In 2020, one of the most brilliant students of Benjamin Graham at Columbia University, Warren Buffett, weighed in on the ongoing debate regarding the attributes and responsibilities of a board of directors in his annual letter to Berkshire Hathaway Inc shareholders.

At the time of writing his annual letter in 2020, he had 61 years of experience and served as a director of 21 publicly owned companies including Berkshire Hathaway. The company pays far more in corporate income tax than the US government had ever received from any company (R494bn), and one of the most valuable companies in the world, Coca-Cola.

With his outstanding credentials in corporate governance, Buffett reflected on diversity, audit committees, compensation committees, the challenges faced by directors, lack of informed and articulate critics and board independence.

Of interest to us today is his wisdom on the challenges faced by directors and board independence. He observed that “the bedrock challenge for directors, nevertheless, remains constant: Find and retain a talented CEO – possessing integrity, for sure – who will be devoted to the company...” On board independence, he candidly stated that “director compensation has now soared to a level high that inevitably makes pay a subconscious factor affecting the behaviour of non-wealthy members”.

In recent weeks, a fervour filled the South African youth as they watched parliament through the portfolio committee on women, youth and persons with disabilities interviewing prospective board members of the National Youth Development Agency (NYDA).

First, it is important to state that the “robot questioning” of some members of the portfolio committee should be discouraged if one intends to isolate closed-mindedness and only recommend critical minds. If the questions have been leaked for one reason or the other, “robot questioning” can lead to shallow assessment and potentially poor recommendation. It can also be undermined when the candidate is all over the place with his answers as it was demonstrated in one of the interviews.

Nonetheless, EFF's Sihle Lonzi saved our days by intelligently posing the committee’s questions differently. Through his style of questioning, he revealed that some candidates lacked integrity and understanding of the mandate of the NYDA board.

According to the NYDA Amendment Act 11 of 2024 and the NYDA board charter, members of the board of directors must be people of integrity as alluded to by Buffett. The board has a responsibility to find and retain a talented CEO who possesses integrity. Now it will be a big ask for a board to find and retain a talented CEO possessing integrity if their integrity is questionable. It is worth noting that the interim NYDA has been looking for a CEO since last year.

Instead of addressing one of the key factors which affect the board’s independence, namely director compensation, many candidates opted to labour on the impossible – advocating and maintaining neutrality. This debate is still ongoing, but I must state that NYDA is a product of politics and freeing it from politics will be like removing it from life support.

The challenges which are faced by the youth of SA are not natural, they are political. Politics should not be confused with undue political influence which can be resisted by an independent board. An independent board is not overly dependent on the board fees.

The director's compensation can also be designed in a way to encourage board independence where the director fees are linked to the success and failures of the agency.

• Hlongwane is co-ordinator for Singamadoda – Redefining Positive Masculinities, at the Nelson Mandela University