IMHO: So you’ve done the Company Directors’ Course. Now what? (Institute of Directors)

 

IMHO: So you’ve done the Company Directors’ Course. Now what?

A first-hand account of the Chartered Member Assessment, with practical tips on expectations and how to approach it.

I’ve lost count of how many people have asked me about the Institute of Directors Company Directors’ Course (CDC) since I completed it – and even more have asked what’s actually involved in the optional Chartered Member Assessment (CMA) that follows.

What surprised me was how many people completed the CDC but had not gone on to do the assessment. Most weren’t sure what to expect, so it was easy to put it off. I found myself in the same position, reaching out to understand how the process worked.

If you’re looking for the same, here it is.

The Company Directors’ Course

The CDC is the best professional development I have done. It is five and a half intensive days covering governance, strategy, finance, law and culture, brought to life through boardroom simulations that feel surprisingly real.

The days are long. Mock board meetings run into the evenings and board packs that need to be read before the next morning arrive overnight. You need to dedicate the full week to it. The facilitators are excellent, so it is not as daunting as it sounds.

What also makes it worthwhile is the cohort. The CDC brings together a diverse group: experienced directors alongside those just starting out, from the private sector, public sector and elected office. You build strong connections over the week.

For those who complete the CDC, the next step is the CMA, which leads to the ‘CMInstD’ designation. If you begin the process within six months of completing the CDC, it is included in the course fee.

The exam

With Christmas approaching, I made the mistake of deferring the exam until the final week of the six-month window. If you have not sat a formal exam since university, it can feel like a nerve-wracking prospect.

The exam is held at an official examination centre. When I arrived on a Saturday afternoon, there were about a dozen people sitting exams – most completing electrician qualifications. One other person from my CDC cohort was there too, which was reassuring.

The exam is open book. You are given a clean copy of the Four Pillars of Governance Best Practice and the relevant sections of the Companies Act. What you don’t have is time to rely on them. Sixty multiple-choice questions in 75 minutes gives enough time to think, but not enough to search.

The questions cover four areas: corporate governance (12 questions), finance (21 questions), law and compliance (20 questions), and risk governance (seven questions).

The system is straightforward. It shows your remaining time, which questions you have answered, which you have bookmarked and which are still blank. That visibility is helpful when you are under pressure.

A few things I have been telling others preparing to sit it:

Do a first pass at pace. Bookmark the questions you are uncertain about and come back to them.

Know the index of the Four Pillars. On your second sweep, use the pen and paper provided to note relevant page numbers from the book’s index. Some questions required me to cross-reference more than one section and writing the page numbers down avoided constant flipping back to the index.

Brush up on your financials. Finance accounts for more than a third of the exam and most questions cannot be answered from the Four Pillars. The questions didn’t require calculations, but you need to be comfortable with financial statements and what they are telling you about the business.

I had initially assumed I’d finish with time to spare. In reality, I used almost every minute.

Results arrive by 5pm the same day. Mine came through at 4:57pm. Scoring 92% – well above the 70% pass mark – was a relief.

The assignment

Passing the exam triggers an email from the IoD asking when you would like to receive the assignment. From the date you nominate, you have exactly three weeks to submit.

The assignment is based on a fictitious board pack. You step into the role of a director preparing for a board meeting and respond to five questions across core governance areas.

The word allocation reflects weighting: strategy is 750 words (25%), finance and legal is 600 words (20%), board effectiveness and dynamics is 750 words (25%), and risk and ethics are 450 words each (15% each).

I found it engaging. The more time I spent away from the material, the more I noticed on subsequent reads. The materials are deliberately imperfect. Part of the task is identifying where governance has drifted.

It tests judgement: identifying whether strategy is grounded in reality, whether capital decisions stack up, whether risks have been accounted for, and where board dynamics do not align with good governance practice.

The hardest part for me was the word limit. Three thousand words across five questions, with 10% leeway. It seems generous at first, until you realise every question feels like it deserves more space.

You are asked to think like a director, not write like a novelist. Bullet points are encouraged, but I spent more time editing my responses than writing them – tightening language, prioritising key points and keeping everything focused on governance.

You do not receive a grade. You either pass or you don’t. The marker’s feedback on my assignment noted that I had demonstrated the “depth and breadth of critical thinking in the competencies required of a Chartered Member” and provided “insightful responses at an appropriate governance level in all areas”.

Is it worth doing?

You cannot use the Chartered designation until you hold a qualifying board role, but the assessment does not expire. You can upgrade to Chartered Member when the right opportunity comes along.

For anyone building a governance career, that external validation carries weight. Experienced Chartered Members often say the designation signals that you have done the work, understand the material and can demonstrate it.

The IoD estimates around 30 hours of preparation for the exam and another 15 to 30 hours for the assignment. That feels about right, although I spent longer on the assignment.

If you do the assessment right away while the content is fresh, it is much easier. My advice if you have completed the CDC and have not yet started the assessment: do it sooner rather than later.

If you are weighing up the CDC, the assessment or have questions about either, feel free to get in touch.


Tim McCready MInstD is Director of Business & Entrepreneurship at the Asia New Zealand Foundation. He is also director of CrammedCity Consulting, advising boards, executives and government agencies on strategy, trade and investment. Tim is a columnist for the New Zealand Herald, writing on trade, geopolitics, capital markets and innovation, and is convenor of judges for the 2degrees Auckland Business Awards. He is a Member of the Institute of Directors.

India FTA throws the door wide open for agribusiness opportunities

India FTA throws the door wide open for agribusiness opportunities

Trade agreements open doors. The New Zealand-India free trade agreement has thrown one wide open – but people still need to walk through it.

I saw that first-hand last month, accompanying 10 of India’s brightest agribusiness entrepreneurs and business leaders during a week-long visit to New Zealand.

The Asia New Zealand Foundation’s India Entrepreneurship Initiative (NZIEI), now in its second year, brought the delegation here to meet businesses, researchers and entrepreneurs across Auckland, Waikato, and the Bay of Plenty before culminating at Fieldays.

Delegates included the vice-president of Tractors and Farm Equipment (Tafe) one of India’s largest tractor manufacturers; the founder of a precision agriculture platform operating in more than 80 countries; and entrepreneurs working across AI-driven crop monitoring, dairy health technology, climate-smart mechanisation, and sustainable beekeeping.

They brought with them a sophisticated understanding of how to deploy technology across complex, price-sensitive markets at a scale few New Zealanders have experienced.

What impressed them

For Vikas Mishra, business director at Evergreen Innovation Platform – which scouts and adapts climate innovations for smallholder farmers across India – the visit confirmed something he had long suspected: that New Zealand’s agricultural edge lies not in geography or luck, but in the quality of its innovation ecosystem.

“I was so impressed by the quality of technology in New Zealand, and in particular how it is developed and adopted,” Mishra says. “Innovation is deeply collaborative, with research institutions, industry and farmers working closely together.

“That level of trust and collaboration is something that makes New Zealand’s agricultural ecosystem truly distinctive.”

A visit to the newly formed Bioeconomy Science Institute was a particular highlight for the delegation.

Mishra was impressed that producers are involved in developing new technologies from the outset, testing and refining innovations before they reach the market.

“Rather than being passive end-users, they actively participate in validating innovations, making the final products far more relevant and practical,” he says.

For Pulkit Mittal, vice-president at Tafe, it was the commercial model that stood out.

“New Zealand consistently creates value beyond the farm gate,” he says, citing Zespri and Comvita as examples of how the country turns agricultural science into globally competitive businesses.

“Innovation here is not technology for technology’s sake, but instead it is designed to solve real problems for growers and producers.”

Fieldays made a strong impression too.

Swapnil Jadhav, founder and CEO of Map My Crop, has attended agricultural trade shows in more than 25 countries. He called Fieldays one of the best he has seen – for the technology on display, but also for the setting, the culture, and the willingness of New Zealand farmers to engage with new ideas.

Not a one-way relationship

Several memoranda of understanding were signed during the visit, with further partnerships already under negotiation.

Rohan Ursal, who joined last year’s inaugural delegation, has since introduced the New Zealand apple variety Rouge to India, where an entire container sold out in a single day.

He is now importing Royal Gala through his company and is receiving inbound interest from New Zealand growers seeking Indian buyers.

“This year, we have people connecting with us – new suppliers and small growers from New Zealand trying to seek new markets and new buyers like us in India,” Ursal says.

He credits both the FTA and Rouge’s commercial success for the growing interest from New Zealand suppliers.

“In the next five years, I think we will see very good growth in this sector.”

What New Zealand needs to know

But New Zealand would be making a mistake if it viewed India simply as an export destination. Both Mishra and Mittal were clear that the value runs both ways.

“The opportunities are significant because our strengths are highly complementary,” Mittal says.

“New Zealand brings world-class expertise in dairy, horticulture, sustainability and agricultural science, while India offers scale, manufacturing capability, digital innovation and a rapidly growing agritech ecosystem.”

Mishra sees horticulture innovation as particularly promising.

He suggests technologies developed for New Zealand apple orchards could be adapted for apple growers in Shimla and Kashmir, or for orange farmers in Maharashtra.

“The opportunity lies in developing technologies together and then adapting deployment models to suit the country’s unique farming systems,” he says. “Such collaborations would create solutions that are globally relevant while remaining locally appropriate.”

That local knowledge matters more than many New Zealand businesses realise. Success in India depends on understanding its diversity, not treating it as a single market.

“Each state differs in terms of regulations, crops, climate, languages, and market structures,” Mishra says.

“A solution that works well in Maharashtra may require significant adaptation before succeeding in Kerala or Sikkim.”

He stresses the importance of working alongside trusted local institutions: farmer-producer organisations, co-operatives, and NGOs with long-standing relationships in farming communities.

Mittal is quick to point out that India is more than a large market. It is increasingly a source of innovation, engineering talent and technology solutions.

“The greatest opportunities will come from partnerships and co-development rather than simply exporting products,” he says.

The NZIEI programme is designed to build those relationships. Next year, the Foundation will take a reciprocal delegation of New Zealand businesses to India.

When they go, Mishra has some advice:

“I encourage New Zealand businesses not to underestimate Indian farmers,” he says. “They are remarkably knowledgeable, entrepreneurial, and practical. They quickly recognise technologies that genuinely solve problems – and are equally quick to reject those that do not.”

The free trade agreement has created the opportunity. Whether New Zealand captures it will depend on relationships, trust, and a willingness to see India as a long-term partner rather than just another export market.

The door is open. Now it’s time to walk through it.

Business exchange

The Asia New Zealand Foundation is New Zealand’s leading provider of Asia insights and experiences that help New Zealanders build their knowledge, skills and confidence to excel in Asia.

The New Zealand India Entrepreneurship Initiative (NZIEI) is a business exchange programme created and delivered by the Asia New Zealand Foundation that connects entrepreneurs and business leaders across New Zealand and India. Now in its second year, the programme has already produced commercial partnerships and lasting business relationships between the two countries.

Later this year, the Foundation will also take a delegation of company directors to Singapore and India – a pilot programme designed to build the international competency of New Zealand’s governance leaders.