Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 347

Are Australian bank boards fit for purpose?

Australian banks have certainly taken criticism over the last couple of years, much of it deserved and some of it produced for the pleasure of the media. Banks have been in a never-ending cycle of public-attested mistakes. While culture and greed are often cited, I doubt this is really the case.

One area worth exploring is whether banks have the right management and governance experience for the modern business environment. This is not a question of a director’s ‘smarts’ but rather if traditional experiences are still as relevant.

Most recent bank losses have little to do with lending losses. They have been operational failures.

CBA copped a $700 million dollar fine for its “software error” causing breaches with AUSTRAC’s anti-money laundering (AML) rules.

Westpac lost its CEO and Chairman due to AML failures on small international transactions in what AUSTRAC said was due to a lack of "appropriate IT systems and automated solutions”.

In many respects, a cold analysis of banking governance suggests the above examples were accidents waiting to occur.

First, the good news. When running a heatmap over the skills of bank directors, they rate well in the core skills of ‘Risk and Audit’, ‘Economic and Financial Theory’, ‘Accounting’, ‘Industry Expertise’ and holding responsibilities in ‘Large Commercial Business’.

But times are changing at an ever-increasing pace. The required skills from a director ten years ago are not those required today. Banks now resemble huge digital machines run at high speed sitting on top of large capital bases. Staff numbers are continually cut and those remaining have more diverse and larger responsibilities.

Unfortunately, many bank directors lack some really important business experience. They don’t understand technology, they don’t have operations skills and they are light on human resource experience. These skills are thought to exist because they may have held senior roles like a CEO of a large company.

The reality is you need hands-on experience and scar tissue from being deeply involved in technology and operations to know where the subtle but real risks exist.

Technology is moving under our feet as it evolves and living with these new risks and ambiguity can only be learnt on the front line. Being a ‘good people manager’ will only give a partial credit for these complex skills.

When we look at these new skill requirements our directors are coming up short.

This second table clearly shows that banks could materially improve the diversity of skills on a board. Historically, many would argue that these skills are of second order. Directors need to know how to run big companies with large staff numbers.

But that is no longer the case. Knowing how to run technology is perhaps even more important in avoiding a scandal that makes the front page of the Australian Financial Review than in driving commercial success.

 

Donald Hellyer is Director of OpenDirector and CEO of the development company BigFuture.

 

  •   4 March 2020
  • 4
  •      
  •   
4 Comments
Jonathan
March 04, 2020

Thanks Donald - another overlooked skill for bank boards is credit assessment. Insolvent banks are almost always brought down by bad lending, but few (usually none) of the directors understand how to lend money. It's like a retailer (Coles, Woolworths or Myer) having no one with retail experience on their board - it would seem an obvious oversight. Banks are very large beasts requiring a wide range of skills to be managed correctly.

Donald Hellyer
March 04, 2020

Agreed Jonathan, it just that recent losses in the banking sector have been tech related. I am sure lending losses will return again!!

Steve
March 07, 2020

Of greater concern is that the banks have become the political punching bags of the Industry Super funds. Given their recent run of mergers, they are slowly evolving into 4 pillars themselves & with close to 1 trillion in FUM & fast growing, are becoming far too powerful. Perhaps the Fed Govt should introduce anti-trust legislation to prevent them controlling Bank Boards, or any other publicly listed company.

Sandi
March 07, 2020

Taking the skills matrix to the next level - very useful tool.
It also adds to discussion of role of the Board and the Executive in the business management...
If Technology or HR are specific skills that are not represented on the Bank Board and they should be - not sure how a HR professional or CTO/CIO will actually get invited to join these Boards against current criteria.

 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

Why 'boring' Big Four banks remain attractive

Who gets the gold stars this bank reporting season?

The value of wealth management for Australian banks

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Indexation implications – key changes to 2026/27 super thresholds

Stay on top of the latest changes to superannuation rates and thresholds for 2026, including increases to transfer balance cap, concessional contributions cap, and non-concessional contributions cap.

The refinery problem: A different kind of energy crisis in 2026

The Strait of Hormuz closure due to US-Iran conflict severely disrupted global energy supply chains. While various emergency measures mitigated the crude impact, the refined product market faces unprecedented stress.

The missing 30%: how LIC returns are understated, and why it matters

The perceived underperformance of LICs compared to ETFs is due to existing comparison data excluding crucial information, highlighting the need for proper assessment and transparent reporting.

Little‑known government scheme can help retirees tap into $3 trillion of housing wealth

The Home Equity Access Scheme in Australia allows older homeowners to tap into their home equity for retirement income, yet remains underused due to lack of awareness and its perceived complexity.

Origins of the mislabeled capital gains tax ‘discount’

Debate over the CGT discount is intensifying amid concerns about intergenerational equity and housing affordability. This analysis shows that the 'discount' does not necessarily favor property investors.

2 billion reasons to fix retirement income

A proposal to address Australia's 'stranded balances' in retirement by requiring super funds to transition members to pension phase at 65, boosting retirement income and reframing super as a source of income.

Latest Updates

The ultimate superannuation EOFY checklist 2026

Here is a checklist of 28 important issues you should address before June 30 to ensure your SMSF or other super fund is in order and that you are making the most of the strategies available.

Retirement

Two months into retirement

A retirement researcher's take on retirement and her focus on each of her six resource buckets to stay engaged during the transition and beyond.

Superannuation

Markets have always delivered for super fund members. What if they don’t?

What happens if market resilience in the face of ongoing geopolitical tensions ends? Potential decade-long market weakness shows the need for contingency planning.

Retirement

We tend to spend less in retirement …

Studies show that a drop in expenditure during retirement leads to a happier retirement. But when costs ramp up again later in life, it's a guaranteed income that makes spending more hurt less.

Shares

Can you value a share just using dividends?

A cow for her milk, a stock for her dividends. Investors are too quick to dismiss this valuation technique. 

Property

The 25-year property trust default is being questioned

The 33% CGT discount rate being floated isn’t random. It sits at the structural break-even between trust and company for the multi-property cohort. That’s driving the conversation we’re hearing now.

Investment strategies

Are active managers bringing a knife to a gunfight?

How passive investing has permanently changed market structure — and why sophisticated tools are now the price of survival.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2026 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.