Do you agree or disagree that this post is the most important principle out of these three principles:

Principle #1: Boards Should Have the Right to Manage the Company for the Long Term

Principle #2: Boards Should Install Mechanisms to Ensure the Best Possible People in the Boardroom

Principle #3: Boards Should Give Shareholders an Orderly Voice

The principle I am choosing to summarize is:"Boards should install mechanisms to ensure the best possible people in the boardroom".

In exchange for long-term governance,the board should insensate a mechanism to ensure shareholders that they are competent and are working on behalf of shareholders.CorporateGovernance 2.0 suggests a "tailored manner" to ensure the selection and evaluation process is meaningful to the board compositions.Rather than using age and term limit mechanic that might rule out the most effective directors, meaningful investigation with relevant metrics to the board should be conducted. This thorough process would be held by a third-party in different aspects of the company to make sure the directors' contributions and constraints got inspected. The transparency would keep the underperforming directors from re-election and the shareholders to understand the company better. therefore they could think of shareholder proxy access, to put their appointees on the board to ensure the company have enough expertise on board. I agree with the view that age and term limit is not the best mechanism for shareholders, since strategic governance and development would take a long time to see results, and the long-term vision would change frequently if we have a term limit. An investigation of governance and performance is more effective than age or term limit.