accountability – Lele Muthali

Leadership in social impact work is tested not only by regulations and strategy but by moral and relational complexity.

Faith-based principles, particularly those emphasizing service, can guide leaders through crises. Robert Greenleaf’s concept of “servant leadership” asserts that authority emerges from nurturing, protecting, and empowering others rather than from positional power.

In practice, a leader navigating a contested board decision may face pressure to prioritise ego or personal alliances. By applying a servant-leadership lens, they focus on safeguarding staff, maintaining community trust, and aligning decisions with organisational purpose. Scripture reinforces this ethos: “Whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant” (Matthew 20:26). This principle translates into everyday governance: listening actively, mediating disputes fairly, and prioritising mission over personal gain.

Examples abound in nonprofit management. During funding shortfalls, a servant leader may choose to protect staff salaries rather than discretionary perks. In programme design, they may incorporate community voices into decision-making processes. These choices demonstrate that ethical leadership is not abstract; it is manifested in concrete acts that uphold dignity, trust, and sustainability.

Learning: Complexity is inevitable in social impact work. Leaders guided by service, humility, and ethical conviction can navigate turbulence without compromising purpose, strengthening both organisational resilience and community well-being.

-Lele

Good governance is often mistaken for compliance — ticking boxes on legal requirements or producing documentation for audits.

Yet effective governance is a lived practice, grounded in fiduciary responsibility, clarity, and relational trust. South African law codifies these duties in Section 76 of the Companies Act, requiring directors to act with care, skill, diligence, and good faith. But most governance failures arise not from ignorance of the law but from poor execution: ambiguous roles, opaque decision-making, and interpersonal conflict.

Consider a nonprofit addressing water and sanitation in informal settlements. If board authority overlaps with management responsibilities, staff may receive conflicting instructions. Donors may hesitate to fund initiatives, and beneficiaries may experience service gaps. Comparative research shows that the strongest organisations adopt hybrid accountability models — combining legal compliance with relational trust, transparency, and inclusion. These models ensure that legal frameworks are applied in ways that are adaptive, responsive, and mission-aligned.

Practical strategies are instructive:

Clear charters and role definitions delineate responsibilities, preventing confusion between boards and management.
Communication protocols and regular reporting embed transparency into daily operations.
Board training on fiduciary duties ensures directors understand not just legal obligations but ethical stewardship.
Feedback mechanisms from staff and stakeholders provide continuous insight into operational realities.

An analogy clarifies this further: governance is like an orchestra. Legal structures provide the score, but trust, coordination, and leadership create harmony. If musicians (staff) are ignored or instructions are unclear, the music falters, regardless of how well the score is written.

Learning: Governance is not self-perpetuating; it must be earned and practised continually. Organisations that actively cultivate transparency, humility, and inclusion ensure that legal structures translate into meaningful accountability and impact.

-Lele