A Change in Course

When it comes to appointing new directors, boards are going back to the future. 

For the better part of the last 20 years, boards have prioritized filling vacant seats with actively employed executives, believing them to be more attuned to the technology-driven changes impacting business. But this year, they’ve reversed course: New data shows that retired executives outpaced active executives in board appointments. Six in 10 new director appointments to S&P 500 boards went to retired executives, a 22% increase from last year. “The pendulum seems to be swinging back towards more typical director profiles,” says Fabrizio Ferri, a University of Miami professor specializing in corporate-governance issues. 

Ferri attributes the preference for retired executives to the concerns of directors about the unpredictable global business landscape. To be sure, data shows that boards’ preference for active executives started eroding in the aftermath of the pandemic. At the time, boards desperately needed experienced directors to bring stability to firms and guide them through an expanded risk environment of geopolitical and economic uncertainty. Since then, disruption has only accelerated, and the portion of director seats going to retired instead of active directors has increased in tandem with it.

The increase in retired-executive appointments aligns with other trends that underscore boards’ desire for more experience. The average age of new directors inched up in 2025 following years of declines, for instance, while appointments fell for first-time directors, the majority of whom are actively employed. At the same time, more boards have eliminated or raised the age for mandatory retirement. Torrey Foster, vice chairman in the consumer and board and CEO services practices at Korn Ferry, says the trend lines indicate that change is happening so fast that boards are seeking directors who can “hit the ground running.” “Boards need directors who are experienced with the dynamics in the room and can contribute from day one,” he says. 

Kim Van Der Zon, global vice chair and leader for the board and CEO succession practice at Korn Ferry, agrees, adding that the pressure on leaders to deliver swift results for their own companies, coupled with the time commitment a board appointment requires, means boards must pursue retired executives by default. More boards than ever before are limiting outside directorships for executives—86% of S&P 500 firms have restrictions, and two-thirds of those only allow one additional appointment. “Active executives are too focused on their own companies right now, so the pool of potential candidates is constricted,” says Van Der Zon.

But some experts question the wisdom of swinging away from those who are actively employed. Every year an executive is out of an operating or P&L role is magnified by the accelerating pace of change—someone retired for just two years is likely well behind the curve in AI, if they have experience with it at all. “How retired is retired?” asks Foster rhetorically. “There’s a difference between being recently retired and being stale.” Boards also have to consider how investors and stakeholders will view such appointments, says Michelle Lowry, a professor of finance at Drexel University’s LeBow School of Business who specializes in corporate governance. As Lowry explains it, an eight- or ten-person board with two retired directors wouldn’t raise an eyebrow, but one with four or five such directors “would attract a lot of negative attention, particularly from activists,” she says. “Investors would definitely notice if half the board is out of business.”

Ferri worries that the need for “seasoned executives” could easily portend a return to the “professional director” model of the pre-digital age, when appointments were made because of relationships rather than to uphold governance standards. “It raises concerns about whether they are motivated or willing enough to govern,” he says. 

For her part, Van Der Zon says boards tend to overindex in response to external trends and pressures, which can sometimes be against their best interests. She observes that demand among boards for supply-chain experts rose during the pandemic, only to evaporate a few years later. She advises boards to think about composition and refreshment in terms of overall strategic needs instead. “Some trends aren’t going away, like the need for tech expertise,” she says. “Others are trends of happenstance.”

Learn more about Korn Ferry’s Board Succession capabilities.