So, the power and influence of non-execs, therefore, is rooted in their expertise they bring, the quality of personal relationships they have in and around the boardroom and also, above all, because of their wilfulness, their character, if you like. So, these are some of the key conclusions about influence and I've deliberately accentuated these opening remarks on board conduct and performance, not just because we happen to have research findings in this area but because board conduct is the key to good corporate governance. There are other key players, but their interests and intentions have eventually to be interpreted and addressed in the boardroom. It's the black box of the board that eventually needs addressing. The buck stops with the board.
Ineffective boards are the prime problem.
Which leads me to my final point. Here our research clearly indicates cause for concern. Eighty four percent of the chairmen said non-executive performance was not evaluated. Less than ten percent of the non-execs who responded said their performance is formally evaluated so these findings are consistent and, of course, worrying. With one or two notable exceptions, the answer was no.