"Do" is IMO actually a bit misleading in this context. As a Board member, you are a member of a team. There is no unilateral "do". But, in context, what I would do is advocate shareholder interests.

The one thing that I would insist on (where I could probably get away with it, because there is no effective counterargument) is that in every decision being addressed, the first thing and the last thing to be assessed in the proposed action is whether the action is in the best interest of shareholders.

First thing, because if the proposed action does satisfy this fundemental consideration, the discussion should go no further.

Last thing, because often, when a proposed action is being addressed, the action may be tweaked to the point of being completely different from the original proposition. Thus, a final assessment of the benefit to shareholders should be done prior to a final decision.

I believe the above summarizes where I'm coming from effectively. But there is more, such has pushing for improved frequency and clarity of company communications with shareholders and the investor community, establishing a Mission Statement emphasizing protection of shareholder interests, and a visible-as-possible corporate operating structure including directives for routine (and not so routine) activities where boundries of authority are clear and sufficient checks and balances are in place.

I'll stop there and not turn this into a novel. But there is more I have in mind.

I hope this helps.

SGE