To Pay or not to Pay: Board Remuneration Considerations for NGOs
Serving on a Non-Governmental Organisation (NGO) board whether in Cape Town or Kampala is often a labour of love. But love alone doesn’t build strategy, drive governance, or deliver oversight. Around the world – and especially across Africa – NGOs are rethinking how they support and reward board service, while staying true to their mission-first mindset.
Over the years, I’ve had conversations with non-executive directors (NEDs) who’ve quietly stepped back from meaningful non-profit board roles – not because they lacked commitment, but because attending meetings in Nairobi, London, or Geneva on their own dime simply wasn’t viable. That’s not a governance issue; it’s a missed opportunity for inclusion.
The volunteer ethos and its limits
Most non-profit boards operate on a voluntary basis. The argument is ethical and reputational: Public trust matters, and visible restraint in spending reinforces that.
As NGOs grow in scope and complexity though, especially across borders, there’s increasing discussion about whether some form of compensation or structured reimbursement is not only appropriate but strategic.
Insights from governance codes
In South Africa, the King IV governance framework explicitly allows for remuneration of NEDs in the non-profit sector as long as doing so is transparent, defensible, and not excessive. Many NGOs are now exploring this flexibility to reflect the real demands placed on board members.
ISO 37000 (Governance of Organisations) is a voluntary international standard that provides principles and key aspects of good governance, applicable across all types of organisations i.e. public, private, not-for-profit, and NGOs. Whilst it does not prescribe specific remuneration frameworks, it does acknowledge that remuneration and incentives play a role in governance effectiveness. The code recognises fit-for-purpose governance and therefore it supports contextual governance (what works for a multinational differs from a community non-profit) and stakeholder-based oversight with it being important for NGOs accountable to donors, beneficiaries, and the public.
While ISO 37000 doesn’t hand you a playbook on board pay, it supports the idea that remuneration should align with the organisation’s purpose and values, should help to attract the right board talent (especially important for NEDs), and must be transparent, accountable, and fair.
ISO 37000 provides principled backing for drafting governance frameworks or policies for NED fees in a non-profit or NGO, which can be supplemented with insights (depending on your locality) from King IV, The Charity Commission (UK), OECD principles and/or local NGO governance codes.
Attracting and retaining global talent
Board members of NGOs are expected to bring more than just goodwill these days. They bring governance expertise, financial literacy, strategy experience, and sometimes specialist sector knowledge. In order to attract and retain top-tier board talent, particularly those balancing full-time professional roles, some NGOs (especially larger ones) offer stipends or director fees.
This is becoming more common in international development organisations, where complex governance and donor reporting requirements necessitate strong board oversight.
You might say this isn’t applicable to your NGO because your board is fully local – but even then, it’s worth asking: What are the real costs to your board members in simply being present? Whether it’s taking time off from work or travelling to meetings, the invisible contributions can add up and may quietly limit who stays at the table.
Formal frameworks protect the organisation and directors
Where fees aren’t possible or appropriate, many boards create clear policies around expense reimbursement. These typically cover out-of-pocket costs such as travel, meals, or accommodation for in-person meetings. In America and Europe, these policies are standardised. In Africa, there is increasing adoption of similar frameworks, with emphasis on fairness and sustainability.
Location matters more than ever
Here’s where things get real. Consider a North African NGO with board members based across North America, Europe, and Southern Africa. For a director based in Namibia or South Africa, the cost of attending an in-person meeting can be significantly more burdensome than it is for their U.S. or European counterparts, especially when costs are in dollars or euros.
Even when board roles are voluntary, NGOs should consider covering basic costs such as travel and accommodation when in-person attendance is required. It’s not about luxury; it’s about access and inclusion. This simple policy shift makes it more viable for qualified individuals based anywhere to contribute meaningfully, regardless of their personal financial capacity.
A matter of governance maturity
Ultimately, remuneration – whether via fees, stipends, or reimbursements – goes beyond creating a paid boardroom to creating a professional one.
Engaging in conversations about remuneration – its structure, purpose, and potential to attract the right calibre of board members – demonstrates forward-thinking leadership and governance maturity. Introducing thoughtful remuneration strategies signals a board’s commitment to accountability, inclusivity, and the evolving responsibilities of directors.
