From a global perspective, executives in their late 30s and 40s are no longer ‘young’. But the Japanese seniority system and Confucian cultural legacy place great value on seniority: few boards or nominating committees consider 40-year-olds as sufficiently mature. It’s a handicap. 

Of course, we could argue that a boardroom is no place for experimentation: board members need to have weathered multiple unexpected, major events. A 38-year-old is unlikely to have that track record. But few in the younger age bracket would be surprised by emergent technical trends - or other rising phenomena that may baffle peers in their 60s or 70s. The younger cohort has a nose for the new, their understanding supported by stateoftheart technology. 

It’s time to re-think board design  

Let’s add new voices to established ones. Knowing that a single, token member isn’t enough for the board of a multinational: a newcomer will need the support of a likeminded peer to present an opinion that senior members may have difficulty accepting. The purpose of age diversity is to open vistas and stimulate discussion. Coming from a senior board member, an atypical view will spark a conversation. Coming from its youngest member, the board may look the other way: “He’s young, lacks qualifications, experience.” Two young heads are better than one.  

Even then, new voices will not be heard absent certain conditions of behaviour and attitude. I observe that board discussions generally take place in two types of atmospheres: fact- and experience-based. Most boards lean toward the latter, making it difficult for a less venerable member to contribute. This is regrettable. Technology facilitates fact-based discussion: ideas based on data, not age or tenure. Moreover, boards are well acquainted with bias theory. But in practice they often have trouble distinguishing between experience and... heuristics. Demographically homogenous boards may find this particularly difficult. 

As a board, consider this: introducing younger members can be an opportunity to refresh the way you function: are you sufficiently factbased, or do you rely too much on experience?  

As an NED, part of your mission is to bring new perspectives to the table. To challenge experience anchored thinking with factually robust proposals. But you’ll need diplomacy if you want your colleagues to hear you out. The “right” opinion is not enough. I often hear younger board and CXO candidates spluttering: “But what I’m saying is based in the facts. Why can’t they accept it?” This may be. But as a board member, your role is to contribute to the dialogue, not simply deliver information. Invite, don’t confront. Ask: “What do you think about this question? Is this an interesting perspective?” 

Next, prepare to be challenged – even if you are factually armed. Open-mindedness is needed on both sides. Accept a discussion. Remember – you’re more likely to meet objections if you’re challenging an experienced-based view. You’ll need high emotional intelligence – self-awareness and self-regulation.  

I will continue promoting younger candidates 

A leader in their 60s or 70s may have reached their position through charisma and energy: sweeping people towards the goal through sheer force of ambition, personality and will. As a younger executive, you’ll likely have other strengths. Less trapped in dogma, hype, or the need for status. More focused on growth, self-actualization – and that of others. 

Of course, younger isn’t always better. Boards need balance. But if there are two candidates with the same qualifications, and I must choose one, I would recommend the younger.