A boardroom review is a procedure that allows a table to evaluate its performance in a thorough manner. It assists tables in identifying aspects of longevity as well as weaknesses in their leadership relationships, connections and culture that could cause both social and practical changes. It also helps ensure that those who pay for table membership are prepared to perform their roles.
This research field is still evolving and many problems remain. First, the evidence currently available provides mixed findings on the way that dissent affects boards and their functioning. While some studies show positive (Zona 2016) and curvilinear impacts, others find negative (Brown, Buchholtz and Butts 2019) and mixed results (Heemskerk, Heemskerk, and Wats, 2015; Minichilli et al. 2012) connections between dissent and the performance of a board’s tasks.
Furthermore, the current research is lacking a deeper understanding of what influences the dynamics of disagreement. Future research should provide an integrated theoretical framework to understand this governance phenomenon. This might include the use of configurational approaches (Federo and Saz-Carranza, 2018; Schiell Lewellyn and Yan 2023) to assist researchers to more precisely understand how individual board attributes as well as processes and contexts connect to the need for and sufficient causality in governance phenomena.
In the end, some studies employ the narrow definition of discord, but don’t provide precise measurement methods. These studies are therefore susceptible to measurement errors. It would be worthwhile to create more robust methods to measure dissent for future studies.