Skip to content
boardiqo
FRBegin your assessment

For boards

A competency map of the whole board. Each director's report stays private.

Board evaluation asks how the board works together. Renewal and succession ask a harder question: what does the board know, with evidence, and what will it stop knowing when the next mandate ends? The board workspace answers it without turning individual assessments into a performance file.

Request a proposalSee the sample report

Who uses it

Chairs

A coverage map to steer succession and committee composition before the search brief is written.

Nomination committees

An evidenced skills matrix instead of a self-declared one, with gaps against the strategy's demand.

Board secretaries and general counsel

A defensible record that the board assessed its competencies, aligned with governance-code expectations on regular evaluation.

EXHIBIT 1

This eight-member board is deep on finance, risk and independence, and thin exactly where the strategy is heading: only one director evidences technology, cyber and AI at Effective or above, and none evidences crisis management

C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
C9
C10
C11
C12
D1
4.6
4.2
3.8
2.5
3.9
3.2
3.4
3.0
4.1
4.3
4.4
3.9
D2
3.8
3.5
3.2
4.6
3.0
3.1
3.6
3.3
3.9
4.0
3.7
3.2
D3
4.1
4.7
4.3
2.8
4.4
3.0
3.1
3.2
3.8
4.5
4.2
3.6
D4
3.6
3.2
3.4
2.6
3.5
4.5
4.2
3.1
4.3
3.9
3.8
3.4
D5
4.4
3.9
4.1
3.0
3.7
3.6
4.4
3.4
4.0
4.2
4.1
4.3
D6
3.3
4.4
4.5
2.4
4.6
3.1
3.0
3.3
3.6
4.4
3.5
3.1
D7
4.0
3.4
3.3
3.2
3.2
4.2
4.0
3.5
4.2
3.8
4.0
3.8
D8
3.9
3.7
3.6
2.7
3.6
3.3
3.7
3.2
3.7
4.1
3.9
4.1
Directors ≥ 4.00
4
3
3
1
2
2
3
0
4
6
4
2
≥ 4.50 High-value4.00 to 4.49 Effective3.00 to 3.99 Conditional< 3.00Coverage gap (fewer than 2 directors)

Basis: illustrative eight-director board (synthetic). Aggregate map only: individual scores are shown here for illustration; in a live workspace the chair sees coverage counts and anonymised distributions, never named individual scores unless a director opts in.

EXHIBIT 2

When D2's mandate ends in 2027, the board's only Effective-level technology and AI coverage leaves with it; succession planning should start now, not at renewal

20262027202820292030D1 · ChairC1, C11 depth remainsD2 · Independentsole C4 coverage ≥ 4.00D3 · Audit chairC2, C5 depthD6 · Risk chairC3, C5 depth; D3, D5 coverD5 · IndependentC7, C12 depth

Basis: mandate end dates from the workspace register crossed with the coverage map. Brass marks a mandate whose end removes the board's only Effective-level coverage of a competency.

Privacy architecture

Two views, one rule: the director owns the individual report

Directorassessment + evidenceprivateScoringAI, rubric-basedautomatedHuman reviewred flags onlyreviewerIndividual reportto the directorprivateAggregate mapto the chaircoverage onlyIndividual reports never reach the chair or the committee unless the director shares them.
  • §Directors are invited by the secretary; each assessment is a private contract between boardiqo and the director.
  • §The chair's view shows coverage counts, distributions and gaps. It does not show who scored what.
  • §A director may choose to share their individual report with the chair. The choice is logged.
  • §Withdrawal removes the director's data from the aggregate on request.

How a workspace runs

Four steps, one board cycle

  1. 01

    Set up

    The secretary opens the workspace, records mandate dates and, optionally, the strategy's demand profile.

  2. 02

    Invite

    Directors receive private invitations; each completes the assessment in a single session.

  3. 03

    Aggregate

    The coverage map, gap analysis and succession timeline populate as reports are released.

  4. 04

    Decide

    Chair and nomination committee use the map for committee composition, renewal and the search brief.

Governance-code context

Governance codes in France and the United Kingdom ask boards to review their composition and functioning regularly, with a formal evaluation at least every three years. A competency map with evidence behind it gives that review a factual base. boardiqo does not replace a board evaluation and makes no claim of code compliance on its own.

Know what the board will stop knowing before it does.

Request a proposalSee pricing