Most boards have never been looked at. A governance review is a structured, independent examination of how yours actually works — who decides what, on what information, with what follow-through — reported plainly and fixed practically. It's the cheapest point at which governance debt can be repaid.
Governance fails quietly. It looks like meetings that overrun, decisions that bounce, information that arrives late and responsibilities everyone assumed someone else held. None of it is dramatic — until a capital event, a dispute or a downturn makes it expensive all at once.
The review examines the machinery honestly: structure and roles, meeting cadence and conduct, information flow, decision rights and follow-through, and compliance basics. Evidence comes from interviews, observation of a live board cycle and document review — not a questionnaire — and is benchmarked against what good looks like for a business of your size, drawing on Max's seats across commercial, community and investment boards.
The output is deliberately usable: a plain-English report to the full board, a prioritised fix list with owners, and — where wanted — support implementing it, from rewriting the board pack to chairing the first improved cycles.
Board composition, role clarity between shareholders, directors and managers, matters reserved, and delegated authority — written down or reconstructed.
How meetings run: frequency, agendas, time allocation between past and future, quality of debate, and whether actions survive contact with the calendar.
The board pack tested against one question: does it let a competent outsider make these decisions? Volume is not the metric; decision-readiness is.
A sample of recent significant decisions traced end-to-end — framing, debate, record, execution — to find where value leaked.
Findings presented to the full board in plain English, with a prioritised, owned fix list. Optional implementation support through the next two cycles.
| Duration | 4–6 weeks elapsed |
| Method | Interviews, live-cycle observation, document review |
| Output | Board-presented report + prioritised fix plan |
| Optional | Implementation support; conversion into chair or NED engagement |
Independent SME governance reviews are typically quoted fixed-fee after scoping — commonly the equivalent of five to ten senior consultancy days (£1,200–£2,500/day) depending on board size and complexity.
Figures are indicative UK market context, not a quotation — every MAXFR engagement is scoped first and priced in a written letter of engagement, with review points both sides can use. For broader numbers, see the NED & chair fees guide.
Five questions if you want structure. One email if you'd rather talk. Either way, a straight answer about what your board needs.