At my local church, we have been discussing generosity, what it really means, how it shows up, and whether it is something we live out or simply admire from a distance.

While reflecting on this, I came across a news article summarizing the state of the City of Johannesburg:

One article summarized the state of the City of Johannesburg:

“…Public infrastructure is collapsing, with potholes, power outages, and water shortages becoming routine. Crime is rampant, with lawlessness extending from informal land invasions to unchecked organized crime activity. Basic services like traffic lights, waste collection, and road maintenance are supposed to be provided by the City of Johannesburg, but they are delivered so badly that the city feels like a slum. In the absence of effective governance, private business improvement districts have stepped in to maintain some level of order.”

In another article, the Mafube Council finds itself at the center of a growing environmental crisis, unable to halt the pollution of the Vaal and Wilge Rivers.

These failures are symptoms. But what is the underlying cause?

Around the same time, I came across the Dimension Data and Identity Property Company case. It explores the duty of disclosure in leadership and the ethical conflict between public interest and private gain. That case reminded me of a powerful principle: fiduciary duty.

Every institution, whether it is a municipality, a homeowners’ association, a church, a school, or even our country is led by fiduciaries. People we trust to act in our best interest.

But what does this position truly entail?

The AI on my desktop defines a fiduciary as: “A fiduciary is a person or organization that has the legal and ethical duty to act in the best interest of another party. This relationship is built on trust, meaning the fiduciary must prioritize the interests of the person or entity they are serving above their own.”

It sounds noble. But can anyone truly put others’ interests ahead of their own, consistently, without compromise? To do so, one would need unwavering integrity, an immunity to bribery, secret profits, and opportunities, a willingness to tackle community issues without concern for popularity or financial gain, and the courage to sacrifice personal survival for the greater good. Easier said than done.

Let me explain what I mean by asking some uncomfortable questions:

• Should directors prioritize greater salaries for employees and directors, or should profits be applied to dividends for shareholders?

• Should ward councilors of local authorities forgo their remuneration to make more tax funds available for community development?

• Are elected councilors and trustees genuinely committed to their roles, or are they simply filling a vacant position or seeking visibility?

• Do people donate to charities for genuine altruism, or is motivation primarily tax benefits?

• Are B-BBEE deals structured for the greater good, or do they serve the profit interests of their initiators?

• Is securing a lucrative deal or profit a sound business strategy, or does it blur ethical lines of fraud or theft?

• Are non-profit auctions driven by a genuine desire to support worthy causes, or do they sometimes become platforms for showing off?

• Is a fiduciary genuinely invested in creating order and promoting goodness, or is self-interest the driving force?

• What happens when opposing sides believe they are fighting for the greater good, but the “greater good” is interpreted differently?

• When should fiduciaries compromise, and when should they stand firm?

Self-interest is subtle. It looks like logic, strategy, confidence. But it can derail service.

John Maxwell explains it in one of his teachings by using the photo example. We tend to focus on how we as individuals appear in a photo rather than noticing how others look.

So, the one who is more concerned about the group photo is the better candidate for a fiduciary position.

So how do we ensure that we choose leaders who care? And the reality is, we do not just choose individuals, we choose organizations, and by doing so, we indirectly select their leaders.

I have explored answers over the past week and have been trying to identify elements that can help us choose the right fiduciaries. I found guidance in scripture, inter alia in the Bible books of Micah, Nahum, and Habakkuk. These texts speak profoundly about fiduciary duty, emphasizing righteousness, integrity, and accountability. They encourage individuals to do good and make a positive impact while maintaining purity and avoiding defilement. Followers are urged to reject wickedness, deceit, and crookedness, and instead to pursue what is right with sincerity. The scriptures caution against embracing worldly desires and warn against associating with those who knowingly choose evil despite understanding right from wrong. Power should not be abused — whether by unjustly seizing land, fraudulently taking residences, or exploiting trust to steal property. Promises of provision made in deceit, twisted justice, bribery, and corruption must be avoided.

Instead, the Bible uplifts those who act with righteousness, love mercy, and walk humbly with God, fearing Him above all else. It condemns wealth acquired through dishonest means, extortion, and perverted justice. The Bible warns against wicked counsellors — cruel individuals driven by arrogance, greed, and reliance on their own strength. The scriptures advocate for a life of integrity, fairness, and devotion to God, ensuring that fiduciary responsibilities are conducted with honesty and moral uprightness.

The good people in my town embrace the leadership lessons from the Books of Kings, recognizing their timeless wisdom. Yet these same good people, including myself, also indulge in shows like Billions, captivated by Bobby Axelrod and Chuck Rhoades as they navigate the intricate strategies of the worldly game of power.

This duality within us—good and evil—creates a constant battle of choice. The answer in appointing fiduciaries lies in the saying, “known by your fruit.”

People are like trees. Their daily actions reveal who they are. If flaws show up consistently before they hold leadership, then we can expect that same “fruit” to emerge once they do.

Leadership does not change who we are, it reveals it. The real test of leadership is not how much power you hold, but how much integrity you refuse to surrender.