11.5 Conclusion

(Consideration 11.4) National culture, benefits of social ties and groupthink theory change the view on independence, which is acquired by studying the economic and legal aspects of independence. Characteristics of the country, related to the national culture, are predictors for the demand and the attributed importance of independence. This entails that the level of board independence is not only affected by corporate governance codes, law, economic circumstances and company characteristics, but by national culture as well. The benefits of social ties for the monitoring and advising function of supervisors shed a different light on stringent independence requirements. A distinct attitude towards executive directors and members of the management (board) has a negative influence on the willingness of executives to cooperate and share information, which leads to monitoring of lower quality. Therefore, supervisors should pursueboard effectivenesswith a balance betweentask effectiveness – the ability to execute their monitoring and advisory tasks – and cohesiveness – the ability to cooperate together – to let a board function well. Corporate governance requirements, such as CEO duality prohibition, diversity and evaluation requirements and the establishment of board committees, do not only increase the level of independence, but also prevent antecedents of groupthink. By addressing these antecedents – group cohesion, structural faults in the organisation and a provocative situational context – independence will lower the probability of groupthink and improve decision-making.

These behavioural aspects of independence – national culture, social relationships and groupthink theory – influence the answers to the three research questions about the definition, aim and consequences of independence. Below, these questions are addressed successively.