From Seattle Business, published by the Seattle Chamber of Commerce, October, 1981, page 45.

(Editor's Note: Seattle Business columnist Stew Cogan recently completed a two-part series (Business Law: June/August, 1981) on the problems corporations face in finding willing men and women to serve as active members of the board.
 
Part of the problem, says Cogan, is the increasing prospect of personal liability today's board members face in a continually increasing litigious society. This Seattle Business reader sees other problems as well.)

*	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	*
 
	It's not surprising that corporations are having difficulty in recruiting outside directors. Nor do I believe the problem is related solely to the question of legal liability, as Stew Cogan suggest.
 
	Instead, the major problem is that most corporations seek outside directors like themselves: white, male, upper-class (read wealthy), and predominately involved in hard businesses (profit-oriented) versus soft businesses, which are social service- and people-oriented.
 
	Unfortunately, the pool of available resource talent that meets the above corporate criteria is finite and limited like water. If everyone wants to drink from the same source, of course very soon there will be a shortage.
 
	If corporations and their management are seriously interested in obtaining the best talent they can find to serve as directors, I would suggest they think along these lines:
 
bulleted list
 
Actively recruit--through advertising and news releases--professional, managerial, and career-oriented women and minorities from both the hard- and soft-business sectors.
 
Allow employees, who are just as important as management in making a business profitable, to elect one or more of their own to a seat on the board. (I seem to recall that Chrysler started losing less money and began making a profit after UAW president Douglas Fraser joined their board.)
 
Don't require board members to own stock in the company. Consultants aren't required to own a piece of the rock; why directors? Nor does it make sense to place needless obstacles before potential board members. I am aware of two qualified board candidates who were unable to serve because of the stock ownership requirement, despite the fact that they wanted to serve and their services desired.
 
Utilize biographical directories to identify likely candidates or sources of referral.
 
Pay board members what they're worth. After all, what profit is there if you can't afford the best directors available? (This is especially true in non-profit organizations.)
 
	My own regret is there isn't a corporate or non-profit/social service board of directors clearinghouse, other than the one run by King County in connection with its women's programs, where qualified candidates could file their resumes and search committees could become familiar with potential new board members.
 
	As one who would like to serve on another corporate board, I and other young professionals would welcome such a clearinghouse.