What Makes a Customer Advisory Board Worth Serving On: A Q&A with Mark Hall, advisory board member & former multi-sector CIO & CTO
In Mark Hall’s time as a CIO / CTO in financial services, government, energy, and utilities, he’s served on advisory boards for multiple enterprises.
Whether you’ve been invited to serve on a board or are hosting one, Mark’s cross-company and cross-sector perspective can help you consider what makes board service worth a senior executive’s time.
>> Want the nutshell view? Read Mark's tips for board members and convening companies.
>> Want to hear from an advisory board host company? Read Andrew Fitzgerald's Q&A and tips or all of Farland Group’s client interviews.
[WHAT A “PROPER” CUSTOMER ADVISORY BOARD LOOKS AND FEELS LIKE]
Q: How have your different board experiences compared to one another?
The set-up influences any sense of impact
MH: I’ve sat on multiple boards from a global strategy board to more country- or regionally-focused boards. They’re all very different in approach and what they’re trying to do.
The strongest one is strong partly because of the way the host execs approach it—they treat it like a proper board. A small number of people, around a board table, a rich, deep conversation like a governance board would have. There’s something very important about the intimacy of the setting to feeling that you’re on a proper board...truly helping develop their strategy.
Some others approach their board with a much larger number of people, a conference-like setting, a lot more presentations. These larger boards are more about sounding out ideas and building relationships than shaping the company strategy.
Q: How do you characterize what you’re calling a “proper board”?
The strongest boards debate and visibly shape the supplier’s thinking
MH: I think people get confused about whether these programs are for relationship-forming, sales, user group support, or something else. Whatever you call it—a strategy board, a customer advisory board—people say the same name and mean different things.
For some, the supplier company shares their perspective, everyone else shares theirs, you have a really good conversation. It is as useful as any closed user group.
But...
It’s not the same as debating and challenging what the supplier is trying to do. In the stronger boards, they’d present “this is what we’re thinking, this is what we’re trying to offer,” and then members would be debating and challenging those ideas.
The best board also plays back what changes as a result. “Last time we talked about this—it's now evolved to that, we took this into account,” etc.
Q: In contrast, what are some warning signs that a board might be less beneficial or enjoyable?
Watch for show greater than substance and contentious execs threatened by the process
MH: There’s a piece about how execs show up. Some execs can feel threatened by the whole process. As a member, it’s quite hard to work out their motive sometimes, but you should try. Do they change their point of view at any point during the conversation? If there’s no change—are they just looking to reinforce their existing view? To what degree are they ready to be challenged about what they do? Or does the challenge only happen on the sidelines—over coffees, at dinners; not on the stage?
Also: On the best boards...the supplier execs show up as a team. In some of the worst ones: the internal tensions bubble up...you see the execs arguing. That’s not always a bad thing; it's transparency. But there’s a balance: be authentic, but remember we are still customers.
Some boards can also be a bit too razzmatazz...like you’re in a really showy environment made to impress…but this is useless if the content or the acoustics are terrible. You think, “Oh, it’s an impressive venue, but I can’t hear the other side of the table.”
[HOW ADVISORY BOARDS HELP EXECUTIVES NAVIGATE COMPLEXITY & UNCERTAINTY]
Q: Post-COVID, there's been a drumbeat of headlines and think pieces about leading in times of constant uncertainty and urgency. Do you agree that's an executive’s new reality?
Decision confidence is diminishing
MH: I’m not totally sure it is real. But it’s perceived as real—therefore it is. There is a lack of confidence in decision-making. That’s the problem. So many factors, so much variability. It’s very difficult to be confident. Or you'll see people execute but not fully commit.
I do think it’s true there's uncertainty in the world. It is more and more difficult to know what the right strategy is. Decision-making is harder because the world is more complex. The only way you can do this is by having more data points—both hard and soft. That’s where you can see the value in these boards.
Q: AI has dominated board agendas for the past two years. How has that changed advisory board dynamics?
With no one ever in the clear lead, there’s a different type of two-way learning
MH: The whole board relationship is changing. On any given day, the customer might be further ahead than the supplier. Everyone’s leapfrogging each other. There’s a different type of learning, which isn’t just about the customer context—it's about what other people are trying, seeing. It’s increasingly becoming this two-way conversation.
The evolution of technology really does not matter. What matters is adoption; adoption is everything. Everyone’s getting focused on the hype around the evolution, and we're not adopting quickly enough. At the moment there’s already more technology than can possibly be deployed into a company any time soon, let alone the next thing.
There’s a vicious cycle: confusion about tech development and evolution is making people indecisive, and that indecisiveness is slowing adoption. And the longer that goes on, the bigger the gap becomes—which makes the next decision harder. The cycle feeds itself. That’s why these conversations are important.
Q: How does an advisory board help counterbalance this complexity and lack of decision confidence?
When decision-making is hard, talking to others is a powerful force
MH: It puts you in the position of knowing, “I spoke to as many people as I can; they’re all saying the same thing.” That helps my confidence in my decision-making.
Historically, companies could be quite insular—you'd understand your market, you’d do your thing. I think now everybody’s looking for more friends to talk to...for more data points or emotional support.
Take Mythos.* The week the crisis broke, I was at both an advisory board meeting and a CIO user group. My CISO was at similar events. When we updated our leadership at the end of the week, we’d spoken to about 80 people within five days. And everything we told our own leaders we said with conviction because we knew we were in line with our peers.
That gives a sense of why decision-making is hard, but also why talking to others is a really powerful force.
* [Ed note: the Anthropic model held from public release due to cybersecurity vulnerabilities, early 2026]
[THE CASE FOR SERVING ON AN ADVISORY BOARD]
Q: What advice do you have for someone considering a board invitation? And why do you think it’s worth serving?
Serve for your company and personal influence and development, not the compliment
MH: Think clearly about why you’d like to do this. Avoid the compliment. Avoid your ego. The fact that you’re invited on to this board—people feel complimented and naturally think, “Oh, I feel quite privileged.”
Some “whys” relate to your company, and some are personal.
For your company, it does two things: It allows you to influence the direction those suppliers are taking—their roadmaps, their strategic thinking, their services. You also build strong relationships and access to their C-suite and senior leaders. You have time together, get to know each other...that’s powerful.
At a personal level, it gives access to c-suite and peer relationships that may be difficult to build otherwise. They're beyond acquaintances because you work together quite a lot; they’re colleagues...from whom you get really good insight.
There have been situations where I’ve needed something, and I can get direct support from the chief executive because we know each other really well. It’s a privileged position to be in.
For those who aspire to non-executive roles and governance boards, some advisory boards can give you good board experience. It teaches you the skills of being an advisor. When you’re in an executive role, you’re paid to make decisions. When you sit on these boards, you’re asked to give advice. There’s a real difference in skill.
[WHAT GOOD ADVISORS—AND GOOD ADVICE—REQUIRE]
Q: What has serving on multiple boards taught you about what good advising takes?
Members lend that critical customer perspective; learn to deliver it directly
MH: Advisors have to bring different experiences or perspectives. The supplier might say, “We’re launching this new product,” and it all makes perfect sense to them...in their own context. You bring the context that’s impossible for them to know by themselves.
I’ve been on boards where it's taken three meetings of the supplier presenting the same product strategy for them to realize that we, their customers, didn’t understand what they were talking about.
So, I’ve become more direct. To start, I was probably using soft influence, “Can you expand on that?” As I’ve grown in confidence, and as I’ve built relationships, I can just go, “Look, sorry, I just don’t understand this.”
It’s also made me more thoughtful. It made me stop and reflect on other people’s worlds. It taught me how to give advice rather than direction.
Q: What kinds of members make good advisors?
The right combination of members is more important than any single individual
MH: I don’t think there’s an ideal individual. There is probably an ideal composition of individuals.
Convening companies need to be thoughtful about how they do this. There’s a risk they go, “Which companies do we want to impress? Who are our prospects? Who do we need to win?” and just fill the board up with that. The best ones think about compositions—making sure you’ve got the right industries and sectors, but also about the personal skills, styles and dynamics on the board.
I think my own ability to influence and my strategic thinking skills are pretty good—I bring those together at the same time. There are similarly extroverted people to me, and sometimes we’d fight for airtime. There’ll be others who sit quietly throughout... and then give you the most inspirational, succinct thought.
There are people who bring a very narrow, but deep perspective; others with broad experience.
It's really the combination—sectors, experience, context, personal style. And then adapting the style of the board or meeting to the people.
This is part of why I think it’s the right thing to have an external facilitator.
Q: Why do you say external facilitation is key to your advisory board experience?
Internal employees will struggle to hold the advisory board to account
MH: Facilitators like Farland Group provide a strong challenge to all participants about what we are trying to do, how we do it, and to get the outcome we’re after.
Some other boards are facilitated internally and you can see the difference. As an employee of that company, it’s harder for an internal facilitator to be objective and to challenge in both directions: your customers and your own executive team. I’ve sat in meetings where a supplier-side exec crashed the whole agenda with a long presentation on the wrong topic. A good external facilitator holds these execs and the advisors to account.
[FINAL WORDS OF ADVICE]
Q: Given all we’ve covered, what are your final words of advice for host companies and their members?
MH: For host companies: Be transparent about what you're trying to achieve. What you say and what you do need to align. Example: Don’t bring in people who aren’t board members...and turn it into a sales pitch because they don’t understand the context.
For board members: Advisory board service is incredible for career development and to support your company. But go in with open eyes about what the company is trying to do...and what your own motives are.