What is a tick-box culture?

Tick-box cultures are warning signs in the world of good standards and compliance. They foster bureaucracy and suck away the motivation for high performance, even if the rules causing it was brought in with good intentions.

A tick-box culture (or check-box culture in North America) occurs when directors and other corporate leaders are most concerned with following rules and showcasing achievements “on paper” instead of in practice. 

They ensure written requirements are met so that the company can say it is fully compliant when stakeholders ask for an update.

It’s a valid question because the above may sound fine at first glance – all the requirements are being met after all. However, beneath the “ticked boxes”, you may find that genuine engagement with the rules simply isn’t there. 

Rules were created to solve an underlying issue, and they nearly always need reporting on paper to check who’s following them. Tick-box culture means focusing on getting the reporting right and not actually addressing the underlying issue. 

In doing so, you prioritise rules and regulations over principles and people.

In governance, one of the most current examples is ESG ratings. 

They are supposed to be impartial scoring systems to encourage engagement with environment, social and governance issues, and they’re so popular now that many stakeholders depend on them to make decisions. 

As a result, companies will get a rating, meeting all the criteria so they can boast a metric to investors and consumers. 

However, the entire ratings industry has been criticised repeatedly for vagueness, ties to profits, the lack of an international standard, and generally not encouraging the core values of ESG. 

If directors simply shrug off that criticism and push ahead with getting a rating just to look good, they’re box-ticking.

Critics will give multiple explanations, but here’s the most common one:

New rules come too thick and fast for companies to engage with them appropriately. So, rather than fully integrating them into corporate strategy, they default to ensuring they get the reporting and compliance right. 

Often, this will include a vague promise to seek further integration through time, but before directors know it, they are simply filling out forms to show compliance year after year, with no change in their engagement with the underlying issue.

Absolutely. They’re an example of some of the most influential people in business taking the easy road over the right road.

Tick-box cultures only serve to limit pressure from regulators and other stakeholders. They make rules look purely bureaucratic in directors’ eyes, fostering no appreciation for the underlying issues. 

Suppose investors and regulators catch on to this. If that happens, their confidence in your board will erode because it suggests that your directors prefer a hands-off approach and robotic compliance. This will never allow them to engage with a company’s strategic future.