As the role of the board is expanding, with more being expected of directors in the context of increasingly uncertain times, we are exploring the way boards operate and evolve. How is the role of business in society changing? What are the implications for directors? What does the future hold?
Around the globe, boards are tackling geopolitical uncertainty and conflict, emerging technologies, cybersecurity concerns, and a long list of social and environmental concerns. In the United Kingdom, directors also face an ever-increasing regulatory burden and a weakened position in global equity markets in the context of a polarized political climate that is creating an acute sense of pressure for many board members.
But this expanded role is also creating opportunity. New approaches are emerging for boards and individual directors who see promise in this shifting landscape. In what follows, we draw on the results of two recent surveys of CEOs and directors around the world, as well as our experience, to describe how directors and CEOs are answering six questions that are reshaping the boardroom.
Six shifts boards are making to thrive now
Navigating shifting sands:
Copyright @ 2024 Heidrick & Struggles International, Inc.
All rights reserved. Reproduction without permission prohibited.
CEO & Board Practice
Heidrick & Struggles’ CEO & Board Practice has been built on our ability to execute top-level assignments and counsel CEOs and board members on the complex issues directly affecting their businesses.
Europe CEO & Board of Directors Practice
Kit Bingham
London
kbingham@heidrick.com
Alice Breeden
London
abreeden@heidrick.com
DOWNLOAD FULL REPORT
CEO & Board of Directors Practice
Helping organizations lead with purpose to be the best they can be now and in the future
LEARN MORE
Heidrick Insights
Explore the latest thought leadership from Heidrick & Struggles
LEARN MORE
Leadership Agenda:
stay connected
Subscribe to our monthly newsletter for the latest expert insights and trends.
SUBSCRIBE
In November 2023, Heidrick & Struggles fielded an online survey that garnered responses from 3,156 respondents. Of those, 2,320 respondents were CEOs and 836 were non-executive directors. Forty-one percent were in Europe; 38% in North America; 10% in Asia Pacific; 4% in both Latin America and the Middle East; and 2% in Africa. Respondents represented companies of all sizes; 23% reported annual revenue of US $1 billion or more. Companies ranged across all industries.
In February 2024, Heidrick & Struggles fielded an online survey that received responses from 2,653 respondents. Of those, 1,927 respondents were CEOs and 726 non-executive directors. Thirty-seven percent were in Europe; 37% in North America; 9% in Asia Pacific; 4% in the Middle East; 3% in Latin America; and 1% in Africa (and 9% N/A). Respondents represented companies of all sizes; 26% reported annual revenue of US $1 billion or more. Companies ranged across all industries.
This analysis is part of Heidrick & Struggles’ long-standing study of trends in board composition in countries around the world. Produced by our global CEO & Board Practice, these reports track and analyze trends in non-executive director appointments to the boards of the largest publicly listed companies in Australia (ASX 200), Belgium (BEL 20), Brazil (B3), Canada (TSX 60), Colombia (COLCAP), Denmark (OMX Copenhagen 25), Finland (OMX Helsinki 25), France (CAC 40), Germany (DAX and MDAX), Hong Kong (Hang Seng), Ireland (ISEQ), India (Nifty Top 200), Italy (FTSE MIB), Japan (TOPIX Core 30), Kenya (NSE Top 40), Mexico (BMV IPC), the Netherlands (AEX), New Zealand (NZX 10), Norway (OBX), Poland (WIG20), Portugal (PSI 20), Saudi Arabia (Tadawul), Singapore (STI 30), South Africa (JSE Top 40), South Korea (KOSPI 50), Spain (IBEX 35), Sweden (OMX Stockholm 30), Switzerland (SMI Expanded), the United Arab Emirates (ADX and DFM), the United Kingdom (FTSE 350), and the United States (Fortune 500). Information about executives is gathered from publicly available sources, BoardEx, and a Heidrick & Struggles proprietary database.
Explore the data: 2023 appointments
SIX QUESTIONS RESHAPING THE BOARDROOM
THE UNITED KINGDOM
IN CONTEXT
OUR RECOMMENDATIONS
The United Kingdom in context
Many of the global trends drawn from the survey are mirrored by the responses of the US directors. Here is what stands out from the findings of the US respondents:
Who is influencing the board agenda today—and are board members happy with that?
To better understand the relative influence of stakeholders today, we asked directors and CEOs to stipulate which stakeholders have accelerated their influence most in the post-Covid environment. Overall, they report that the CEO and leadership team, the broader workforce, regulators, and consumers and customers have increased their influence more than others.
Interestingly, given the direct fiduciary responsibility the board has to the company’s owners, and despite increased shareholder scrutiny and shareholder democratization policies in the asset management arena, a relatively low number of UK respondents report increased influence from mainstream investors (22%) or from activist investors (13%), consistent with the global average. So, though attention is paid to the role of activists, and there have been a number of high-profile takeover approaches in recent months, changes in the ways boards approach their work may not come first, now, from the shareholders they serve, but rather from the operational, commercial, and regulatory contributors to the business. In the United Kingdom (and Europe), regulators top the list of those having more influence.
Where does the board spend its time—and are those the right places?
A higher share of respondents in the United Kingdom report an increase in time spent on emerging technology and AI concerns than any other area, consistent with the average global response. Sustainability is another very high priority for time spent in UK boardrooms, notably higher than the average global response.
How are boards addressing the widening risk environment?
When we asked what steps they have taken since Covid began to better manage uncertainty and risk, we found that respondents remain anchored primarily in risk management practices that are internal in nature; that is, derived from interactions among the board itself and between the board and management. However, we also see a growing willingness to draw in the contributions of “external” experts.
UK board members indicate they are doing more and doing these things more often to address risk than directors in almost any other region—and are the highest globally in spending more time understanding and defining risks. All these efforts add to the overall burden on board members that so many in the United Kingdom are feeling acutely.
Are boards more operationally involved?
Globally, a majority of respondents report that board members are more operationally involved: 25% say it happens frequently; 45% occasionally; and 4% that it has happened once. Only a quarter report that they have not crossed that line. The figures from UK respondents are very similar, at 22%, 49%, and 2%, respectively. Notably, CEOs more often than directors report operational involvement from the board. UK respondents far more often than their global peers cite board members’ specialized knowledge and a lack of CEO bandwidth as reasons their boards have gotten involved. On the other hand, we also hear executives complain that interventions from non-executive directors lack insight, suggesting a lack of common understanding of some issues that can reduce board and executive team effectiveness.
How are boards engaging with the workforce?
Workers are increasingly exercising their influence on the board agenda. In the United Kingdom, it is mandated that one non-executive director represent the workforce on the board of public companies. When we asked how boards should engage with the workforce, respondents in the United Kingdom were the second-highest share around the world to say that boards should engage with the workforce beyond the most senior executives.
How are boards thinking about diversity today?
Some of the most substantial changes in the UK governance environment are reflected in the changes we see in board diversity. In the United Kingdom, we have focused on gender and ethnicity trends, which we will cover here, but the conversation has widened to consider the impact of geopolitical differences—at home and abroad, as well as the importance of other stakeholders, whose influence we covered earlier.
In early 2024, it was reported that the representation of women on FTSE 350 boards had increased beyond the target of 40% of directors being women by the end of 2025. Of the 350, 235 were at or above 40% and only 28 below one-third. The share of female directors added in the most recent year remained high, suggesting progress is continuing.
Increase stakeholder engagement
Our recommendations
A majority of directors are increasing engagement with stakeholders of many kinds. Engagement with the workforce varies widely by region, and from company to company. In the United Kingdom, regulators top the list of those having more influence.
Directors are accustomed to being hired for their expertise—for being experts. This won’t change, but the scope of expertise required is expanding beyond the capacity of a traditional board. In this environment, “learning to learn” and business judgment have never been more important. Effective chairs set the tone for learning.
Cultivate a learning culture on the board
Still, a growing number of boards are also using mechanisms such as advisory committees, external advisors, and on-demand talent platforms to surround the board with the range of rapidly changing skills needed to create capacity and govern in this expanding environment.
Expand sources of expertise
Polarization has reached severe levels in a growing number of countries. The new face of diversity includes and goes well beyond traditional definitions and boundaries. The implications for business are far reaching. Make certain that director candidates have the experience, wisdom, empathy, and proven reputation of working across societal and inter-company boundaries.
Govern across boundaries
In this widening risk environment, and with rising investor pressure on directors, effective boards are adopting an ongoing approach to succession planning—for both the CEO and board itself. Reactive recruitment projects are a thing of the past. Still, our research shows concern among many directors that succession is being pushed down the priority stack and not actively addressed.
Increase investment in succession planning
As the scope of board responsibility expands, lean on the corporate secretary for help. Challenge service providers and outside experts to take on more, collaborate with each other, and rethink their business models (standards, pricing, conflicts). Lean on the executive team, and on peer companies, to develop collaborative insights and drive change.
Leverage others
Source: Heidrick & Struggles’ survey of CEOs and board members, February 2024, n=2,687
EXPLORE THE DATA
ABOUT THE RESEARCH
Leadership Agenda:
stay connected
Subscribe to our monthly newsletter for the latest expert insights and trends.
SUBSCRIBE
Explore the latest thought leadership from Heidrick & Struggles
Heidrick Insights
LEARN MORE
CEO & Board of Directors Practice
Helping organizations lead with purpose to be the best they can be now and in the future
LEARN MORE
A majority of US directors are increasing engagement with stakeholders of many kinds. Engagement with the workforce varies widely by region, and from company to company. In the United States, most directors are increasing their commitment to ensure the voice of non-management employees are heard in the boardroom, while stopping short of the more formal voting mechanisms required in some countries.
Increase stakeholder engagement
Directors are accustomed to being hired for their expertise—for being experts. This won’t change, but the scope of expertise required is expanding beyond the capacity of a traditional board. In this environment, “learning to learn” and business judgment have never been more important. Effective chairs set the tone for learning.
Cultivate a learning culture on the board
Still, a growing number of boards are also using mechanisms such as advisory committees, external advisors, and on-demand talent platforms to surround the board with the range of rapidly changing skills needed to create capacity and govern in this expanding environment.
Expand sources of expertise
Polarization has reached severe levels in a growing number of countries, most notably the United States. The new face of diversity includes and goes well beyond traditional definitions and boundaries. The implications for business are far reaching. Make certain that director candidates have the experience, wisdom, empathy, and proven reputation of working across societal and inter-company boundaries.
Govern across boundaries
In this widening risk environment, and with rising investor pressure on directors, effective boards are adopting an ongoing approach to succession planning—for both the CEO and board itself. Reactive recruitment projects are a thing of the past. Still, our research shows concern among many directors that succession is being pushed down the priority stack and not actively addressed.
Increase investment in succession planning
As the scope of board responsibility expands, lean on the corporate secretary for help. Challenge service providers and outside experts to take on more, collaborate with each other, and rethink their business models (standards, pricing, conflicts). Lean on the executive team, and on peer companies, to develop collaborative insights and drive change.
Leverage others
Our recommendations
How are boards thinking about diversity?
For the full year of 2023, we saw a continued retreat from peak ethnicity and gender placements in 2020 and 2021. The number of seats going to women on US boards has advanced substantially over the past 15 years but fell slightly last year, and the total share of women directors remains short of parity. The percentage of seats going to women on public Fortune 500 company boards in the United States since 2009 on a percentage basis has more than doubled, but appointments have leveled off in the last five years.
How are boards engaging with the workforce?
81% of US respondents are in favor of directors engaging with the workforce beyond those in senior management, slightly lower than the 86% global share. Meanwhile, 17% of US respondents say directors should not interact with employees at all—one the highest contingent to choose this option. US respondents less often advocated for formal or structural methods of workforce engagement than the global average: only 6% of US respondents favor the use of formal advisory boards, for example, compared with 9% globally.
Are boards more operationally involved?
US respondents least often say that increased operational involvement is frequent. And, they most often say that it doesn’t happen at all, relative to most of their counterparts in other regions. Even so, a majority of those in the United States (70%) still report increased involvement overall. The most common reason for increased involvement cited by US respondents is the need to learn more about the operational nature of the business than normal reporting allows.
How are boards addressing the widening risk environment?
Similarly to their counterparts around the world, the most significant increased investments are internal in nature: 68% of US directors report spending more time discussing risk with management; 50% report spending more time discussing risk among the board; and 49% report expecting more investment from management in understanding risk. They also report increased reliance on external advisory sources: 33% of US directors report an increased use of external experts; 30% report the addition of specialized experts to the board itself; 19% report establishing advisory committees; and 15% have hired independent experts separate from those advising management.
Where is the board spending its time?
More respondents in the United States report an increase in time spent on emerging technology and AI concerns than any other area, consistent with the average global response. Financial performance and risk, cyberrisk, and organizational culture round out the top concerns.
While geopolitical volatility remains a top concern for US boards, particularly considering 2024 global elections super-cycle and the 2024 US election specifically, US directors report a lower increase in the amount of time spent on this issue compared with those in several other markets, particularly those closest in proximity to global conflict zones.
We also saw a lower share of US respondents than in any other country say they are spending more time addressing sustainability (34%) and environmental risk (25%), compared to global averages of 54% and 42%, respectively. Not surprisingly, though, respondents at industrial companies in the United States far more often report a higher focus, 42% and 31%, respectively (followed closely by those in the consumer sector.)
Given the direct fiduciary responsibility the board has to the company’s owners, and despite increased shareholder scrutiny and shareholder democratization policies in the asset management arena, a relatively low number of US respondents report increased influence from mainstream investors (19%) or from activist investors (9%). Globally, only 22% of respondents reported the increased influence of mainstream shareholders and 13% that of activist shareholders, only slightly higher.
The United States in context
OUR RECOMMENDATIONS
THE UNITED KINGDOM IN CONTEXT
More and more, we have been helping our clients understand the expanding—and volatile—environment in which they are operating. How is the role of business in society changing? What are the implications for directors? What does the future hold?
The role of board member is continuously expanding to provide additional oversight on issues that impact their business in unprecedented ways. Issues include a rolling global pandemic, geopolitical uncertainty and conflict, emerging technologies, cybersecurity concerns, and a long list of social and environmental concerns—and the combined impact of these issues is something that even the most seasoned of directors had to tackle for the first time. This study draws insights from two Heidrick & Struggles surveys of CEOs and non-executive directors that garnered 3,176 and 2,653 respondents and the analysis of Fortune 500 2023 board appointments.
Six ways boards are reshaping their processes to thrive now
Navigating shifting sands:
Explore the data: 2023 appointments
DOWNLOAD FULL REPORT
United Kingdom, Europe, and global: Stakeholders who have accelerated their influence most in the post-Covid environment (%)
United Kingdom
Europe (excluding United Kingdom)
Global
49
52
45
The broader workforce Regulators The CEO and leadership team Consumers Leaders in communities where we operate Mainstream stockholders and analysts Activist stockholders Social activists
49
43
47
47
51
53
43
43
43
22
22
22
22
26
23
13
12
13
9
15
13
Source: Heidrick & Struggles’ survey of CEOs and board members, February 2024, n=2,568
71
74
71
61
70
54
61
72
56
57
55
57
56
58
59
55
68
62
51
51
42
48
56
42
Emerging technologies, including AI Sustainability Geopolitical volatility Organizational culture Financial performance and risk Cyberrisk Diversity, inclusion, equity, and wellbeing Environmental risk Stakeholder concerns Executive succession planning CEO succession planning Mainstream shareholders Activist shareholders
United Kingdom
Europe (excluding United Kingdom)
Global
United Kingdom, Europe, and global: Topics on which the board has most increased the amount of time spent on... (%)
38
42
40
35
31
33
27
22
27
22
21
21
15
13
13
(Somewhat more and significantly more)
Source: Heidrick & Struggles’ survey of CEOs and board members, February 2024, n=2,552
67
52
54
63
61
64
60
54
54
Spending more time understanding and defining the risks we face as a board
Spending more time talking with management about how they are managing risks
Requiring management to spend more time on understanding and defining the risks we face
United Kingdom
Europe (excluding United Kingdom)
Global
United Kingdom, Europe, and global: Ways in which the board is managing risk and uncertainty post-Covid (%)
Internal
39
33
35
36
22
28
26
21
22
Hearing from external experts on various potential areas of risk
Adding board members with expertise in particular risks we face
Setting up advisory committees on risks we identify
Engaging with risk advisors separate from those advising management
Internal
18
12
15
43
51
48
40
34
35
22
26
24
21
15
14
Board members want to learn more about operations than regular reporting allows Board members have specialized knowledge the executive team doesn’t The board doesn’t fully trust the executive team to get things done The CEO doesn’t have bandwidth to handle increased responsibilities and needs help from the board Other Don’t know/prefer not to answer
United Kingdom
Europe (excluding United Kingdom)
Global
United Kingdom, Europe, and global: Reasons why boards are more operationally involved (%)
16
12
15
3
4
4
Source: Heidrick & Struggles’ survey of CEOs and board members, February 2024, n=1,858
In addition, UK survey respondents far more often than others say the board should engage in a number of different ways—though only 6% think a direct employee representative on the board is a good idea. This suggests that the mandate for a non-executive director representing the workforce may be having unintended consequences.
8
7
5
4
93
Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates
Japan
Singapore
United Kingdom
Australia
95
96
98
92
Should engage
Should not engage
Don't know
Selected countries: Board members’ engagement with employees deeper in the firm (%)
1
1
Source: Heidrick & Struggles’ survey of CEOs and board members, February 2024, n=2,547 Note: Numbers may not sum to 100%, because of rounding.
61
34
34
55
39
38
41
36
39
39
28
33
14
9
9
6
13
6
Board members should meet with small groups of employees from time to time without executives present Board members should conduct or participate in town halls from time to time to hear employee views The board should know employees’ views based on surveys conducted by a third party The board should know employees’ views based on surveys conducted by management There should be a formal advisory board of employees that reports to the management team and the board We should have an employee representative on our board
United Kingdom
Europe (excluding United Kingdom)
Global
United Kingdom, Europe, and global: Ways boards should engage (%)
Source: Heidrick & Struggles’ survey of CEOs and board members, February 2024, n=2,547
1
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
51
51
54
58
56
Gender trends, 2019–2023 (%)
Source: Heidrick & Struggles’ analysis of FTSE 350 boards. In 2023, there were 294 seats filled
By December 31, 2024, all FTSE 350 companies are required to have at least one director of color, but progress in adding directors of non-white ethnicity has stayed roughly the same over the past three years. Still, according to the Parker Review, 96% of the FTSE 100 and 70% of the FTSE 250 have now met their target.
2
Ethnicity trends, 2019–2023 (%)
Source: Heidrick & Struggles’ analysis of FTSE 350 boards. In 2023, there were 294 seats filled
1 “FTSE Women Leaders reports,” FTSE Women Leaders, ftsewomenleaders.com
2 David Tyler and the Parker Review Committee, Improving the Ethnic Diversity of UK Business, Parker Review, March 2024, parkerreview.co.uk.
100%
75%
50%
25%
0%
2021
2022
2023
Black or African descent
Asian or Asian descent
Arab or Middle Eastern
Other minority ethnicity
White
N/A
78
17
5
75
3
16
1
5
78
1
2
16
4
Who is influencing the board agenda today—and are board members happy with that?
49
52
45
49
43
47
47
51
53
43
43
43
22
22
22
22
26
23
13
12
13
9
15
13
United Kingdom
Europe (excluding United Kingdom)
Global
United Kingdom, Europe, and global: Stakeholders who have accelerated their influence most in the post-Covid environment (%)
The broader workforce Regulators The CEO and leadership team Consumers Leaders in communities where we operate Mainstream stockholders and analysts Activist stockholders Social activists
71
74
71
61
70
54
61
72
56
57
55
57
56
58
59
55
68
62
51
51
42
48
56
42
38
42
40
35
31
33
27
22
27
22
21
21
15
13
13
Emerging technologies, including AI Sustainability Geopolitical volatility Organizational culture Financial performance and risk Cyberrisk Diversity, inclusion, equity, and wellbeing Environmental risk Stakeholder concerns Executive succession planning CEO succession planning Mainstream shareholders Activist shareholders
United Kingdom
Europe (excluding United Kingdom)
Global
(Somewhat more and significantly more)
United Kingdom, Europe, and global: Topics on which the board has most increased the amount of time spent on... (%)
39
33
35
36
22
28
26
21
22
18
12
15
Hearing from external experts on various potential areas of risk
Adding board members with expertise in particular risks we face
Setting up advisory committees on risks we identify
Engaging with risk advisors separate from those advising management
Internal
United Kingdom
Europe (excluding United Kingdom)
Global
United Kingdom, Europe, and global: Ways in which the board is managing risk and uncertainty post-Covid (%)
67
52
54
63
61
64
60
54
54
Spending more time understanding and defining the risks we face as a board
Spending more time talking with management about how they are managing risks
Requiring management to spend more time on understanding and defining the risks we face
Internal
43
51
48
40
34
35
22
26
24
21
15
14
16
12
15
3
4
4
Board members want to learn more about operations than regular reporting allows Board members have specialized knowledge the executive team doesn’t The board doesn’t fully trust the executive team to get things done The CEO doesn’t have bandwidth to handle increased responsibilities and needs help from the board Other Don’t know/prefer not to answer
United Kingdom
Europe (excluding United Kingdom)
Global
United Kingdom, Europe, and global: Reasons why boards are more operationally involved (%)
8
7
5
4
1
93
95
96
98
92
Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates
Japan
Singapore
United Kingdom
Australia
Should engage
Should not engage
Don't know
Selected countries: Board members’ engagement with employees deeper in the firm (%)
Source: Heidrick & Struggles’ survey of CEOs and board members, February 2024, n=2,547 Note: Numbers may not sum to 100%, because of rounding.
Workers are increasingly exercising their influence on the board agenda. In the United Kingdom, it is mandated that one non-executive director represent the workforce on the board of public companies. When we asked how boards should engage with the workforce, respondents in the United Kingdom were the second-highest share around the world to say that boards should engage with the workforce beyond the most senior executives.
61
34
34
55
39
38
41
36
39
39
28
33
14
9
9
6
13
6
Board members should meet with small groups of employees from time to time without executives present Board members should conduct or participate in town halls from time to time to hear employee views The board should know employees’ views based on surveys conducted by a third party The board should know employees’ views based on surveys conducted by management There should be a formal advisory board of employees that reports to the management team and the board We should have an employee representative on our board
United Kingdom
Europe (excluding United Kingdom)
Global
United Kingdom, Europe, and global: Ways boards should engage (%)
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
51
51
54
58
56
Gender trends, 2019–2023 (%)
Source: Heidrick & Struggles’ analysis of FTSE 350 boards. In 2023, there were 294 seats filled
Some of the most substantial changes in the UK governance environment are reflected in the changes we see in board diversity. In the United Kingdom, we have focused on gender and ethnicity trends, which we will cover here, but the conversation has widened to consider the impact of geopolitical differences—at home and abroad, as well as the importance of other stakeholders, whose influence we covered earlier.
In early 2024, it was reported that the representation of women on FTSE 350 boards had increased beyond the target of 40% of directors being women by the end of 2025. Of the 350, 235 were at or above 40% and only 28 below one-third. The share of female directors added in the most recent year remained high, suggesting progress is continuing.
Ethnicity trends, 2019–2023 (%)
Source: Heidrick & Struggles’ analysis of FTSE 350 boards. In 2023, there were 294 seats filled
1 “FTSE Women Leaders reports,” FTSE Women Leaders, ftsewomenleaders.com
2 David Tyler and the Parker Review Committee, Improving the Ethnic Diversity of UK Business, Parker Review, March 2024, parkerreview.co.uk.
100%
75%
50%
25%
0%
2021
2022
2023
Black or African descent
Asian or Asian descent
Arab or Middle Eastern
Other minority ethnicity
White
N/A
78
17
5
75
3
16
1
5
78
1
2
16
4
About the research
In November 2023, Heidrick & Struggles fielded an online survey that garnered responses from 3,156 respondents. Of those, 2,320 respondents were CEOs and 836 were non-executive directors. Forty-one percent were in Europe; 38% in North America; 10% in Asia Pacific; 4% in both Latin America and the Middle East; and 2% in Africa. Respondents represented companies of all sizes; 23% reported annual revenue of US $1 billion or more. Companies ranged across all industries.
In February 2024, Heidrick & Struggles fielded an online survey that received responses from 2,653 respondents. Of those, 1,927 respondents were CEOs and 726 non-executive directors. Thirty-seven percent were in Europe; 37% in North America; 9% in Asia Pacific; 4% in the Middle East; 3% in Latin America; and 1% in Africa (and 9% N/A). Respondents represented companies of all sizes; 26% reported annual revenue of US $1 billion or more. Companies ranged across all industries.
This analysis is part of Heidrick & Struggles’ long-standing study of trends in board composition in countries around the world. Produced by our global CEO & Board Practice, these reports track and analyze trends in non-executive director appointments to the boards of the largest publicly listed companies in Australia (ASX 200), Belgium (BEL 20), Brazil (B3), Canada (TSX 60), Colombia (COLCAP), Denmark (OMX Copenhagen 25), Finland (OMX Helsinki 25), France (CAC 40), Germany (DAX and MDAX), Hong Kong (Hang Seng), Ireland (ISEQ), India (Nifty Top 200), Italy (FTSE MIB), Japan (TOPIX Core 30), Kenya (NSE Top 40), Mexico (BMV IPC), the Netherlands (AEX), New Zealand (NZX 10), Norway (OBX), Poland (WIG20), Portugal (PSI 20), Saudi Arabia (Tadawul), Singapore (STI 30), South Africa (JSE Top 40), South Korea (KOSPI 50), Spain (IBEX 35), Sweden (OMX Stockholm 30), Switzerland (SMI Expanded), the United Arab Emirates (ADX and DFM), the United Kingdom (FTSE 350), and the United States (Fortune 500). Information about executives is gathered from publicly available sources, BoardEx, and a Heidrick & Struggles proprietary database.