Who makes the worst company chairman: a cokehead or a blockhead? Some will say the two go hand in hand – if you’re on drugs your command of the facts is likely to be hazy. Coke can also make people irritable, unpredictable and paranoid. “None of that is desirable, but it’s still better than being ruled by a blockhead. Anyone who is ignorant of the basic facts of a business can only do harm to a company.” Many top business people rely on bluff and delegation to hide “large and shameful gaps in their knowledge”. What is needed is a new system of fierce and random knowledge tests for all directors, like drugs tests for sportsmen. “Directors would be accosted at unpredictable times and forced to answer basic questions about their companies’ performance, its risks and the market in general.” This would flush out “the most lethal blockheads” and focus the minds of all directors all of the time. “No excuses. No diverting the questions to someone else. No flannel. If you don’t know the answer, you’re out”. (Lucy Kellaway, Financial Times)

Lucy Kellaway is the most important reason for dipping into the Financial Times. She is irreverent and funny. And mostly right. My personal experience of top company directors (albeit limited) is that their success is due to:

1. Connections going back to school and university
2. Good looks, tall, square jaw.
3. A strong self-belief, belied by the history of their company’s share price.

There ought to be an examination for these characters. What do they really know? Epicurus would want the best and brightest. Do we get them? Well, a few, perhaps.