I WANT to reiterate this because it is too important to overlook. Boards that lead successful organisations do not succeed because they have the smartest people, the most decorated CVs, or the most polished governance processes.
Research is clear: they succeed because they have members who are willing to speak up. This point may sound simple, but it cuts to the heart of board effectiveness.
In every major corporate failure, from Enron to Steinhoff to local entities that collapsed under scandal, there were boards with highly-qualified members, often boasting impeccable credentials.
Yet they failed spectacularly. Why? Because people who saw problems remained silent.
The most effective boards always have a few truth tellers; directors, who are brave enough to question issues, challenge management and voice uncomfortable truths.
In those boardrooms, everything is open to discussion. Dissent is not punished; it is valued. Ideas are not shot down; they are sharpened. The boardroom becomes a place of psychological safety where tough issues are confronted head-on.
Psychological safety, a term popularised by Harvard’s Amy Edmondson, describes an environment where people feel secure enough to take interpersonal risks, admit mistakes, ask questions, or express dissenting views without fear of humiliation or retaliation.
In the context of boards, it means directors can raise difficult issues, challenge the CEO, or question the wisdom of the majority.
- Zim’s exhibition rated 7th globally
- Zim quartet to showcase at Italian exhibition
- Byo producer inspires daughter to be musical
- Lawyers challenge blitz on unregistered vehicles
Keep Reading
Boards that foster such environments make better decisions. When dissent is encouraged, blind spots are reduced. When directors are free to ask: “What if we are wrong?”, risks are managed more effectively.
Now compare this to boards that preside over failed organisations. They often operate like cults. A dominant chairperson leads the board like a personal fiefdom. Other members are treated as subordinates, not colleagues. Questions are discouraged and disagreement is seen as disloyalty.
In such environments, fear replaces candour, compliance replaces courage and silence becomes the culture. Directors learn that their survival depends on agreeing with the chairperson or CEO. The result is predictable: the board fails, and eventually the organisation follows.
When the chairperson or CEO becomes the sole source of truth, the board loses its ability to govern effectively. The organisation then moves from oversight to oversight failure. Every scandal you have ever read about in corporate governance circles, from financial misreporting to abuse of authority, has one thing in common: silence in the boardroom when it mattered most.
Here is a striking insight from research: boards rarely differ significantly in terms of skills, experience or processes. Those are almost identical across successful and failed boards. What makes the difference is culture.
Studies show that psychological safety and open communication are the top differentiators between high-performing and low-performing boards.
Other related research findings indicate that the most effective boards allocate more time to candid discussions and less time to listening to polished management presentations.
In short, the winning formula is simple: create a culture where board members can speak freely, question decisions and disagree without fear of being ostracised. Anything short of that will not work.
Many boards think they can solve dysfunction through training. They attend corporate governance workshops, participate in retreats, or hire consultants to improve meeting processes. These interventions can be helpful, but only to a certain extent.
No amount of board training will fix a culture of silence. You can spend millions training directors, but nothing will change unless the boardroom itself allows honesty and dissent.
Training addresses knowledge gaps, not courage deficits. You can teach someone about fiduciary duty, but you cannot teach them to speak truth to power if the environment punishes it.
Board effectiveness is not a function of how many governance manuals directors have read. It is determined by whether they can ask hard questions and be heard.
And do not forget this: integrity is non-negotiable. If you bring in board members without integrity, you cannot train them into it. You cannot fix corruption, dishonesty, or self-interest with a workshop.
A director without integrity is a liability. They will trade their conscience for convenience, their judgment for alliances, and their independence for favours. They will protect management rather than the organisation. Once integrity is compromised, governance collapses.
Board selection, therefore, is not about filling seats with the most impressive CVs. It is about finding people with the courage to tell the truth and the moral strength to do what is right, even when it is unpopular.
Building a candour culture
Creating a board culture where truth thrives requires intentional effort. Here are four practical steps that can help:
Empower the chairperson to facilitate, not dominate: The chairperson sets the tone. Their job is to ensure every voice is heard, not to impose their views. Effective chairs invite dissent, balance contributions and protect minority opinions.
Encourage structured dissent: Some boards designate a “devil’s advocate” for each major decision, a rotating role whose job is to challenge assumptions and identify potential risks. This normalises constructive conflict.
Evaluate board dynamics, not just attendance: Annual board evaluations should include questions on psychological safety, openness of debate, and the quality of discussion not just process compliance.
Model integrity and accountability: Directors must walk the talk. When mistakes happen, acknowledge them. When ethical dilemmas arise, choose principle over politics. Integrity builds trust, and trust makes truth possible.
Boards that succeed are not those that look perfect on paper, but those that are brave enough to hear the truth inside their boardrooms.
It takes courage to speak up. It takes even more courage to listen, especially when the truth is uncomfortable. But that courage is what separates great boards from those that exist.
The boardroom should never be a place of fear.
It should be a space where intelligence meets integrity, where diversity of thought is celebrated, and where truth is not an act of rebellion but a normal part of governance.
Because, in the end, it is not silence that saves reputations, it is truth. And it is not the smartest board that wins, but the bravest.
Nguwi is an occupational psychologist, data scientist, speaker and managing consultant at Industrial Psychology Consultants (Pvt) Ltd, a management and HR consulting firm. https://www.linkedin.com/in/memorynguwi/ Phone +263 24 248 1 946-48/ 2290 0276, cell number +263 772 356 361 or e-mail: [email protected] or visit ipcconsultants.com.
