty ends because you need your chair to give you a really good reference in order to get the next one. I don't agree that you won't get your first NED unless you have non-executive experience. There's this age-old debate that seems to come up again and again, "Oh, well, I should sit on a charity board, and then I'm more likely to get my commercial non-executive role, which is what I really want." And actually that, to me, as a non-executive headhunter, is completely irrelevant, really. It's more about what is the breadth and depth of your experience? What are you going to bring to a board that a board would want or a particular business would want?

Ralph Grayson: Yeah, I think there's also a lack of appreciation for those who are thinking tactically like that. That that lack of authenticity won't come through when you're applying for a charity role or a public sector role. They're too competitive and just thinking that you can tick that box to then move on to a commercial role, I just don't think is valid.

Marianne Macdonald: I think it's anathema actually to too many chairs. What they hate is, being used, their board being used as a stepping stone and that will absolutely turn them off immediately. I remember one chair saying to me that he had asked somebody why they wanted to join his board, and they didn't have an immediate answer and he thought, "Well, we might as well stop the interview right there."

What is useful though, I think, when you're going to see board headhunters who are very tough breed, is having something to talk about. So it is quite useful if you have already retired and come out of your executive career, then you do need to evidence that you are doing things. Whether it's advising a startup or you're very focused on investing in a certain area or actually that's where the charity board can become quite useful, because you could start to talk about the kind of learnings you've had from it, the kind of board issues that you have been dealing with and some people will certainly take the view that, yes, you've started to make that transition into the non-executive mindset, which is quite a big consideration.

Ralph Grayson: Yeah, I think it's a great point. I'm going to turn it on its head as well, because you and I have both seen many people over the years who've said, "Look at my CV. Look at my experience. I'm a proven CEO. Obviously, I'm going to walk straight into a NED role."

Marianne Macdonald: Gosh, do people still think that? I don't know.

Ralph Grayson: Depressingly in my experience. Yes.

Marianne Macdonald: I mean, it's so difficult to get these roles. There just aren't enough to go round and there are many very, very able, determined people wanting to get them. They probably need to work on their style and approach because ego and humility do play quite a big role in all of this.

Ralph Grayson: So let's just touch on that in a bit more detail. What role in your mind does reputation play? And how does a strong executive reputation perhaps fail to translate into relevance for a board seat?

Marianne Macdonald: Clearly what works as an executive, which you could very bluntly characterise as command and control, obviously, won't work in the non-executive sphere. So there is a piece around, if you are moving onto a decent kind of commercial board role, any, you would hope, board or indeed search firm or both would be trying to pick up information about the likelihood of success in making that transition. I think if there are enough star points that suggest that you are unlikely to be able to move to a sort of oversight, hands-off, non-executive, literally non-executive role, then you are likely to find some difficulty actually moving forward in a process.

There's a piece about track record, of course, as well. So there's reputation more broadly. If you have been perceived as failing at things, that's going to work against you, clearly. And then there's a piece around just general style. Headhunters absolutely notice how people manage things. They actually get to know candidates much better through a process. So whilst they've picked them to run in the process, they are also getting to know them at the same time. So if you're difficult to deal with, if you're quite peppery, if you seem incredibly unavailable, if you're quite displeased about being signed off for a role, that will all be noted by the board headhunter, and it'll probably stay in their head for the next 10 or 15 years. So people need to be a bit careful.

Ralph Grayson: I think that's great wisdom. I think the maths of the search process for a board member is, I will say, something not many people take into consideration. I think I've seen some data that would suggest if you make it on a long list for an executive role, you probably got a one in six, one in seven chance of getting the job. I think if that's a NED role, probably half it, you've probably got a one in 15 chance.

Headhunters will approach a lot more potential board candidates, because there are conflicts of interest, there's time availability, there's all the fit stuff we'll maybe get into later. But the maths of being approached as a candidate for a board is a lot tougher than the maths of being approached to be an executive.

Marianne Macdonald: That's absolutely right. I think so and I think the odds are lengthening, actually. Shortlists themselves have got much longer. So whereas before there were three or four people, they might now be considerably more than that as well. And those shortlists are typically regarded as people who are all appointable, as it were. Whether the style is a fit, that's a different question.

So yeah, I think people are very taken by surprise, I think, by this and it is very bruising. It's quite hard to watch sometimes because people have often succeeded completely in their executive career. They've not really maybe even had a setback. They've just risen through a large organisation or several of them and then suddenly, they're getting knocked back left, right, and centre and you have to have a bit of stamina and just be aware you need a thick skin.

Ralph Grayson: And learn to take rejection well. Because it's not really rejection, right? It's just you didn't happen to get that one.

Marianne Macdonald: But people do get quite discouraged. They feel like they're continuously the bridesmaid. And actually, that's discouraging as well for the headhunters, because they don't want to keep running them and then saying no to them. So it can be a bit of a vicious cycle, actually.

Ralph Grayson: So let's use this as an opportunity just to step into what I call the hidden board market. What I say to a lot of people is, you've got to appreciate somewhere between a half and two-thirds of all the board appointments don't involve an intermediary, don't involve a headhunter. They're private networks. The recommendations of a recommendation of somebody who sits on a similar board or may have been approached for that role. So let's just drill into a little bit the world of such informal networks, the role of chairs, the role of sponsors and recommendations within that informal network. Just give me your 20,000 feet view on this, would you?

Marianne Macdonald: I mean, this is quite a complex question. So I guess the transparent board market in a way, or actually to some degree transparent, is the executive search market. I tend to work in the larger business board space, if you like. So I'm not so good on the kind of AIM small cap side of things. So in kind of the area I know well, the first hurdle people have is, yes, the search firms are themselves visible. But that doesn't mean to say it's easy to identify who they are actually comprehensively and that's one of the things that I was very keen to solve in my advisory business.

The second part is that you don't know which headhunters are in those firms. They're also very hard to get to. So that's a real problem. Informal networks, these are undoubtedly very powerful. Really the more chairs and board members you have got to know in your executive career, and some people do get to know a lot, particularly if they move around between companies, that's going to help you enormously. That goes to formal referencing, but also informal referencing, a whole load of advice, and then connections. Some people might view this, I think the old boy network is actually such an outdated term, but I think there is an element of being hidden in all of that, because that just won't work to the advantage of the people that have been based in Asia or the people that don't have those ready-made kind of PLC or other networks. That doesn't mean that they don't have a great deal to offer a board.

There's a piece around that which is quite important. Can you build a network? You can. Most people aren't very good at it, and they're not very good at maintaining it because networks are quite fragile, actually. They don't really last that long, generally. Sponsors, very important. Dare I say it for women in particular, I think. They're still very powerful. Most people don't have them. Recommendations, again, that goes back to networks and then it goes back to broader people skills. In a way, if the world is a marketplace, people are continually forming views of you and your ability and your capability, your ability to contribute and that's all kind of hidden stuff that will actually start to work for you or against you.

So some of this stuff you can control, some of it's harder to control, and some of it I think is impossible to control because it's stuff that's in your past. Your career is largely created by the time you're thinking about this stuff.

Ralph Grayson: I think the key moral to that is there's no shortcuts here. It takes a lot of time and effort, particularly to get that first board role, but then to keep that continuity and that network fresh and relevant to what boards may be looking like or looking for at that particular moment. I'd love just your perspective, because I don't want to lead the audience on how a listener should be thinking about their interaction with a search firm.

In the context of search firms are transactional. Searches are London buses. They come and they go, and headhunters can be looking for very different things on very different days, and there's got to be a certain amount of serendipity. The chances of you approaching as a prospective NED, a search firm or a headhunter at any one moment, and them having the right job for you at that moment. It is, as I say, it's two bullets meeting in the air. It's a beautiful explosion when it happens, but you don't see it very often.

Marianne Macdonald: That's such a good analogy. I think that's absolutely right. Obviously you would hope, and to some degree it's true, I think very true, that you go in to see the search and they don't have anything for you and it's something that, frankly, board headhunters lament. They don't like having what they call generals or drop-ins and not having anything to offer, but that's usually inevitably the case.

So then they should code you properly, put you on their system, maybe even use our board directory. There should be ways that they can find you again when something does come up that matches with you. And on that, the good news of this is that board headhunters want to help, and by and large, they'll be carrying around your profile in their head along with thousands of others. And if they like you and were impressed by you, they're trying to find the matching brief for you.

So it's not all bad, but you do have to be proactive by yourself. I remember a board, the head of a board practice at one of the SHREK firms saying to me that someone had said to him, "What are you doing for my career?" And he said, "Well, what are you doing for your career?" "It's not my job to help your career." People often sort of slightly misunderstand. Their headhunters are working for their clients. The candidates are actually not their clients. They're simply there to fulfil the brief.

Ralph Grayson: Well at the risk of putting myself on the naughty step here, headhunters also aren't there to give prospective NEDs free career advice.

Marianne Macdonald: Oh, gosh, absolutely and I think they do find themselves doing that an awful lot, as do chairs, and they don't have the time.

Ralph Grayson: Yeah, much as they might want to or like to.

Marianne Macdonald: Yes, indeed.

Ralph Grayson: Before we leave search firms, because you've been a practitioner, I think a lot of prospective NEDs misunderstand how search firm actually works and the partner doesn't have their Black Book, rolodex, whatever the expression is in their head. A lot of this is delivered by the research department and I'd love just to get your advice to listeners, for listeners, as to the role of a research department and actually the importance of getting your CV in front of the researcher, not necessarily the most senior partner in the firm.

Marianne Macdonald: That's right. I kind of see it as two twin entities that interact to make a decision. Let's say that the partner side of things, it will generally be their judgement on kind of style and fit that will carry the day and probably make the difference between making the long list or shortlist or not.

But the research department, as you say, are the ones that are doing the hard yards, combing through thousands of names, and it really is thousands of names, and coming up with the right fit on behalf of the partner and sometimes working very closely with them so that they're also a pair of eyes and ears and that they're sitting there in the interviews and they're also absorbing. Because to be a board headhunter, you really have to get to know thousands of people and remember their background and style in your head. Yes, the researcher is really important, and I say this, I think one of my jobs as a career advisor is to kind of educate clients about how search works because they really are the gatekeepers in so many cases.

So they are quite powerful, a very powerful force in the market. You don't want to go and do an interview and talk only to the partner and completely ignore the researcher, because to be honest, the partner might well notice. The researcher will certainly notice and one day the researcher will probably be running that board. You know, they probably won't forget it.

Ralph Grayson: And the role of LinkedIn? Has it democratised and made the process more transparent? And how should people think about the LinkedIn summary as part of their board proposition and actually stating, "Here's what I'm looking for and here's what I'm available for."

Marianne Macdonald: Look, this is just my personal view. I think LinkedIn is just a tool in the process. I don't think it's certainly the higher levels, it's that material. However, it does do something really important because I'm quite often asked by headhunters if I have any thoughts about candidates, for example, for search they're doing and if I suggest a name, I'll hear the keys tapping on their keyboard. They will be looking at LinkedIn. So it's very powerful in terms of providing what is generally regarded as the most up-to-date snapshot of what someone is up to. That's quite important, because obviously, that goes to things like capacity and conflicts.

It is really worth paying attention to your LinkedIn profile and making sure it's really quite well filled in, at least for the later more senior roles.

Ralph Grayson: Yeah, I know and it goes without stating that LinkedIn isn't a social media platform. Just be careful about your photograph. Be careful what you say.

Marianne Macdonald: I completely agree. Yes, exactly. So there's a piece around messaging. I mean, sometimes when I was a board headhunter, very rarely, but on occasion, I would message people on LinkedIn because it was the only way to get hold of them. So there's something about the 360-degree kind of ability to get in touch, which can be useful. But that will be, you know, a whole bunch of other messages you probably don't want to get. I once persuaded someone to go on LinkedIn and it was a disaster, because he was very powerful on an honours committee and he then got a flood of emails from people that he probably didn't want to hear from again. It can be a bit of a double-edged sword.

The other thing about LinkedIn is, I think it's most useful at the beginning of your non-executive career. You can then start to come off it as people do. It gets awkward if you're being contacted by employees of a board on which you sit. That can be a bit awkward. For headhunters, they do on occasion, obviously, even in the non-executive space, use it to identify candidates. But it's not really designed for that and it's not really very effective at that either.

Ralph Grayson: So just before we leave this segment, what for you is effective networking as opposed to wasted miles on a pavement and medium dry Chardonnays?

Marianne Macdonald: And this obviously is not going to surprise anybody, but I guess, obviously, you don't really want to be networking with others at your level if you are trying to enter the non-executive board space, because that probably won't get you so far. What is effective networking? I think it's really thinking through who you do know and if you want to be super tactical, frankly, who they know. And you can do that in quite a strategic way. I mean, I have a tool that will do that. I think you probably have access to the same one. I know most people don't, but it's then getting to them. Obviously not asking them for things, but you can ask them for advice, which people will generally give. And then I think it's about compounding it. Then it's saying, "Okay, is there anyone else I should meet?" And trying to get additional introductions from them and then keeping up with that person and then it's like the basics. Thanking them for their time. Going back to them when you then meet the person they've mentioned to thank them for that and just, that kind of politeness goes a long way, actually.

Ralph Grayson: Politeness does go a long way, particularly in the board space. Again, shouldn't need to say, but does need reminding every now and again. Say, Marianne, you've spent probably as much time with the leading search firms and in particular the board practice as anybody I know. So I'd love just to get your thoughts on what makes a NED candidate stand out. What mistakes do aspiring NEDs make when presenting themselves to such firms and chairs? Let's go from there.

Marianne Macdonald: Okay. Well, I could talk about this for hours, but what makes a NED stand out? At the end of the day, and on occasion, I think this is sometimes lost on people, it's going to be about the strength and quality of your experience and that is what you're going to bring to a board. In truth, that's something you can't change either. Although, you can do a lot to change how you present it, i.e. effectively or not effectively. So it's a bit of a kind of nuanced answer.

So I think what makes them stand out is something around the experience they've gathered and then the other piece usually is around their style and EQ. Those are usually the two things. You can then start to slice and dice it. So do they have experience that's super relevant for what boards are concerned about? But that's not really something you can make up. You can certainly try and keep up, but that's very different. You can't become a CTO if you've come up the CMO route. So that's one thing.

Mistakes they make in terms of how they come across. So there's a huge piece around preparation, and I think people routinely under-prepare. I think they fail to realise that if you're going up to meet a headhunter in relation to an non-executive role, that is an interview which is just as important almost as the one with the chair. In fact, arguably more important because that headhunter could run you for multiple processes where the chair is probably only meeting you against one, you'd imagine. So it's something around how well do you know the business you're going to discuss?

Oddly, how well do you know your own career? Cause people can be quite odd sometimes. They seem to have forgotten the people they worked for or the years they worked for them. That can get quite hazy in their head, but that doesn't really induce confidence if you're a headhunter kind of interviewing them and then there's something around enthusiasm. So people can often seem as though they're out really for themselves rather than coming at something from, "I want to contribute this to a board. I want to help build and grow this business." So there's something about approach there as well.

Ralph Grayson: I think that's a crucial point. This whole area of moving from executive authority to boardroom influence. That is a style that you can train in yourself in terms of the way you articulate it.

Marianne Macdonald: That you can train? Yeah.

Ralph Grayson: You can be more self-aware. Maybe you can't train yourself, but you can be more aware of the nuances and the subtleties. If you're not aware of that, you'll probably not cut out to be a good board member.

Marianne Macdonald: I hear this debated and it was being debated by a chair the other night at a dinner I was at whether people really can change themselves. If someone joins a board, they're probably going to be the way they are and either you accept that or you try and ease them out at the end of their first term, which is what was part of the problem we were discussing.

This came up in the context of what do you do when most people around the board table are nine out of 10, was the way it was put, and there, there's a passenger who's sort of six or seven out of 10. How does that affect the board dynamic? To what degree should they be allowed to stay? Those sorts of questions. That's not quite what we're talking about, but I think it's about, can people really change in terms of their contribution, their style? I'm not sure they can. And usually, to be fair, they self-select out. Having been involved in quite a lot of search processes for boards you do see a lot of similar mistakes. Someone who just talks too much to the point that the chair doesn't get the answers they need to even decide whether they want them around the board table and then they just decide they're probably on transmit and that's going to be a bit of a pain.

Ralph Grayson: Well, this whole area of board behaviour. I mean, this is a theme that runs through every podcast I have. That's different to the skills, experience, knowledge that we all talk about as being the expertise on the board. Let's turn to that sector expertise, because I think people talk now about this VUCA environment. Where is that changing this emphasis and balance between skills, experience, knowledge?

Marianne Macdonald: Well, a few hours ago, I had a debate about whether the pure non-executive career even had any future. Because if things are changing so rapidly in the tech space, to what degree can non-executives really contribute other than, which by the way, I don't remotely underestimate, but other than wisdom and judgement.

Because if some of the most meaningful and existential and strategic and business model questions facing a business are really related to technology issues and the non-executive around the table is quite out of date with those things, assuming they are digital at all, then it does raise the question of what should the board of the future look like?

So I think there's a piece around the kind of geopolitics and people who really have that bigger picture and understanding and actually curiosity. I think there's a piece, massive piece, around technology and being able to even, at some level, weigh in on those big decisions that every board is grappling with including data, actually.

Ralph Grayson: Gosh, there's a lot to unravel there. How does that lead you onto your perception on this balance between good judgement, self-awareness, the ability to influence rather than manage? How does somebody put forward as best they can those soft skills?

Marianne Macdonald: Well, remember that the chairs and the headhunters will be taking up soundings on those, I think. Obviously, whenever you're in front of somebody, that's going to be part of the assessment that's going on. Not to state the obvious, but, it doesn't begin in the interview room, whatever that is. We, at my search firm, we had a very kind of powerful receptionist who's actually still working today and he would form extremely strong views of candidates as they arrived, whether he felt they were smart enough, whether he felt they were nice enough, whether he felt they were courteous enough, and he would have no hesitation in conveying them to the headhunters who were involved in the search. So there's a piece around, that, which is quite interesting.

I think there's actually, it depends on the board and the chair, you know, I spoke to one chair, he's actually an executive chair, so he's slightly unusual, but he really didn't want his non-execs either to have sector experience or indeed to weigh in on most of the kind of day-to-day or operational decisions even when they got to the board table. Really, what he just wanted was those non-execs to come in a really effective and strategic way on the really big calls. Do we sell half the business ahead of what appears to be a financial crisis in 2008? And I saw where he was coming from you, you know. His view was we have a business full of people with sector experience. I don't need that in my non-execs. Other chairs will differ, and they will say, "What good is a board without people with at least two members who understand the sector very well?"

Ralph Grayson: This is a question I'm being asked a lot, which is, how do I demonstrate I'm a fit as a member of the board? But to the same extent, I'm going to add diversity, either of thoughts, perspective. Increasingly, I'm asked how somebody balances those two.

Marianne Macdonald: I question how much you can control that, because at the end of the day, there's a chemistry thing, isn't there, between you and the chair? And yes, they might have liked your background on paper, but when you get in the room, to be honest, and this is probably due to a thousand invisible pieces of experience and things to do with your upbringing and who knows what, but the chemistry won't be there. That will probably mean you don't get the role, but maybe also means that you probably don't want the role. So I don't know how much you can influence that and I'm not even sure you can influence your level of EQ and if it's not that great, then I think you are going to have a problem. You might just make it, but it will be much harder.

Ralph Grayson: Yeah, I think that's a really pragmatic. It was rather an unfair question. I default back to don't try and overthink it and don't overgame it because if you're not authentic, you will get found out.

Marianne Macdonald: I mean, what I do say to clients a lot is think about the headhunter, because these are the really powerful gatekeepers almost always. They get tired. They get tired of giving, because it's almost like you're continually giving in that role and people are wanting things from you all day, essentially, career advancement. Just think about asking them questions, showing an interest in them, thanking them. Things where you're just actually being thoughtful as a human being, asking about their family and then remembering what they said. These are things that do make a really good impression. Being aware of the researcher who is asking maybe not such a good question, and just being incredibly nice in your answer.

Ralph Grayson: And if I just interject, when the researcher rings you for something you're not a candidate for, but they want your advice on, take the call and give it some thought because they'll remember the people who are nice on the phone to them.

Marianne Macdonald: Well, more than that, they'll keep a log on the database that will stay there forever and it will say something like, "Yes, always refuses to be sourced," or, "As usual, really nice, came up with some really good ideas."

Ralph Grayson: There you go. I'm fascinated to hear your thoughts from the conversations you're having with other headhunters around board cadence, priorities, where the recruitment hotspots are. We've all talked about AI and Cyber. Geopolitics is coming more to the fore. Private capital. ESG, Trump, non-Trump. The list goes on, right? So is this the natural ebb and flow of board recruitment or is there something more structural or what are you seeing and hearing?

Marianne Macdonald: In terms of sort of changes in board trends, board composition?

Ralph Grayson: Yeah.

Marianne Macdonald: Technology. It just feels like a really big one. So I think that is a change. There was a period about 15 years ago where overnight, every board seemed to wake up and say, "Oh, we need a digital NED." And that was the start of it.

But now, I think it's so overwhelmingly important. So I think that's something that's going on. We had CSR, sadly, it's come and gone. I think geopolitics, as I've mentioned, I do think people who have that kind of insight are going to come up the track. I'm not quite sure it's happening yet, but I think that's probably something we'll see more of. So that kind of plays, to people like the ambassadors who haven't been perhaps so sought after to date.

The diversity trends have actually gone away. They're much less sharp than they were. We had a period where, frankly, men felt they didn't have much of a chance of a commercial non-executive role. Now, those big listed boards, these are pretty much equalised. So I think we're back to level pegging on that front.

It's often, it seems to me, the bigger economic environment is a big kind of influencer of this. So in the last financial crisis, almost 20 years ago now the boards all went back to their knitting. They were like, "Okay, we're not going to take any chances now on the left field candidate, the sort of slightly more fun, creative, less obvious candidate. No, what we're going to do is we're going to take frankly, at the time, it was the guy who was 66, who served on 15 boards, who totally gets our sector and he just has so much board experience and wisdom and judgement. And I think today, you're starting to see some of that coming back in.

Ralph Grayson: Yeah. I think it's very contextual. Couldn't agree more. We went through this wave, everybody wanted ex-CEOs then they wanted ex-CFOs. No, I think that's very insightful.

Tell me a little bit about your thoughts of how early and whether an aspiring NED should start thinking about the ladder, first board role, multiple board roles, chair of subsidiary committee to being chair of the board. How should they, or should they not overthink it?

Marianne Macdonald: I don't think you can start planning your non-executive career too early and then obviously, for a period of time, that will run alongside your executive career, you hope, because you probably don't want to come up too early, otherwise you'll lose your currency and that'll be a problem potentially.

But then you are on the front foot when you have your full plural career. So I quite often work with serving execs, they might be CEOs, but they might not necessarily be at all and for example, I'm working with somebody where they have quite a technology focus. So we were just discussing how that person could enhance their executive credentials for the board space whilst they still have the ability to do that. In other words, the executive career is still going and so I think there's a whole range of things you can do. You can sit on committees that you might have done your best to avoid previously. You could actually create work streams, projects, committees which might be around some of the really important issues that the board is wrestling with. So it might be AI, it might be quantum.

If you do things like that, that is enormously helpful and you can do that quite tactically. Quite often, I think with people about how they might change or amend their role title so that it's either extended or changed completely so that it's more differentiated or it's more spot on to either reflect what they've done, but more importantly, perhaps reflect something that's really important in the board's sort of mind collectively.

So there's a lot you can do there and then we've talked a bit about, do you take on the charity? Do you take on something alongside? You can if you want to. I'm not sure school governor will get you that much further, to be honest. People often think, "Oh, well, maybe I'll do some training around being a NED." I'm not sure that will get you much further, frankly, either. I think that's possibly a bad use of your money.

Once you are actually thinking more actively about retirement, then I think it becomes a campaign where you are trying to harness, which is also, frankly, easier often when you're still serving, you're trying to harness your network. You're trying to burnish your credentials and you're trying to go out to the headhunters and just start to get that first while you still have the currency of the executive career.

Ralph Grayson: Marianne, thank you. This has been a fascinating insight into how board careers are really built, the importance of reputation, relationships, and judgement we've touched on, and why an impressive executive career maybe does not automatically translate into a credible portfolio career. You've also certainly reminded me that the board market is not simply about access, but about relevance.

Before approaching somebody like you, I think listeners should ask themselves some honest questions. What's the distinctive value I bring to a board? How can I explain it clearly? Do I really understand the responsibilities of a NED? And perhaps most importantly, am I genuinely ready to contribute? Or am I just attracted by the title or the stature or status?

So for those listening who believe they have the experience, the credibility, and the commitment to begin or further develop their portfolio career, how should they decide whether it's appropriate to connect with you? What's the best way to do so? And what information should they provide to make that initial approach relevant and worthwhile?

Marianne Macdonald: Thank you. It's not hard to get ahold of me. If you Google Marianne Macdonald non-executive or something, you'll probably find me somewhere and my career advisory firm has my email there. People also connect with me quite often on LinkedIn, and I do look at LinkedIn, I do read those messages. Feel free to connect with me. But for the Board Directory, anyone who's really been a partner of a big professional services firm, anyone that's been involved with the business of small cap and upwards I'm sure I could potentially help them through the Board Directory and would be delighted to do that.

Ralph Grayson: Thank you for your time. I hope we've shone a bit of a light into somewhat of an opaque industry, if we can call it that. Thank you for your insights and it's been a pleasure.

Marianne Macdonald: Thank you so much for having me.

Ralph Grayson: I hope that you've enjoyed listening to this podcast and have found it helpful when thinking about how to approach your own path to the boardroom. If you would like to push this a little bit further, Sainty Hird runs a bespoke one to one programme designed specifically to this end. For more information, please visit our website saintyhird.com, follow us on LinkedIn, and subscribe to the Boardroom Path to receive new episodes. Thank you for listening.