CGF ARTICLES, OPINIONS & EDITORIALS
Board evaluation: Raising the bar in South Africa (2013-08-28)
February 20,
2015 3701 3701 
Article by CGF Research and reviewed by Goldman Judin Inc.
Over the last two decades, much emphasis has been placed on corporate governance and many countries across the world have specifically embarked upon much needed reform in this area.
Indeed, our country has had its own challenges regarding better governance practices, which was probably pre-empted by the period when sanctions against South Africa came to an end at the time of Nelson Mandela’s release in February 1990.
Since then, South Africa has seen a flurry of activity to raise the bar pertaining better governance standards, practices and expected behavior. For South Africa, it started with the writing of the new Constitution and the Bill of Rights which was drawn up in 1994 and took effect in February 1997; followed by numerous corrective, as well as new legislation for all South African citizens. The measures to improve our governance -- within a new legal governance framework -- were necessary in order to ensure parity amongst all South African citizens and that equality as well as all these rights remain protected; be these human rights, environmental rights or business and trading rights (King I and King II were instrumental in establishing some of the ground rules for businesses and their stakeholder’s rights).
Where the issue of rights is concerned, there is no doubt that protecting these rights is of critical importance; as the very essence of life, safety, security and sustainability depends upon this much needed protection.
Regrettably, so often is the case that the people who are empowered to lead -- be this in government, business or even social settings -- abuse their leadership duties and they fail to protect their constituencies. The failure of leadership to safeguard these rights is caused mostly through, for example:
- disregarding legislative frameworks,
- power imbalances and authoritarianism,
- ignoring accepted / existing policies and procedures,
- violating delegation of authority,
- conflicts of interest,
- poorly informed decision making and acting unreasonably,
- selfish intent / motivation, and
- poorly appointed, unqualified and inexperienced individuals placed in leadership positions.
Against this background, it is not surprising why so many organisations (and countries) are cited as offenders of good governance practices. Simply put, boards of directors who disregard proper governance measures are generally dysfunctional, with defunct leaders who must be held directly accountable for the organisation’s demise. Clearly no modern democratic society can afford to allow directors and similar types of individuals in leadership positions to exploit their power at the cost of undermining the fundamental rights of their stakeholders.
