King V: a transformative blueprint for charities

GGi’s chief executive Professor Andrew Corbett-Nolan has sat on multiple charity boards over the last 30 years. He currently chairs one – an art gallery – and is a trustee of an international charity which provides bursaries to opera creatives. In this article he discusses how King V Report on Corporate Governance can help trustees get better impact from the new Charity Code of Governance.

In the charity sector, where missions are forged in the fires of compassion and constrained by the chill winds of fiscal austerity, governance is not a luxury; it is the lifeblood of impact.

As we stand in late 2025, the sector grapples with a perfect storm of escalating demands on charities while they are simultaneously starved of resources. Fundraisers are competing for a diminishing pool of financial support from trusts, corporates and philanthropists. There is a growing problem with trust too. In this environment the Charity Commission's updated guidance on trustee duties—emphasising robust risk management and stakeholder engagement—serves as a helpful reminder of accountability.

Layered on top of this is the freshly launched 2025 Charity Governance Code, a voluntary yet vital framework that distils eight core principles into practical outcomes for boards, from clarifying purpose to fostering inclusive cultures.

Amid these UK-centric tools, a global beacon emerges: the King V Code of Governance Principles 2025, published by the Institute of Directors in Southern Africa (IoDSA). This is far from being a distant import. Since 1994 the King Committee has published five codes that are internationally recognised as the foundational inspiration of governance codes worldwide, with the main author, Judge Mervyn King, being known as ‘the Godfather of modern corporate governance’.

For UK charities, King V offers a profound, evidence-based evolution in governance—one that transcends prescriptive checklists to embrace ethical dynamism and systems thinking. Rooted in decades of empirical research, it redefines the board's role as a 'collective moral compass', infusing decisions with Ubuntu-Botho philosophy: the profound African humanism of 'I am because we are'. For UK charities, King V is not an add-on; it's a multiplier, elevating the Charity Code's outcomes into a holistic ecosystem that safeguards legitimacy while amplifying mission-driven value.

As CEO of GGi, a specialist consultancy working since 2009 to evaluate and develop the boards of public-purpose organisations, I have long advocated for adaptive, high-performing boards that balance entrepreneurial flair with assured oversight—eschewing the ‘truly terrifying’ extremes of unchecked risk or bureaucratic paralysis, as Dame Julia Unwin so aptly warned in her article Governance – what do we mean and how do we do it?. In this short paper I unpack King V's architecture and its resonant relevance to charity boards, drawing parallels with the Charity Code and other Charity Commission guidance. I will explore how it transforms independent governance reviews from compliance audits into catalytic diagnostics and board development from tick-box training into journeys of ethical stewardship. As a charity trustee myself, this resonates. Colleague charity trustees should consider weaving King V's threads into their governance fabric, and in doing so, they will be future-proofing impact in an era where trust and resilience are the ultimate currency.

The architecture of King V: moving from pillars to purpose

King V is a living blueprint, structured as an outcomes-based framework that judges governance by its fruits, not its foliage. At its core lie six foundational concepts, or pillars, forming a symbiotic ecosystem where each reinforces the others to foster resilience in complex socio-ecological systems. These pillars—ethical leadership, corporate citizenship, sustainable development, integrated thinking, stakeholder relationships and governance as stewardship—interconnect like the six capitals they invoke: financial, manufactured, intellectual, human, social/relationship, and natural.

As King V’s Foundational Concepts document articulates, "principles build upon and reinforce one another; they are essential and foundational to sound corporate governance and hold true across all organisations." This universality, tempered by proportionality, makes King V exquisitely suited to charities of all scales, from grassroots community programmes to substantial national organisations.

Ethical leadership anchors the edifice; demanding boards exemplify integrity beyond legal minima: "Acting ethically beyond mere legal compliance" and setting a tone for cultural embedding. Corporate citizenship extends this outward, viewing organisations as societal contributors—juristic entities with duties to the economy, society, and environment, aligned with constitutional imperatives like the UK's Equality Act. Sustainable development reframes success as regenerative: meeting present needs without eroding future capacities.

Integrated thinking, the King V's thematic spine, urges holistic appraisal of interdependencies: "Integrated thinking suggests that organisations actively consider the connectivity... between the range of factors that may affect an organisation’s ability to create value." For charities, this means linking donor funds (financial capital) to volunteer contribution (human) and community engagement (social). Stakeholder relationships amplify inclusivity, rejecting shareholder primacy for a nexus of interests—beneficiaries, staff, regulators, and ecosystems—embodying Ubuntu-Botho's relational humanism. Finally, governance as stewardship casts trustees as custodians: cyclical stewards of strategy, policy, oversight and accountability, ensuring fiduciary duties serve long-term systems value.

These pillars propel 13 principles which span leadership (e.g., ethical tone-setting), strategy (integrated reporting), structures (diverse composition), risk/compliance (holistic scanning), and stakeholders (inclusive approaches). Unlike rigid mandates, King V's ‘apply and explain’ regime demands universal principle application, with transparent disclosures on adaptations—proportional to size, complexity, and impact. For a small hospice, this might mean simplified stakeholder mapping; for a multimillion-pound relief agency, scenario analyses on aid distribution ethics.

Recommended practices—non-binding yet evidence-backed—offer footholds: biennial board evaluations, whistleblower protections, and integrated reports narrating trade-offs. Research from IoDSA adopters shows uplifts in foresight (better risk scanning) and cohesion, outcomes structural codes alone cannot yield. In charities, where missions eclipse margins, King V's emphasis on ‘systems value’—creating interconnected benefits—resonates as a mandate for amplified societal return.

Perhaps the most appealing element of the King Committee work is that of governance being accountable for impact and outcome. Working through the capitals, the application of the principles through the relevant use of the practices drives impact which is summarised as these four meaningful outcomes:

• Ethical culture – the shared values, beliefs and practices within the organisation that promote ethical behaviour and decision making
• Performance and value creation – organisational performance that creates value in a sustainable manner within the organisation’s economic, social and environmental context
• Conformance and prudent control – adherence by the organisation to the spirit and intent of laws and policies, non-binding rules, codes and standards as adopted by the organisation as well as the establishment of an effective system of internal controls and accountability mechanisms
• Legitimacy – the social license to operate that the organisation has acquired, in addition to its formal legal right or license to operate, through transparently demonstrating its trustworthiness and responsible corporate citizenship

These outcomes are highly relevant to the UK charity sector.

King V's resonance with UK charity governance: a symbiotic synergy

The 2025 Charity Governance Code, launched in October, arrives as a timely UK lodestar: a foundation principle (trusteeship basics) plus eight outcomes-driven principles, from purpose clarification to EDI stewardship. Its ‘You know it's working when’ indicators—40 in total—provide auditable yardsticks such as ‘the board draws on a range of diverse backgrounds... to enhance decision making’. Echoing the Charity Commission's trustee essentials (e.g., conflict management, public benefit duties), it mandates proportionality: core practices for all, with ‘large charity only’ escalations like triennial external reviews.

King V does not duplicate this; it supercharges it. Both frameworks champion outcomes over outputs—the King V's ethical culture aligns seamlessly with the Charity Code’s first outcome, urging boards to ‘uphold high ethical standards in... decision making’. Where the Code's Principle 6 demands risk stewardship (‘balances risks with safeguards’), King V's Principle 8 elevates it via six-capitals scanning: treating beneficiary vulnerabilities as social risks, not footnotes. A mapping table illustrates this synergy:

This interplay addresses charity-specific pain points. With such financial pressure on the charity sector, King V's sustainable development pillar equips boards to navigate funding volatility—e.g., scenario-planning donor diversification against economic risks—while corporate citizenship bolsters Charity Commission duties on public benefit. For international NGOs, integrated thinking bridges UK operations with global impacts, disclosing trade-offs in annual reports per Principle 4.

Critically, King V's proportionality—"adapted or modified form still amount[ing] to attaining the objectives"—mirrors the Charity Code's scaled advice, exempting micro-charities from exhaustive audits yet insisting on ethical cores. As GGi's work with charities reveals, this flexibility turns governance from burden to enabler: a hospice board might ‘apply’ Principle 10 (Data/Technology) via basic GDPR training, explaining adaptations in trustee reports to affirm legitimacy.

Elevating independent governance reviews: King V as diagnostic compass

Independent governance reviews—mandatory every three years for large charities under the Code's Principle 8, and wise for all per Charity Commission guidance—are pivotal rites of renewal. Yet, too often, they devolve into compliance marathons, flagging gaps without igniting growth. King V reframes them as transformative diagnostics, leveraging its outcomes and apply/explain for deeper, actionable insights.

In a King V-informed review, evaluators map board practices against the four outcomes, using the six pillars as lenses. Ethical culture becomes the cultural key line of enquiry: Does the board's ‘tone from the top’ permeate volunteer codes, or erode via unaddressed conflicts? GGi's diagnostics, inspired by this, employ 360-degree feedback and maturity matrices to score conformance—e.g., triangulating risk registers with stakeholder surveys for prudent control gaps. For a mid-sized environmental charity, this might reveal siloed decision-making undermining legitimacy, prompting Principle 13 workshops on beneficiary co-design.

The ‘apply and explain’ approach (as opposed to ‘comply or explain’) significantly strengthens board reviews: it encourages transparent disclosure of tailored adaptations, transforming routine evaluations into meaningful narrative opportunities for stakeholders. "We applied Principle 5's diversity via lived-experience recruitment but explained modifications for rural isolation," yields not censure, but commendation for proportionality and thoughtfulness—echoing the Charity Code's ‘open recruitment/election processes’.

GGi's independent reviews, conducted for numerous charities, integrate this. In some reviews we have benchmarked against King V's stewardship pillar, revealing enhanced succession planning that boosted EDI outcomes.

Implications ripple outward. Reviews become catalysts for Charity Commission compliance—e.g., evidencing ‘closing the loop’ on risks via integrated reports—while pre-empting inquiries. For smaller charities, King V's scalability democratises excellence: a volunteer-led food bank conducts lightweight self-reviews via foundational checklists, escalating to externals only as scale demands.

Ultimately, King V elevates reviews from retrospective to prospective, fostering self-aware boards that, per GGi's High-Performing Boards paper, ‘shape the table’ rather than merely attend it.

Board development: an essential prescription for high-performing stewards

Great boards do not just happen; they are deliberately built. Board development—central to the Code's Foundation principle (‘commit to learning’) and Principle 8 (‘commitment to development’)—must evolve from sporadic inductions or an annual awayday to sustained journeys. King V provides the forge: a principles-driven curriculum that builds ethical muscle, aligning with Charity Commission essentials like duty mastery and conflict navigation.

Ongoing development leverages integrated thinking: Workshops on six capitals train boards to link financial stewardship (e.g., reserves policies) with social (beneficiary feedback loops), addressing the Charity Commission's risk under-reporting warnings. For diversity, Principle 5's ‘balanced composition’ inspires GGi's recommendations to build a succession pipelines—transparent recruitment yielding boards that ‘draw on diverse backgrounds for decision-making’, per the Charity Code. Ubuntu-Botho's humanism shines here: role-plays cultivate relational dissent for example by working through issues such as measured entrepreneurialism (risk appetite) and compassionate challenge.

King V's evidence base—for example with adopters' risk foresight gains—validates this for charities. In a GGi-facilitated session for a charity recently we integrated Principle 13, enhancing stakeholder mapping and reducing service delivery blind spots and inequity. For small boards, proportionality means bite-sized modules—e.g., virtual ‘apply and explain’ simulations—budgeted modestly yet impactfully.

In essence, King V turns development into stewardship. Boards emerge not as compliant overseers, but high-performing teams—purpose-driven, values-led, inclusive, learning-oriented, externally connected, and self-aware, as GGi defines them. This counters volunteer burnout, embedding the Charity Code's ‘contributory environment’.

Stewarding charities into a relational future

King V is a clarion for UK charities. In an age of squeezed grants and amplified scrutiny, it beckons boards to ethical elevation where governance is stewardship and not survival. By synergising with the 2025 Charity Code and Charity Commission guardrails, it crafts outcomes that endure: ethical cultures safeguarding trust, sustainable value amplifying missions, conformance yielding legitimacy.

For independent reviews, King V is the diagnostic gold standard, unveiling as it does not just gaps but growth pathways. In board development, it becomes the humanist forge, sculpting relational leaders who embody Ubuntu-Botho amid isolation's temptations.

As GGi prepares further resources on King V for public-purpose boards, I urge charity trustees to download the Charity Governance Code and the King V Foundational Concepts [PDF] today. Conduct a principles gap analysis; commission a King V-infused review. In Dame Julia Unwin's words, shun the terrifying poles—embrace balanced, inspired governance. Your beneficiaries, donors, and future generations will thank you.

For further open-source guidance and, I hope, inspiration, visit GGi’s website. Together we can steward a sector not to just endure, but to flourish.