A boardroom review is a procedure that lets a table evaluate its performance in a comprehensive way. It helps tables identify aspects of longevity as and weaknesses in their connections, leadership and their culture that could lead to both practical and social changes. It also ensures that those who pay for table membership are equipped to fulfill their duties.
This research area is still developing and many difficulties remain. The evidence available at present shows inconsistent results regarding how dissent can affect boards and their performance. Some studies report positive (Zona 2016) curvilinear, not significant, or mixed results. Other studies report negative (Brown Buchholtz And Butts 2019, Heemskerk Heemskerk and Wats, Minichilli, et al. There is a 2012 study that shows) relationships between dissent and the task performance of a board.
Furthermore, the current research literature is not able to provide a more thorough theoretical understanding of what drives the dynamics of the dissent. To enhance the contextualization of this governance issue, it’s beneficial to develop a more theoretically integrated approach. This could 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 processes, contexts, and even processes are connected to the necessary and sufficient causality in governance phenomenon.
Finaly, some studies use a narrow definition of disagreement, but do not provide precise measurement methods. As such, these studies are susceptible to measurement errors. It would be worthwhile to create more robust dissent measurement methods for future studies.