Gaming and Interactive Entertainment Non-Executive Recruitment

Gaming & Interactive Entertainment NED Recruitment

NED Capital places non-executive directors for video game developers, game publishers, mobile gaming companies, esports organisations, interactive entertainment platforms and gaming technology businesses across the UK. The gaming and interactive entertainment sector — the UK’s sixth-largest video game market globally and a sector generating approximately £7.9 billion in domestic revenue — has governance requirements that have grown substantially in complexity: the Online Safety Act 2023 creates new platform duties of care, the ICO’s Children’s Code governs the design of gaming products accessible to under-18s, in-game purchasing and virtual currency governance is under increasing regulatory and parliamentary scrutiny, and the IP governance of gaming’s most valuable asset — its intellectual property — is specific and consequential in ways that general commercial governance frameworks do not anticipate. This page covers video gaming and interactive entertainment — for gambling and betting sector NED appointments, see our separate gambling sector page.

Adrian Lawrence FCA, founder of NED Capital and Fellow of the ICAEW, leads every gaming and interactive entertainment NED search personally. Call 0203 137 2496 or email recruitment@nedcapital.co.uk to discuss a gaming sector NED appointment.

Online Safety Act 2023 — The Governance Priority

The Online Safety Act 2023 is the most significant regulatory development affecting gaming and interactive entertainment governance in a generation. Gaming platforms that include user-to-user functionality — multiplayer games, in-game chat, community features, social gaming elements — are within scope as user-to-user services. The Act’s provider duties create specific board-level governance obligations that go substantially beyond previous content moderation or age verification expectations.

Duty of care. In-scope gaming platforms must take proportionate steps to protect their users — especially children — from illegal content and, for the largest platforms, from content that is legal but harmful. This duty of care is not a management compliance function — it is a board-level accountability. The board must be satisfied that the platform’s safety systems and processes are designed and implemented to meet the duty of care standard, and Ofcom can require senior managers to demonstrate that duty of care governance is operating effectively.

Children’s risk assessment. Platforms likely to be accessed by children — which includes virtually all mainstream gaming platforms — must assess the risks that children face on the platform and implement appropriate protections. Age assurance, content filtering, communication tools that protect children from adult contact, and algorithmic feed design that does not amplify harmful content for child users are specific governance requirements that the board must oversee through its governance of the platform’s safety framework.

Ofcom regulation and enforcement. Ofcom is the Online Safety Act regulator. Ofcom can impose fines of up to £18 million or 10% of global annual turnover (whichever is higher) on non-compliant platforms, and can pursue senior managers for personal liability where duty of care failures result from the management’s actions or negligence. The board’s governance of Online Safety Act compliance — including the required risk assessments, safety reports and transparency reports — is a regulatory accountability that NEDs with online platform regulatory experience are specifically qualified to oversee.

Children’s Code and Gaming Platform Design

The ICO’s Children’s Code (the Age Appropriate Design Code) applies to information society services — including gaming apps and platforms — that are likely to be accessed by children under 18. The Code’s 15 standards govern how gaming platforms must design their services for children: default privacy settings must be high, data collection must be minimised, nudge techniques that encourage children to provide more personal information or spend more time on the platform must not be used, and profiling of children for targeted advertising must not be carried out by default.

For gaming platforms that monetise through in-game advertising, personalised recommendations or engagement maximisation techniques, the Children’s Code creates specific design constraints that affect product development, monetisation strategy and data governance. The board’s oversight of Children’s Code compliance — including the data protection impact assessments required for any processing that presents high privacy risk to children — is a specific governance responsibility that requires a NED with digital platform regulatory awareness.

In-Game Purchasing, Loot Boxes and Consumer Protection

The governance of in-game purchasing mechanics — virtual currencies, loot boxes, battle passes, microtransaction models, season passes — has become an increasingly active governance area as regulators, legislators and consumer protection bodies have scrutinised the consumer protection implications of these mechanics, particularly for younger players.

Loot boxes. The UK Government’s 2023 Gambling White Paper confirmed that loot boxes — paid random item generators that are a common monetisation mechanic in games — would not be regulated as gambling. However, the Government recommended that the gaming industry implement voluntary age verification measures for loot box purchases and that loot box spending data should be made available to parents. The board’s governance of loot box design and age verification is a consumer protection governance priority — not because loot boxes are currently regulated as gambling, but because the reputational and political risk of their implementation, particularly in games with a significant child player base, requires board-level governance attention.

Virtual currency governance. The governance of in-game virtual currencies — Robux in Roblox, V-Bucks in Fortnite, similar proprietary currencies across gaming platforms — involves specific consumer protection considerations: transparency about the real-money cost of virtual currency, refund policies for unused virtual currency, the governance of exchange rate clarity between real money and virtual currency and the management of virtual currency inflation and economy design. The FCA has been considering whether virtual currencies used in gaming may fall within the scope of financial regulation in certain circumstances.

Subscription and spend governance. The governance of gaming subscription spending — monthly subscriptions, auto-renewal terms, parental controls for spending limits, chargeback management — has received attention from the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). The CMA’s consumer protection enforcement activity in digital markets includes subscription traps and auto-renewal practices, creating specific consumer protection governance obligations for gaming subscription businesses.

Intellectual Property Governance

Intellectual property is the gaming sector’s primary competitive asset and its most significant board-level governance responsibility. The IP estate of a successful gaming company — the game characters, worlds, mechanics, music, story and associated trade marks — can represent a multiple of the company’s tangible asset value and is the foundation of its long-term commercial value.

IP ownership and creator agreements. The governance of IP ownership in gaming requires careful management of developer agreements, work-for-hire arrangements, employee invention assignment provisions and publisher-developer contracts. Where IP ownership is disputed — between the company and a departed developer, between a publisher and a developer regarding a game created under a publishing agreement — the financial consequences can be material. The board’s governance of IP ownership documentation and its proactive management of potential IP disputes is a primary governance function for gaming companies.

Third-party IP licensing. Many games license third-party IP — sports league licences (EA’s FIFA successor EA FC licensing from UEFA, NFL, NBA and other leagues), film and TV adaptations, music licensing, brand partnerships. The governance of third-party IP licence management — monitoring compliance with licence conditions, managing licence renewals, assessing the commercial implications of licence loss or restriction — requires NEDs familiar with IP licensing governance in creative sector businesses.

Franchise governance. Successful game franchises — long-running series with established characters and worlds — are among the most valuable assets in the entertainment industry. The board’s governance of franchise strategy — sequels, remasters, adaptations, brand extensions, merchandise licensing — is a strategic governance function that requires directors who understand the specific commercial dynamics of gaming IP franchises.

Studio Talent and Culture Governance

Game development talent — designers, developers, artists, writers, composers and production staff — is the primary input to the gaming sector’s output. The board’s governance of studio culture, talent retention and the management of creative teams is a primary governance function that differs from most other sectors in its specific dynamics.

The gaming industry has faced significant governance scrutiny over studio culture — allegations of “crunch culture” (extended, unsustainable working hours during game development cycles), workplace misconduct allegations at major studios and significant gender diversity gaps. These are not just HR management issues — they are board-level governance concerns that affect the company’s ability to retain talent, its reputational standing with players and press, and increasingly its access to institutional capital whose ESG frameworks include workplace culture assessments.

Studio acquisitions — which have been a primary strategy for major gaming companies seeking IP and talent — create specific post-acquisition integration governance challenges. Retaining the creative talent and studio culture of an acquired studio while integrating it into a larger corporate governance framework is one of the most consistently difficult governance challenges in the sector.

Gaming NED Candidate Profiles

Former gaming executives with board governance experience. Senior executives from gaming developers, publishers and platforms who have transitioned to governance roles — former CEOs, CFOs, Chief Product Officers and Chief Legal Officers from gaming businesses. The most immediately valuable profiles have direct Online Safety Act, IP governance or in-game economy governance experience from their executive careers.

Online platform regulatory specialists. Directors with experience of governing online platforms through the Online Safety Act implementation — from any consumer internet sector (social media, streaming, marketplaces) — bring directly applicable regulatory governance expertise for gaming platforms in scope. Former Ofcom officials, internet platform general counsels and digital platform governance specialists are specifically relevant.

IP and entertainment lawyers with governance experience. Former senior lawyers with gaming, media and entertainment IP governance experience who have made the governance transition bring specific IP governance capability that generalist commercial NEDs cannot replicate.

Consumer technology investors. VC and growth equity investors who have governed gaming and consumer technology companies — who understand the product-market dynamics, the monetisation governance challenges and the M&A landscape of gaming — bring governance capability that is specific to the growth equity-backed gaming company context.

Gaming and Interactive Entertainment NED Fee Benchmarks

Gaming sector NED fees reflect the company’s stage, size and listing status. Listed gaming companies (AIM, main market): £30,000–£75,000 per annum. PE or VC-backed gaming companies: £20,000–£50,000 with equity component; equity is particularly common and significant in gaming given the potential for IP value appreciation. Private gaming developers and publishers: £12,000–£35,000 depending on revenue and complexity. Chair roles at 1.5–2x the standard NED fee.