This article originally appeared in our February 26th edition of the Diligent Minute Newsletter. For more insights like these, delivered straight to your inbox, subscribe 

Across board conversations this year, one theme keeps resurfacing: directors are leaning into growth, with deals firmly back on the table — and AI is a major catalyst. Many see today’s environment as a buyer’s market and are positioning to move while conditions create openings — even as their internal systems and processes are still catching up.

AI-fueled M&A tops board agendas for 2026

The appetite is real. M&A and strategic partnerships top the 

 this year, with 40% of directors citing deals as a leading strategy for 2026. 

 as the second-highest capital allocation priority (just behind technology adoption — including AI investments), with directors split evenly between investing in transactions and expanding into new markets. That tight pairing of capital priorities underscores how directors increasingly see AI and broader technology integration as the way to make those deals pay off — by building the data, analytics and automation muscles required to capture post-transaction value.

35% of directors say M&A opportunities are among the most pressing topics for their next board meeting, behind only strategic planning and AI-related risks and opportunities. In a striking asymmetry, just 1% cite the M&A landscape and valuations as a leading risk, while 26% view it as one of their greatest opportunities for 2026. Boards, in other words, are reading the macro environment as a moment to act — not wait.

On paper, directors feel confident. More than half say they have strong transactional/M&A expertise on the board and another 38% report at least some expertise. Yet nearly one in five still list M&A among the most challenging areas to oversee, alongside AI, innovation and capital allocation.

Taken together, the data suggests a familiar pattern: ambition is running ahead of infrastructure. Boards are ready to pursue transformative — often AI-oriented — deals, but many organizations still lack integrated data, standardized playbooks and technology-enabled diligence.

 of 2026, transaction readiness has to become a continuous discipline, not a one-off exercise. In practice, that means pressure-testing whether governance, due diligence and oversight are truly deal-ready at all times — from roles and decision rights to data access and approvals — not just when a transaction is imminent.

 outlines what to have in place across M&A, IPO and other liquidity events.

From transaction readiness to transaction velocity

While there’s great enthusiasm for deals this year, are companies truly ready? Our 

 last fall with Wilson Sonsini and NetSuite surfaced some 

 about M&A, IPO and other transaction readiness:

Only 4% of organizations had fully integrated governance, risk, compliance and finance systems for transactions; roughly 60% were operating on siloed or partially integrated platforms.

56% pointed to limited resources as the chief barrier to deal readiness; 35% cited economic and geopolitical uncertainty and 28% a lack of experienced personnel.

Adoption of core deal-enabling technology was thin: just 20% reported using secure data rooms, 16% ERP tools, 10% specialized financial reporting systems and 5% AI-powered tools for transactions.

The takeaway then was clear: many organizations were still built for analog deals in a digital and AI-fueled market. Fast-forward to today: appetite has rebounded, but the underlying infrastructure hasn’t fully kept pace — especially as AI accelerates dealmaking and raises the bar for diligence, integration and oversight.

Building always-on M&A transaction readiness at the board level

For boards, the mandate is clear: make transaction readiness always-on. Use integrated systems, define clear roles, standardize diligence, stand up robust data rooms and maintain continuous board engagement. The boards that come out ahead in this cycle won’t necessarily be the ones doing more deals — they’ll be the ones pairing bold, AI-informed strategy with the governance, data and integration muscle to execute cleanly.

 to pressure-test your board’s M&A playbook for the year ahead.

M&A is back — and supercharged by AI. Are boards ready to execute? 

In today’s polarized, fast-moving and highly scrutinized public environment, technical competence and policy knowledge alone are no longer sufficient for effective leadership. Elected officials are increasingly being called upon not just to govern, but to 

. This is where relational leadership becomes not just relevant, but essential.

Relational leadership is grounded in the understanding that leadership is not primarily about authority, position or control — but about influence, trust, connection and shared purpose. For elected officials, whose legitimacy is derived from the public they serve, relational leadership is not optional; it is foundational.

The shift from transactional to relational leadership

Traditional models of leadership emphasized hierarchy, command and compliance. Leaders made decisions, others followed. While this approach may have worked in stable environments, it is poorly suited for today’s complex and adaptive challenges.

Influence is earned through credibility and connection, not title.

For elected officials, this shift is particularly important. Governance does not occur in isolation, it occurs in relationship with constituents, fellow board or council members, administrators, staff and the broader community.

Relational leadership reframes the role of elected officials from “decision-makers only” to stewards of relationships, culture and collective outcomes.

Trust is the cornerstone of relational leadership. Without trust, communication breaks down, collaboration falters and even well-intended decisions are met with skepticism or resistance.

Timothy R. Clark’s work on psychological safety

 reminds us that people must feel safe to:

In a governance context, this means creating boardrooms and public spaces where:

Mistakes are treated as learning opportunities.

Elected officials who cultivate this environment strengthen not only their board or council, but public confidence in the institution itself.

Relational leadership and healthy governance culture

A healthy governance culture does not emerge by accident, it is intentionally built. Research and practice consistently show that high-performing boards share several relational characteristics:

A commitment to collective responsibility

 reinforces that trust is the foundation upon which productive conflict, commitment, accountability and results are built.

For elected officials, relational leadership means:

Investing in relationships before crises occur.

Addressing tension directly but respectfully.

Holding one another accountable in service of shared goals.

This is not about being “nice” or avoiding hard conversations, it is about engaging in those conversations in ways that preserve dignity, strengthen alignment and move the work forward.

Relational leaders understand that influence is more powerful — and more sustainable — than authority. 

 emphasizes that when leaders are at their best, they exhibit five key practices:

For elected officials, this translates into:

Articulating a compelling vision rooted in community values.

Empowering administrators and staff rather than micromanaging.

Recognizing contributions and celebrating progress.

When influence replaces coercion, governance becomes a collaborative enterprise rather than a positional contest.

The role of the board chair and governance leaders

Relational leadership is particularly critical for board chairs and presiding officers. Their role is not merely procedural — it is profoundly relational.

Build and sustain relationships among board members and with leadership.

Balance relational and governance responsibilities, ensuring neither is neglected.

Facilitate communication and collaboration.

This relational stewardship shapes the culture of the entire organization. When the chair models humility, curiosity and respect, others follow. When they model defensiveness or dominance, dysfunction multiplies.

Relational leadership in action and community engagement

For elected officials, relational leadership extends far beyond the boardroom. It is most visible in how leaders engage with their communities.

Treat every interaction as a trust-building opportunity.

Community engagement is not a public relations function, it is a relational practice. When leaders consistently engage with authenticity and respect, even difficult decisions are more likely to be understood, if not universally supported.

One of the most misunderstood aspects of relational leadership is accountability. Some assume that a relational approach avoids conflict or consequences. In reality, relational leadership demands 

 accountability, not less, because accountability is framed around shared purpose and mutual respect.

Frame feedback as growth, not punishment.

Maintain high expectations while offering high support.

This approach strengthens performance while preserving trust, an essential balance for elected officials navigating complex public systems.

Humility, feedback and continuous improvement

Exceptional elected leaders recognize that leadership is a practice, not a destination. They embrace:

Relational leadership requires leaders to be learners — open to critique, willing to adapt and committed to growth. This posture not only enhances effectiveness but models the very behaviors we seek in our organizations and communities.

What exceptional boards and elected bodies do

Relational leadership is not abstract, it produces tangible outcomes. Exceptional boards and elected bodies consistently (Schroeder and Saron, 2003):

Empower the superintendent/CEO or chief administrator.

Encourage and role-model a culture of feedback, continuous improvement, gratitude, relationships and care.

Ensure focus on outcomes and ends, not just activity.

These are not merely technical practices, they are relational commitments.

At a time when public trust in institutions is fragile, relational leadership offers a powerful path forward. It humanizes governance. It restores credibility. It creates conditions where difficult work can happen with integrity and respect.

For elected officials, relational leadership is not about soft skills, it is about core leadership competence.

Because ultimately, leadership is not measured by how many decisions we make, but by the trust we build, the cultures we shape, the people we empower and the outcomes we achieve together.

And in that work, relationships are not secondary — they are the work.

To go even deeper into this topic, join Steve and his governance team colleagues from Sun Prairie Area School District who will be hosting a half-day pre-conference session,

Leading with Purpose: Governance Workshop for Education Leaders

. The interactive workshop is designed for three governance roles to participate together, creating a shared learning experience and aligned outcomes. It includes practical frameworks, real-world insights and peer discussion focused on ethical leadership, accountability and future-ready decision-making.

Relational leadership: What it is and why it matters more than ever

This article originally appeared in our February 12th edition of the Diligent Minute Newsletter. For more insights like these, delivered straight to your inbox, subscribe

 produced with our partners at Corporate Board Member, and the signals on risk oversight are impossible to miss. More than 200 corporate directors shared how they see the year ahead; their views reveal where boards are strengthening oversight and where blind spots still linger.

Key risk trends boards can’t ignore in 2026

From a risk oversight perspective, the story starts in a familiar place: the macro environment. A majority of directors cite a sharp downturn in the U.S. economy as the single biggest risk over the next few years, with “black swan” events and large-scale cyber incidents close behind. Economic conditions and government policy shifts top the broader risk landscape too, even as directors see technological disruption and M\&A as some of 

Boards are not standing still. Over the past five years, 84% say they’ve changed their approach to scenario planning, expanding the scope of scenarios they consider, increasing the time devoted to planning and broadening the range of geopolitical, technological and social risks they examine.

Some risk-oversight trends that stood out

 of directors cite a sharp downturn in the U.S. economy as a top organizational risk, and 

 worry most about a black swan event they haven’t yet scenario planned.

 include cyber events or data breaches in crisis exercises, 

 test for technology-related disruption and 

 say more frequent, structured risk discussions at the full-board level would most improve risk oversight, and 

 want a clearer link between risk and strategy.

 point to better use of AI-powered data and technology tools as a key lever to strengthen risk oversight.

 of directors view cybersecurity as a top organizational risk, even though cyber incidents are modeled in crisis planning more than any other scenario.

 say strengthening cyber and data‑privacy defenses is a priority for 2026.

AI and technology‑related regulation is expected to demand the most compliance attention this year, yet 

 of directors say it remains the most underestimated area of compliance oversight.

Upgrading the board’s risk oversight toolkit

Boards still lean most heavily on management reporting and updates from internal audit or the risk committee, but many say that isn’t enough in a world of always-on risk. They point to AI monitoring tools, 

 into strategy discussions, and more frequent engagement with external experts as the upgrades they need most.

Digital infrastructure is improving — nearly half of directors now receive real-time or near-real-time operational data between meetings — but many wish board time were more forward-looking, noting that risk and performance data are often used to monitor the present rather than reframe the future.

What emerges is a picture of boards working hard to catch up with the velocity of risk, but still wrestling with misalignment between what they rehearse, what they prioritize and how they equip themselves. Directors in this year’s survey point to the same set of needs: more structured risk discussions, clearer links between risk and strategy, better tools and analytics and ongoing education on emerging threats.

Risk oversight has to become a continuous discipline, not a periodic exercise. That means pairing richer scenarios and better data with more disciplined boardroom processes, so directors can anticipate disruptions, challenge assumptions and guide management through whatever “unimagined” risks come next.

Diligent

Blog

M&A is back — and supercharged by AI. Are boards ready to execute?

Relational leadership: What it is and why it matters more than ever

Your Data Matters