A McKinsey study found that 44% of directors said their boards simply reviewed and approved management’s proposed strategies—and only 10% felt they fully understood the industry dynamics they were governing. For IP-intensive businesses, that gap is expensive. Inventions, brands, data and know-how are often the real engines of return, yet they rarely attract the boardroom scrutiny reserved for revenue and margin. When directors can’t interrogate the IP position—freedom to operate, the durability of a competitive moat, where rivals are quietly filing—they end up approving strategies built on assumptions no one has tested. The result is familiar: defensible-looking plans that carry uninspected risk, and value drivers that go unmanaged precisely because they sit one layer below the numbers everyone watches.

MicKinsey’s suggested remedy translates almost directly to IP. First, build genuine understanding of the landscape before reviewing any plan—treat the portfolio as a value driver, not a compliance line item. Second, force real debate before a strategy is set: ask what a competitor or an acquirer would do with your IP, and whether your protection actually maps to where you create value. Third, wrestle the options to the ground—build, license, acquire or divest—and tie each to capital and talent allocation rather than leaving it to legal housekeeping. Done well, this is what turns IP from a cost centre into a lever for bolder, better-resourced moves.

The discipline isn’t about getting the filings right. It’s about how thoughtful owners decide where to compete.

Worth a read: McKinsey, Tapping the strategic potential of boards.