In Lawcadia’s webinar, Board Packs and Corporate AI: What is Good Governance?, Jacinta Dale, Executive Director and Founder at Abledale Law, joined Sacha Kirk to examine a governance issue now facing many boards. Board packs are becoming longer and more complex, while AI is making it easier to generate, review and summarise large volumes of content. The discussion focused on how boards, general counsel and company secretaries can respond in a way that improves decision-making without weakening governance discipline.
The webinar also considered the broader environment in which boards are operating. Directors are dealing with heightened scrutiny, increasing regulatory complexity and growing expectations around accountability. Against that backdrop, the quality of board information, and the way AI is used to support board work, has become a more immediate governance issue.
Board Packs Are Getting Bigger, But Not Necessarily Better
A central theme of the webinar was that board packs are growing in both size and complexity. Dale attributed this to two main drivers. The first is the increasing breadth of regulatory and operational issues boards are expected to oversee. The second is the ease with which AI and digital tools can generate lengthy, polished reports. As she noted, organisations can now produce “incredibly long, detailed reports” very quickly, but that volume can “dilute focus on the material matters… and the things that boards should be talking about”.
That point goes to the heart of board effectiveness. More content does not necessarily result in better governance. The webinar referred to the recent Star Entertainment judgment and the observation that modern board papers can become “impractically long and oppressive”. Where important issues are buried in volume, the board is less likely to be equipped for informed and timely decision-making.
Boards Need To Take Back Control Of The Information They Receive
Dale’s position was that boards should be more deliberate about the information they receive. She said boards “need to take back control of the information they receive” and argued that this is best achieved through structure and agreed protocols, rather than informal feedback given meeting by meeting.
Her recommendation was practical. Boards and executives should agree simple rules for board papers, including executive summaries, clear recommendations, clearer distinction between matters for decision and matters for noting, and consistent standards for length, structure and clarity. She also noted that this approach gives company secretaries a clearer basis to act as gatekeepers for the pack.
Importantly, the webinar did not argue for less information as a general rule. Rather, Dale said “it’s not necessarily about giving them less information”, but about giving boards “the right information” in a format that helps directors engage with the issues that matter. That distinction is significant. The goal is not reduction for its own sake, but clarity and usefulness.
AI Can Support Directors, But It Cannot Replace Judgement
The webinar took a measured view of AI. Dale acknowledged its efficiency benefits but made clear that directors cannot delegate judgement to a tool. She identified over-reliance as one of the most significant governance risks, stating that directors “have to use their human judgment” and warning that if they rely too heavily on AI, “they risk missing the nuance”.
The discussion also addressed familiar but unresolved risks, including privacy, data security and accuracy. Dale observed that boards must make decisions using “the right information, not the ‘sort of, mostly right’ information”.
Kirk also raised a related concern around the tendency of AI tools to be overly agreeable. In practice, that can create a false sense of confidence where a board is using AI to test reasoning, identify gaps or challenge assumptions. Used carelessly, AI can reinforce weak analysis and assumptions.
A Unified AI Approach Matters
Another practical point from the webinar was the need for consistency in the use of AI tools. Dale said boards “really need to have a unified approach” and warned that, if organisations do not provide approved tools and guidance, individuals will find their own. That creates obvious risks around inconsistent outputs, unvetted platforms and data security.
The more effective approach is for boards to adopt clear AI policies and practical protocols around which tools may be used and how. That does not require organisations to avoid innovation. Rather, it allows boards to adopt AI in a way that is controlled, safe and consistent with governance expectations.
AI Transcripts May Help, But Only With Clear Guardrails
The webinar also considered AI-generated transcripts and their role in board meetings. Dale’s view was balanced. She acknowledged that transcripts can be a significant time-saver, particularly for complex boards or smaller teams with limited resources. At the same time, she identified the trade-offs, including privacy risk, cybersecurity exposure, discovery risk in litigation and the possibility that directors may engage less freely if discussions are being recorded in full.
Her recommendation was that any use of AI transcripts should be managed “in a really controlled way”. That includes being deliberate about when transcripts are turned on or off, such as “turning it off when there’s some really spicy discussion because you do want people to be able to speak really freely and not be concerned about that”. Keeping transcript access tightly controlled and applying a clear retention protocol is also essential. As she noted, boards should make a conscious decision about these tools and should not “just drift into the AI transcript because that’s just what is happening”.
The Best Immediate Use Case For AI Is Improving Board Papers
Perhaps the clearest practical recommendation from the webinar concerned where boards should start with AI. Dale said that “the best tool to adopt today” is one that helps management improve the quality of board papers. She described this as a “really practical application”, a “pretty low risk use of AI”, and one that can improve decision-making quickly without displacing director oversight.
Rather than focusing on more speculative uses of AI in the boardroom, the webinar pointed to a simpler starting point: using AI to produce shorter, sharper and better-structured board papers that support more effective decisions.
Good Governance Still Comes Back To The Basics
A consistent message throughout the discussion was that technology does not remove the need for governance fundamentals. Dale put it plainly: “No AI in the world is going to save you if you’re not discussing the right things and you don’t have the right papers in front of you.” She also noted that “when Board papers are good, meetings are better every time.”
The same principle applies to minutes. According to Dale, “minutes are some of my favourite things and AI transcripts are really helpful, so that you can turn those minutes around really quickly and get them back to the Board.”
“Director’s personal review of those minutes is really important, and if you can get them to directors as soon as possible after the meeting, that’s their best chance to give it their attention when they can still have a good recall of what was discussed, and make sure those minutes are clear and concise and complete.”
Key takeaways from the episode
- Better board packs lead to better board decisions
Clear, concise board papers with strong summaries and recommendations help directors focus on the decisions that matter. - Longer reports are not always better reports
Regulatory pressure and AI-generated content are making board packs bigger, but more material often means less clarity on what is genuinely important. - Boards need to take control of the information they receive
Agreed rules on structure, length, purpose and decision points can reduce overload and make board discussions more effective. - AI should support directors, not replace their judgement
AI can improve efficiency, but directors still need to apply human judgement and stay alert to errors, missing nuance and over-reliance. - A unified AI approach reduces risk
Boards should approve clear policies, tools and protocols so directors are not relying on inconsistent or unvetted AI platforms. - The best immediate AI use case is improving board paper quality
Using AI to help management prepare sharper, more focused board papers is a practical low-risk step that can improve decision-making straight away. - Governance fundamentals still apply
Well-structured agendas and papers lead to better meetings and clear minutes support accountability. These are not new insights, but they can be overlooked in the push towards technology adoption.