From Ethics on Paper to Ethics in Practice: What King V Means for Boards, Executives and Risk Leaders
Inspired by the “Ethics Under Pressure: Navigating Real-World Ethical Risks in Business” training presented by Jade Theart (Biz Facility Learning Centre). The article reflects the key themes discussed and their relevance to governance and risk professionals.
For many years, organisations approached ethics as a compliance exercise.
Develop a Code of Conduct. Tick the ethics training box. Publish a statement in the annual report. Create a whistleblowing hotline.
The expectation was that if these structures existed, the organisation could claim to have an ethical culture.
The governance failures exposed through South Africa’s State Capture, the Steinhoff collapse, Tongaat Hulett and numerous other corporate scandals demonstrated that this approach simply isn’t enough. Many of these organisations had policies, committees and governance frameworks in place. What they lacked was ethical leadership, accountability and action.
This is the fundamental shift that King V introduces.
Rather than asking “Do you have ethics?”, King V asks “Can you demonstrate that ethics influences decisions, behaviours and outcomes?”
Ethical Decision-Making Webinar_otter_ai_transcript.txt
Ethics has moved beyond compliance
One of the strongest messages from the Biz Facility webinar was that ethics should no longer be viewed as a compliance function.
Compliance asks:
- Do we have the required policies?
- Have we complied with legislation?
- Have we submitted the required reports?
Ethics asks a much more challenging question:
Are we consistently making the right decisions—even under pressure?
King V recognises that organisations can comply with legislation while still developing a poor ethical culture. Governance is therefore no longer measured by documentation, but by behaviour, leadership and evidence.
For risk professionals, this is a significant shift.
Ethics is becoming a measurable governance risk that requires monitoring, assurance and continual improvement—not merely annual declarations.
From “We have a Code” to “Show me the evidence”
Perhaps the most important evolution within King V is that organisations must now provide evidence that ethics is embedded throughout the business.
The focus has shifted from aspiration to demonstration.
Boards should increasingly be able to answer questions such as:
- How do we know employees feel safe to raise concerns?
- How consistently are disciplinary actions applied?
- What trends are emerging from whistleblowing?
- How quickly are ethical concerns investigated?
- How do leaders model ethical behaviour?
- Can we demonstrate improvements over time?
Ethical culture is becoming something that should be measured using objective indicators rather than described in generic statements.
Leadership—not policies—creates ethical culture
One recurring theme throughout the training was simple:
People do not judge culture by what leadership says. They judge it by what leadership consistently does.
King V places ethical leadership at the centre of governance.
It recognises that:
- leadership sets the ethical tone;
- accountability cannot be delegated;
- boards remain responsible for governance outcomes;
- ethics committees support governance but cannot replace leadership responsibility.
This has important implications for executives.
Employees quickly notice if:
- senior executives are treated differently;
- misconduct goes unchallenged;
- performance is rewarded regardless of behaviour;
- difficult questions are discouraged.
Culture is built through consistency.
Consequence management becomes a governance issue
One of the strongest areas emphasised during the training was consequence management.
Many South African governance failures were not caused because organisations lacked policies.
They failed because:
- misconduct produced little consequence;
- senior executives were protected;
- disciplinary action was inconsistent;
- ethical breaches were tolerated if commercial performance remained strong.
King V explicitly strengthens board accountability for ensuring ethical breaches are addressed fairly, consistently and regardless of seniority. Failure to enforce consequences is itself regarded as a governance failure.
For boards and remuneration committees, this means ethical behaviour must become part of performance management—not separate from it.
Ethical culture must be measurable
Risk managers often ask:
How do we assess culture?
The webinar highlighted several practical indicators that organisations can monitor:
- whistleblowing volumes and trends;
- time taken to investigate cases;
- repeat ethical breaches;
- disciplinary consistency;
- employee trust and psychological safety;
- leadership behaviour aligned to organisational values.
These are becoming leading indicators of governance maturity.
They deserve the same level of board attention as financial, operational and cyber risk metrics.
Technology and AI are now governance issues
Another major development under King V is the explicit inclusion of technology and AI governance.
Artificial intelligence can improve productivity, but it cannot replace professional judgement.
Boards should be asking:
- Who remains accountable for AI-assisted decisions?
- How is human oversight maintained?
- Can AI outputs be explained?
- Are confidential data and privacy adequately protected?
- How are algorithmic risks governed?
Technology governance is no longer solely the responsibility of IT—it is a board responsibility because it directly affects ethics, accountability and stakeholder confidence.
Whistleblowing only works when people feel safe
The Zondo Commission repeatedly showed that warning signs often existed long before major failures occurred.
The problem was not always a lack of reporting.
The problem was that concerns were ignored.
King V therefore reinforces:
- protected reporting;
- psychological safety;
- independent investigations;
- board oversight of whistleblowing outcomes;
- protection against retaliation.
Healthy organisations should not measure success by having few whistleblowing reports.
They should measure whether employees trust the system enough to raise concerns early.
What should boards and risk leaders be doing now?
King V challenges organisations to move beyond ethical intentions towards ethical evidence.
Some practical actions include:
- Review ethics governance against King V expectations.
- Strengthen ethics committee mandates and reporting.
- Develop measurable ethics and culture indicators.
- Integrate ethics into enterprise risk management.
- Include ethical behaviour in executive performance evaluations.
- Test whether consequence management is applied consistently.
- Strengthen AI and technology governance frameworks.
- Build psychological safety so concerns are raised before they become crises.
Final thought
Perhaps the most powerful message from the training was this:
Ethical failures rarely begin with criminal intent. They begin with small compromises that gradually become normal.
King V represents a significant evolution in South African governance because it recognises that ethics is not a compliance exercise—it is a leadership responsibility.
For boards, executives and risk professionals, the question is no longer:
“Do we have an ethics framework?”
It is:
“Can we demonstrate, with evidence, that ethics shapes the way our organisation makes decisions?”
That is the standard stakeholders, regulators and society increasingly expect.
iGRECS strive to empower sustainable impact through good governance by connecting expertise, build capacity and fostering inclusive, transparent and integrated GRECS and related practices.
