Governance: springboard or safety net?

Helen Buckingham, GGI special adviser on policy and leadership, puts the case for a balanced approach

“I just want you to keep me safe.” Over the years I have heard many chief executives say something along these lines to their governance lead. I might even have said it myself. And it’s not wrong—good governance does contribute to keeping individuals and organisations safe. It ensures accountability, fairness, and a degree of predictability in an increasingly chaotic world.

But sometimes it can keep us too safe. Instead of being risk aware, we become risk averse. Instead of being strategic, we become reactive. It’s important that we also think about how good governance can enable change and progress—how we use governance strategically to create the conditions that enable innovation to thrive.

There should be creative tension between governance as a safety net and governance as a springboard. It can both lessen the risk of falling and help us to fly.

Governance as safety net

Good governance in the public sector and wider civil society is essential scaffolding. It helps to ensure that our institutions function efficiently, equitably, and transparently. It stops individuals and organisations from taking irresponsible risks with public or charitable funds and means that we always have an eye on the quality and safety of the services we provide. Regulatory frameworks aim to ensure that public systems work for everyone, not just those who are best equipped to navigate them.

Good governance is not just a safety net for organisations, it also acts as a bulwark against social inequality. It ensures that essential services—healthcare, education, infrastructure, and welfare—are accessible to all citizens, not just a privileged few. It keeps charitable organisations working in line with their charitable purpose to serve their beneficiaries.

Strong governance frameworks uphold the rule of law, protect human rights, and ensure that institutions remain accountable to those they serve, and to those who fund them.

Governance as a springboard for change

For most organisations, change is not optional. Across the public sector and civil society, organisations are being asked to do more with less. The need and demand for services is rising inexorably while funding is being reduced, at least in real terms.

‘Transformational change’ is not just a fancy phrase; it’s existential—organisations that are unable to transform the way they work and deliver services are at risk of ceasing to exist, either because they will fail commercially or, in the case of public sector organisations, they will be reorganised out of existence.

Even without the financial impetus for change, good organisations are always striving to be better, to find more creative ways to meet the needs of those they serve, to innovate, and to make the best use of the resources at their disposal—both financial and human.

So, it’s important to think about how governance enables progress. Good governance creates environments where innovation is the norm, organisations are not only financially sustainable themselves but also contribute to the economy around them, and citizens can fully participate in shaping the services they receive.

Individuals working in well-governed organisations know the outcomes expected of them, the freedoms within which they can operate to achieve those outcomes, and—importantly—how to manage risk in a way that enables change to happen safely rather than to be stifled.

They are accountable, but they are not micromanaged. Failure—within appropriate parameters—is not a disaster; it’s an opportunity for learning—to apply that well-worn Beckett quote, “Try again. Fail again. Fail better.”

The balancing act

When times are tough, it’s tempting to retrench. To focus down into the organisation and use of governance systems and processes—and board time—to scrutinise how every penny is spent, to drill down into performance reports, and to hold feet to the fire for delivery.

But this is when strategic boards come into their own. Yes, they will want to ensure that individuals and teams are accountable for using resources effectively. But they will also want to spend time looking at the environment around them, thinking about the future, understanding risks and opportunities, and agreeing on the best strategic responses. That might be helping the organisation hold its nerve when all around them is thrown up in the air; it might be about a total organisational transformation. Most likely it will be somewhere between the two.

So, should governance in civil society be viewed primarily as a safety net or a springboard? The reality, of course, is that it must be both. The safety net is there for a reason. But placing too much reliance on it risks stifling initiative, burdening staff with excessive bureaucracy, and creating dependency rather than resilience. On the other hand, governance that prioritises risk-taking without sufficient safeguards can lead to systemic failures and deep inequities.

The key is balance—as every good chief executive knows.