Governing culture: The invisible architecture of governance integrity

Nqobani Mzizi

Good governance has always been described as the framework that holds organisations together. Yet beneath the visible structures of committees, policies and disclosures lies something less tangible but far more decisive. It is the culture that determines whether governance principles are lived with conviction or performed by routine.

Culture is the invisible architecture of governance, shaping how people behave when no one is watching. Culture gives substance to governance. It is the shared set of values, beliefs and habits that influence decisions long before policies are consulted. A board may approve sound strategies and establish strong controls, but if the prevailing culture tolerates inconsistency, division or silence, governance weakens quietly from within. In every organisation, culture becomes the unwritten code that defines how power is used, how mistakes are handled and how truth travels.

Governance culture begins in the boardroom. It is expressed through how directors deliberate, how they handle disagreement, and how they uphold integrity when the pressure to perform is greatest. The tone of the boardroom becomes the atmosphere of the organisation. When leadership is transparent and fair, these qualities ripple through every layer. When expedience is rewarded, that pattern repeats itself throughout the institution, creating a flaw that grows into a monster. Governance culture sets the moral climate in which organisational culture forms.

The two are inseparable. Organisational culture reflects the values that governance sustains. If governance is ethical and consistent, the organisation develops similar traits. If governance is careless or defensive, the same tone echoes in daily conduct. Over time, the link between governance culture and organisational culture becomes self-reinforcing. Each either strengthens or corrodes the other. 

This connection is not new, but it is receiving sharper focus under the new King V Code. The Code identifies ethical culture as one of the four intended outcomes of good governance, alongside performance, adequate control and legitimacy. This placement is deliberate. It recognises that culture is the foundation upon which the other outcomes rest. A healthy culture promotes sound judgment, ethical decision-making and sustained value creation. A fractured one leads to ethical drift and eventual decline. I find this reminder timely. We speak often of performance and compliance, yet too rarely of culture as the soil from which both grow. King V brings that conversation back to the centre where it belongs.

The widely known Steinhoff International matter demonstrated how the absence of an ethical culture can destroy even the most established institutions. The company’s downfall was not caused by a lack of governance structures but by a culture that valued loyalty over transparency and growth over honesty. The board’s failure to question, to probe and to challenge allowed a flawed culture to thrive until it consumed the organisation itself. It remains a painful reminder that where culture collapses, governance follows soon after and eventually permeates the entire organisation. 

Vodacom Group, conversely, reflects how a strong governance culture can build a resilient organisational culture. Its board has embedded ethics, technology oversight and social inclusion into its governance practices. Conversations about privacy, digital access and community impact are part of its strategic rhythm. This clarity of tone has shaped an internal culture of accountability and innovation. Employees see integrity modelled by leadership, and that consistency builds trust. The governance culture’s steadiness reinforces the company’s broader purpose and performance. 

The same principle applies in the public sector, where governance culture directly influences service delivery. When institutions normalise poor accountability or tolerate ethical lapses, inefficiency becomes routine. The quality of service often mirrors the values that guide leadership. A governance culture that values transparency and stewardship creates institutions that serve with diligence and empathy. State-owned enterprises like Eskom provide a stark illustration.

Where a culture of accountability weakens, systems decay, maintenance is deferred, and public confidence evaporates. The moral test of public governance lies in whether it converts authority into service. An ethical culture thus determines whether public power becomes a tool for progress or a means of self-preservation. 

These examples show that culture is not abstract. It has measurable effects. When governance culture is sound, decision-making is steady, risk is managed wisely and relationships endure. When governance culture weakens, rules may remain but their influence fades. The organisation begins to drift, often without noticing the slow erosion of trust.

Boards that understand this are beginning to govern culture deliberately. They carefully review behavioural indicators such as ethics reports, staff engagement results and leadership feedback to understand whether culture aligns with purpose. They monitor whether conduct in practice reflects the values they proclaim. They consider culture as both a risk and an asset, knowing it can determine reputation, retention and resilience. 

Effective culture governance requires discipline and awareness. It demands that leaders look beyond outcomes to the conditions that produced them. It asks that directors pay attention to how decisions are made, not only to what those decisions achieve. Culture governance grows through conversation, observation and the willingness to confront uncomfortable truths. It deepens when boards are transparent about their own behaviour and consistent in applying ethical standards. Over time, this builds a climate of credibility and care. 

A sound culture also supports strategic clarity. When values are well understood, decision-making becomes easier and conflicts are resolved with integrity. People trust the process because they trust the purpose. Governance and culture then work in harmony, creating coherence across strategy, behaviour and performance. This is how leadership earns legitimacy: through consistency, never through control. 

The lesson is clear. Governance can create structures, but only culture can make them live. When culture reinforces integrity, compliance becomes natural. When culture rewards fear or favour, no system can sustain governance for long. The difference between endurance and failure often lies in whether the organisation’s culture is strong enough to carry its principles when leadership is tested. 

In my reflections, I return to a simple truth. Governance has never been about control; it has always been about care. It is the discipline of creating an environment where integrity can thrive. Culture is how that care becomes visible – in tone, in fairness and in the daily conduct of those entrusted to lead. It is through culture that governance earns its moral authority. 

As boards consider their own environments, three questions arise for reflection:

• Are we governing culture with the same seriousness as we govern risk and performance?
• Does our governance culture shape the organisation we aspire to lead or the one we may later have to repair?
• And when history reflects on our leadership, will it say we built frameworks or that we built trust?

If we confront these questions with honesty and courage, we will move closer to understanding the true work of governance and the enduring power of culture.

Nqobani Mzizi is a Professional Accountant (SA), Cert.Dir (IoDSA) and an Academic.

** The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of IOL or Independent Media.

BUSINESS REPORT