While the audit committee has historically been charged with issues related to technology,[27] some companies have established a separate technology committee to create more airtime for technology topics. Currently, 38% of executives surveyed by Deloitte say their organization has a formal committee focused on technology.[28]

To be sure, there is no one-size-fits-all governance answer to committees, and whether it’s a good idea or not will vary by company. In some cases, having a technology committee may inadvertently create overhead and red tape. This can lead to increased bureaucracy, duplication of efforts, time-consuming preparation and delivery of materials, diffusion of responsibility and communication issues. Most importantly, it can prevent the entire board from being fully engaged on a topic by limiting discussions to the smaller group. A tech-focused committee could also benefit from having board members that are well-versed in technology, yet only 18% of new directors surveyed in the United States in 2023 had a technology background.[29]

On the other hand, technology committees could elevate the focus of technology conversations from passively addressing audit deficiencies to seeing future possibilities and opportunities. Striking this balance between defensive (cyber, risk, and regulatory focus) and offensive (strategic, growth, and revenue focus) conversations could allow the board to get a more holistic picture of technology capabilities and how they can impact the future business trajectory. It can also elevate the role of technology leaders from being back-end support to strategic business partners.

“Having committees solely focused on technology, cyber, privacy, and data has definitely elevated technology in organizations,” says Wolberg. “It has both elevated the technology conversation and it’s given us more time to talk about technology topics. It’s not that technology conversations are often truncated because people don’t want to have them or don’t think they’re important; they are cut short because time is always a commodity. So, we can create space for discussion by creating committees.”[30]

A technology committee could also create another platform to discuss innovation and this idea of technology as a vehicle of strategy, rather than just an enabler of it. The aforementioned tech executive at one vehicle retailer shared: “We have formed a technology and innovation committee jointly supported by our technology and strategy functions. Here we spend quite a lot of time talking about where we’re going with tech, the major disrupting forces we’re seeing in our industry and how we’re preparing for that, among other things. This committee has given us the time and platform to have a meaningful conversation around change, transformation, and innovation.”

A technology committee could also create opportunities to educate board members on the nuances of certain technologies, like gen AI, if desired. This on-the-job education could not only help board members better steer the organizations they’re shepherding forward, but it could also benefit them in the long term, arming them with additional skills and expertise that they can ultimately apply to other technology environments.

Regardless of whether a separate technology committee is the right fit, what’s important is breaking down the life cycle of where technology influences different aspects within an organization and making sure it’s discussed in the right areas. For instance, technology strategy and capital allocation may be better suited to be addressed at the full-board level, but the regulation of data or talent implications and incentives could be discussed at the committee level. While there is no one right answer to where technology should be discussed in the boardroom, especially since it’s so pervasive, there should be an active discussion around which avenues are responsible for discussing which tech aspects.

“There’s not a cookie-cutter answer on whether there should be a separate technology committee,” adds Wong. “It’s going to be different for every company, based on what industry they’re in, what their market is, what their size, if they’re global, and what they’re trying to do from a strategy perspective. What’s important, though, is that there’s a discussion at the board level to decide where technology fits best, and whether it’s a shared workflow that runs through more than one committee or just a specific technology committee.”[31]

The answer to this question can evolve over time. Technologies and certain elements of risk come and go, so how (and where) technology is discussed may shift as well.