Governance is the New Reputation: Why South African Leaders Can’t Afford to Get it Wrong

South Africans trust Woolworths more than Eskom. Not because of rotisserie chicken, but because we instinctively know where good governance lives and where it hasn’t.

In politics, governance failures show up as potholes, rolling blackouts and broken promises. In business, they arrive as collapsing share prices, class-action lawsuits and reputational freefall. The pattern is clear: when governance goes, trust goes with it.

Too many boards still treat governance as a check-box exercise. A ritual of policies and risk registers, dusted off once a year for the AGM. That mindset misses the point. Governance isn’t bureaucracy. It’s a survival strategy. It’s the foundation that keeps a company standing when the storm hits. And in 2025, with investors jittery, consumers unforgiving and cybercriminals circling, good governance has quietly become South Africa’s most valuable intangible asset.

When Governance Fails, the Scandals Are Written in The Billions

• Steinhoff: R190 billion in market value was destroyed. Livelihoods, pensions and confidence vanished overnight.
• Tongaat Hulett: A century-old institution was suspended from the JSE due to weak audit oversight.
• African Bank: Aggressive lending and a distracted board ended in collapse and curatorship.
• Eskom: Procurement irregularities and political interference didn’t just drain balance sheets, they have dimmed the lights of an entire economy.

These aren’t case studies. They’re warnings. Bad governance isn’t embarrassing. It’s ruinously expensive.

When Governance Works, It’s Quiet but Powerful

• Capitec: Accused of reckless lending in 2018, its transparency and regulatory engagement meant the share price recovered in weeks.
• Discovery: Expanded into complex global markets without scandal, supported by independent oversight and a culture of disclosure.
• Nedbank: In the 2008 global financial crisis, its conservative governance proved a shield while peers queued for bailouts.

Boring governance is brilliant governance. It doesn’t make headlines because it averts the disaster from happening in the first place.

The New Frontier: Cyber Governance

South Africa’s next major risk won’t come from balance sheets. It will come from breached data and trust.

• Cell C: 7.7 million customer records exposed.
• NHLS: Ransomware paralysed blood testing.
• TransUnion and Experian: Over 70 million South Africans’ identities compromised.

With POPIA enforcement tightening, data governance is now board-level governance. The average cost of a data breach in South Africa is R49 million. That is equivalent to the annual operating budget of a small municipality, gone with one hack. When companies fail to govern data, they don’t just risk fines. They risk the only real currency left in business and that’s customer trust.

What Leaders Should be Asking Now

Boards and executives can no longer afford to ask whether governance ‘complies.’ The questions are tougher:

• Do we treat governance as compliance or as strategy?
• Is our data governance as robust as our financial governance?
• When the next crisis hits (and it will), will our foundations hold?

The Bottom Line

South Africa cannot afford another Steinhoff, another Eskom or another data scandal that weakens trust in our institutions. Governance isn’t paperwork. It’s resilience. It’s reputation. It’s the story your shareholders tell, your customers believe and your market trades on. In 2025, governance is reputation. And the leaders who understand that will be the ones still standing when the storm passes.