As markets become ever more dynamic and strategies more frequently disrupted, boards recognize that timely, relevant, and well-organized competitive intelligence is essential to their ability to add value. The 2025 Boardspan Benchmark data clearly shows that boards want more and better data, along with greater insight into the competitive landscape. Scores for topics such as access to market data and competitive standing register in the bottom 10 percent among the more than 60 topics covered by the Boardspan Board Performance Assessment. Interestingly, these scores have remained essentially flat since 2023, which hints that the issues are tricky to solve. 

Boards don’t generally view themselves as lacking industry knowledge; in fact, commentary from board members (collected in the Boardspan Board Performance Assessment and in subsequent conversations between Boardspan consultants and directors) suggests the lower scores in these topics don’t represent widespread dissatisfaction with the information available, but acute eagerness to improve on and refine it. Board members see continuous improvement in this area as critical to adding value. Several forces are driving this perspective: 

• Rapidly changing markets: Even established companies face new entrants, disruptive business models, gamechanging technologies, geopolitical shifts, and other threats to even the most wellthought strategic plans. 
• Longterm strategy needs: Staying attuned to external forces is vital to provide appropriate oversight and guidance on strategy, capital allocation, risk management, and more. 
• Broader industry scope: Many companies expand into new segments or find that customer or competitor shifts leave them competing in multiple markets, requiring insight into varied competitive dynamics. 
• Diverse board expertise: Most boards include directors with a wealth of experience, some directly relevant to the industry, others bringing perspective from adjacent industries or functional expertise in finance, technology, HR, or some other key need—and they need a common frame of reference to engage effectively. 

Directors increasingly want competitive intelligence that is broader in scope and more nuanced context rather than raw data. While most boards acknowledge that their executive teams work hard to deliver relevant information, there is a widespread desire for more data and a higher level of analysis. 

Specific information needs vary by company stage, size, industry, and many other factors. Information sources vary widely too. However, there are some common themes: 

• Big Picture: Most boards schedule an annual assessment of the broad competitive landscape, perhaps as part of a longer board retreat or strategy session. Often this is provided by a thirdparty who can bring an objective perspective, incorporate other data sets, and deliver informed insights. 
• Details: Boards seek regular market updates from the management team that include agreedupon metrics, as well as trend analysis and competitive statistics such as market share or win/loss ratios. Board members generally prefer that management standardize on a format so that it is easy to compare data across periods. 
• Wide Angle: Many boards like to get analyst reports about the company or the industry. In some cases, board members with close ties to the sector may share with the board specific industry newsletters or reports that offer relevant market insights. 
• Impact: Increasingly boards are asking management to put its data into context, identify trends, or to explain, for instance, not just the company’s position visàvis competitors, but why the company is in the position it is—what factors have contributed and are expected to contribute to its successes and misses. 

Given their diverse backgrounds and perspectives, board members don’t always share a clear vision of which data would be most helpful. When boards struggle to define the competitive insights that matter most, directors can make vague or conflicting requests. Without clarity, management may get confused, overdeliver, or misdirect resources and produce unnecessary data with limited strategic value. When the board is disappointed with management’s attempt to meet its directive, frustration naturally ensues. If this has happened, it’s essential to acknowledge the misunderstanding and work to get on the right track. 

Even when directors agree on priorities, they may not share a common understanding of what a “robust” competitive analysis entails. Some want granular technical details; others prefer highlevel context. Aligning expectations, at the committee or full board level, allows the board to communicate more explicitly what it wants management to deliver. 

Boards that have struggled with these issues say that sometimes it is difficult to translate directors’ visions of “what good information looks like” into clear principles to align around, or directives to management. One tactic that has helped many is the simple practice of notetaking during meetings: Each director notes specific data or context they felt was missing from a presentation, where they would have liked more or less depth, or offers their guidance on additional analysis that would be beneficial. All the notes are shared with the board chair or lead independent director at the end of the meeting, who then collates and synthesizes the feedback, plays it back to the board to ensure agreement and then shares the collective feedback with the CEO. After a round or two of this very detailed feedback, most boards and management teams report they are much better aligned on expectations. 

There are no hardandfast rules about how to keep the board informed about the market—a lot depends on who sits on the board and how knowledgeable they are about the industry, as well as how quickly and dramatically technological innovations, regulatory changes, or new competition are impacting the market. 

Some key avenues worth pursuing to ensure every board member is fully informed and able to contribute to strategic discussions and decisions: 

• Onboarding: When new members join, ensure they are introduced to the bigpicture competitive landscape as the board and management currently understand it. 
• Continuing education: Plan ongoing programming that enables directors to deepen their knowledge of the company and industry. 
• Additional resources: For directors who have less experience in the industry or whose knowledge is less current, provide opportunities to learn about relevant innovations, competitor offerings, or other aspects of the business that will improve their understanding. 
• Timely updates: Ensure the board stays informed about regulatory changes or political decisions that could impact the market. 
• Context and analysis: Work with management to finetune presentations and reports to include the appropriate data, context, and analysis. 
• Outside perspective: Arrange for periodic reports or presentations from industry analysts or consultants to stay informed about broader market trends, opportunities, and threats. 
• Strategic intent: Be intentional about incorporating a holistic market perspective into strategy discussions. 

As boards navigate increasingly volatile markets, we expect competitive intelligence to remain a hot topic given how central it is to providing strong oversight and insightful strategic guidance. The challenge, and opportunity, lies in moving beyond static reporting toward dynamic insight that informs realtime decisions. Boards that take a proactive role in defining their competitive lens, aligning expectations with management, and seeking continuous refinement will be best positioned to guide their companies through the complexities ahead.