.png?width=220&height=38&name=Automic%20Group%20Logo_Colour%20Tomic%20White%20Tagline%20TM%20(1).png){kind=small}
Beyond the skills matrix: What investors expect from your board in 2025
The election of directors at an Annual General Meeting was once considered a formality. Today, it has become a key arena for shareholder scrutiny, where votes against board-nominated directors can signal deep dissatisfaction with a company's broader governance and strategic direction. For company secretaries and directors preparing for the 2025 AGM season, understanding and proactively addressing the shifting expectations around board composition is no longer a matter of best practice—it's a necessity for maintaining investor confidence.
Decoding investor and proxy advisor expectations
While the ASX Corporate Governance Principles have long recommended an independent Chair and a majority independent board, institutional investors and proxy advisors are now enforcing these standards with greater rigor. The core of their expectation is robust, independent oversight that prevents groupthink and ensures management is held accountable.
Beyond independence, there is a strong and growing focus on a diverse and comprehensive skills matrix. Investors want to see a board that reflects a mix of gender, ethnic, generational, and lived experience.
The Australian Institute of Company Directors’ (AICD) 40:40:20 gender target is now a firm expectation for many, and proxy advisors are actively flagging boards that are not demonstrating sufficient progress.
Communicating your board's value: A proactive strategy
Companies, particularly smaller ones or those with founding members still in key roles, often present counterarguments, citing the value of deep founder knowledge or the challenges of finding appropriate directors for small-cap boards. While these points can be valid, they must be communicated proactively and transparently.
Simply publishing a skills matrix is not enough. Companies must build a compelling narrative around their board's composition, clearly explaining how the current mix of skills, experience, and tenure is uniquely suited to guide the company's strategy.
This is especially important when the board structure deviates from standard governance recommendations. This narrative should be a consistent part of investor communications, not just a defensive tactic deployed during the AGM.
.jpg?width=837&height=627&name=Option%203%20(1).jpg)
When director elections become a strategic battleground
The 2022 AGL Energy board election serves as a high-profile example of how director nominations can become a proxy for strategic debates. In that case, major shareholder Grok Ventures successfully nominated four directors, all of whom were elected despite opposition from the incumbent board. This outcome was driven largely by shareholder frustration with the company's ESG strategy and future direction, proving that investors will use their votes to force change when they feel their concerns are not being met.
Companies must be prepared for such contested situations. This includes understanding the tools available to activists, such as using section 203D of the Corporations Act to issue notices for the removal of directors, and having a plan to manage the intense messaging battles that accompany these high-stakes moments.
Board effectiveness
In the current governance climate, a board must not only be effective but also be seen to be effective. A visible, defensible, and well-communicated strategy around board composition is essential for demonstrating to investors that your company is guided by a capable, diverse, and independent leadership team fit for the challenges of the future.
.jpg?width=520&height=294&name=iStock-1077571960%20(2).jpg)
