South Africa’s coalition governance often struggles with short-term survival strategies rather than long-term institutionalisation. By embedding adaptive governance models, structured agreements, and relational governance, coalitions can transition from fragile power-sharing to stable, transformative governance frameworks, writes, Job Mokgoro.
Introduction: Why Coalition Governance Needs Adaptive Leadership
South Africa’s evolving political landscape suggests that multiparty governance is the new norm. Projections show that for several years to come no single party is likely to achieve an outright majority. Coalitions at a number of municipalities have been a reality since the 2016 elections.
Coalition building in South Africa must transcend mere transactional agreements because governance requires stability, trust, and long-term vision rather than short-term political bargaining. Transactional coalitions—where parties exchange positions and influence without deeper alignment—often lead to instability, policy paralysis, and governance breakdown.
The reasons why a more relational and strategic approach is essential include: Frequent leadership changes and unstable coalitions disrupt service delivery and long-term planning, as seen in cities like Johannesburg and Tshwane, which have cycled through multiple mayors in just a few years. Citizens lose confidence in governance when coalitions are formed purely for power-sharing rather than coherent policy direction. Without shared values and a unified vision, coalition partners struggle to implement meaningful reforms, leading to governance paralysis. Formalised coalition agreements, clear accountability mechanisms, and structured dialogue can improve coalition stability and effectiveness. Countries with successful coalition governments rely on transparent agreements, conflict resolution mechanisms, and incentives for cooperation. South Africa’s own experience with the 1994 Government of National Unity shows that coalitions can work when built on shared principles rather than mere political expediency.
For South Africa’s coalition future to succeed, leaders must embed relational governance, prioritise adaptive leadership, and move beyond transactional deals toward structured, principled collaboration.
How adaptive leadership, experimentation, and iteration ensure governance agility. Adaptive leadership, experimentation, and iteration ensure governance agility by enabling leaders and institutions to respond dynamically to complexity, uncertainty, and systemic challenges rather than relying on rigid, outdated models. These elements work together in the following ways: Adaptive Leadership encourages continuous learning and flexibility, allowing leaders to adjust strategies based on emerging challenges. It helps coalitions balance short-term pragmatism with long-term vision, ensuring governance is resilient rather than reactive. It strengthens stakeholder engagement, making governance more collaborative and responsive to public needs.
Experimentation provides room for policy innovation through small-scale pilots before full implementation. It encourages a safe-to-fail mindset, where leaders and institutions refine solutions without fear of political backlash. It helps coalitions identify effective governance mechanisms that can be scaled for broader impact.
Iteration enables continuous improvement by embedding feedback loops into governance processes, ensuring policies evolve based on real-world results. It strengthens coalition coherence by aligning governance practices with adaptive learning frameworks. It prevents policy stagnation, ensuring governance remains responsive to shifting dynamics.
South Africa’s coalition governance struggles with rigidity, mistrust, and fragmented decision-making. Embedding these principles into coalitions would enable more resilient, foresight-driven governance, ensuring leadership can pivot effectively in crises while maintaining long-term policy coherence.
Mont Fleur as a Foresight Blueprint
The Mont Fleur Scenarios played a crucial role in shaping South Africa’s democratic transition by fostering strategic foresight, dialogue, and consensus-building among diverse stakeholders during a volatile period.
Their key contributions to the transition included encouraging inclusive dialogue The scenario exercise, conducted in 1991–92, brought together politicians, activists, academics, and business leaders from across ideological divides to explore possible futures for South Africa. This created a neutral space for constructive engagement, helping leaders move beyond entrenched positions. It provided a framework for Decision-Making.
The team developed four scenarios to illustrate different paths South Africa could take:
- Ostrich: No negotiated settlement, leading to continued minority rule.
- Lame Duck: A slow, indecisive transition.
- Icarus: A rapid transition with unsustainable economic policies.
- Flight of the Flamingos: A stable, inclusive democracy with sustainable growth.
These scenarios helped leaders visualise risks and opportunities, influencing policy choices. Regarding the shaping of economic and political policy, the flight of the flamingos scenario, which emphasised gradual, inclusive economic growth, resonated with policymakers and influenced South Africa’s early democratic governance approach.
The exercise reinforced the importance of avoiding populist economic pitfalls, as warned in the Icarus scenario, where reckless spending could lead to economic collapse.
The process demonstrated the power of collaborative scenario planning, a principle that remains relevant for South Africa’s coalition governance today. It showed that long-term vision and structured dialogue are essential for coalition stability and governance coherence.
The Mont Fleur Scenarios didn’t dictate policy, but they helped leaders think strategically, fostering a shared understanding of South Africa’s challenges and possibilities. Their legacy continues to inform governance approaches, especially in coalition-building and adaptive leadership.
Adaptive Leadership: Coalition Governance Beyond Fixed Structures
Adaptive leadership transforms governance from a rigid, party-dominant system into a flexible, coalition-driven framework by embedding learning, experimentation, and relational trust into political processes. It shifts governance from control to collaboration, ensuring coalitions function beyond mere transactional agreements. This happens as follows:
It encourages systemic learning over political control: Party-dominant systems rely on fixed ideological positions, often resisting change to maintain electoral strength. Adaptive leadership prioritises continuous learning and iterative decision-making, enabling coalition governments to evolve dynamically rather than being bound to rigid policies.
It strengthens coalition stability through trust and experimentation. Traditional governance structures often treat coalitions as temporary arrangements, leading to policy incoherence and instability. Adaptive leadership fosters safe-to-fail experiments, where coalition partners test governance models, build relational trust, and refine cooperation mechanisms.
It shifts power from partisan hierarchies to distributed governance. In rigid systems, power is concentrated in party leadership, limiting inter-party innovation and reinforcing dominance. Adaptive leadership embeds distributed decision-making, allowing multi-party collaboration based on shared governance objectives rather than ideological superiority.
Adaptive leadership institutionalises iterative learning for policy responsiveness. Traditional party structures often enforce static policy approaches, resisting change due to political risk. Adaptive leadership institutionalises iterative feedback loops, ensuring policy evolves in response to real-world governance challenges.
Adaptive leadership redefines leadership from authority to facilitation. Fixed-party dominance fosters command-and-control governance, where decisions are imposed rather than co-created. Adaptive leadership repositions leaders as facilitators of collective problem-solving, strengthening coalition resilience and policy alignment.
Given South Africa’s fragile coalition governance, embedding adaptive leadership would transform coalitions into deliberative, agile governance structures. This shift is crucial for moving beyond unstable political arrangements, ensuring that governance remains responsive, inclusive, and principled rather than dictated by party hierarchy.
Experimentation and Iteration in Coalition Governance
Experimentation and iteration are essential tools for enabling coalition governance, ensuring that multi-party alliances can adapt, refine, and sustain effective governance structures instead of relying on rigid, predefined frameworks.
Experimentation and iteration strengthen coalition governance as follows: Coalitions often struggle with policy alignment due to diverse ideological positions. Small-scale pilot initiatives allow coalition partners to test policy ideas in real-world settings, evaluating their impact before full implementation. This minimises political risk while fostering a culture of collaborative problem-solving.
Iterative decision-making for governance resilience. Traditional governance models rely on fixed agreements, leading to stalemates when parties disagree. Iterative governance enables ongoing policy refinement, ensuring coalitions remain responsive to shifting political and economic dynamics. Adaptive feedback loops help parties course-correct without dismantling the coalition structure.
Strengthening trust through experimental governance mechanisms. Trust deficits often undermine coalition stability. Experimentation allows coalition partners to test institutional arrangements—such as shared ministerial portfolios or cross-party policy committees—before formalising governance structures. Iteration ensures these mechanisms evolve based on practical governance experience, rather than static political negotiations.
Reducing fragmentation through incremental reform. Coalition governments risk policy paralysis due to conflicting priorities. Iterative approaches enable progressive reform, allowing parties to implement policies in phases, assessing impact and adjusting without derailing cooperation.
Embedding learning for long-term coalition success. Experimentation encourages collective learning, where parties continuously refine governance based on real-world outcomes. Iterative feedback loops allow coalition agreements to evolve, ensuring longevity beyond electoral cycles. Over time, this transforms governance into an adaptive system, rather than a fragile political arrangement.
South Africa’s coalition dynamics often suffer from rigid agreements, governance instability, and policy incoherence. By embedding experimentation and iterative learning, coalition partners can identify workable governance mechanisms, refine policies incrementally, and sustain cross-party collaboration beyond mere transactional agreements.
Conclusion: Embedding Adaptive Leadership in Multi-Party Governance
For coalition governance to move beyond mere survival and toward institutionalised transformation, it must evolve into a structured, adaptive system rather than remaining a fragile, reactive arrangement. This requires embedding long-term governance mechanisms, fostering relational trust, and institutionalising iterative learning. Key strategies for institutionalised transformation in coalition governance could include:
Establishing structured coalition agreements. Moving beyond ad-hoc political deals, coalitions must create binding governance frameworks with clear policy commitments, shared leadership structures, and conflict-resolution mechanisms.
Institutionalised coalition agreements should define long-term objectives, ensuring governance continuity beyond electoral cycles.
Embedding adaptive leadership into governance institutions. Instead of relying on rigid party dominance, adaptive leadership allows coalitions to pivot in response to complex governance challenges. Leaders must act as facilitators rather than partisan enforcers, encouraging collaborative problem-solving rather than winner-takes-all politics. Coalition stability depends on iterative learning structures, where governance evolves based on real-world feedback.
Strengthening relational governance for sustainable cooperation. Transactional coalitions often collapse due to mistrust and power struggles. Institutionalised transformation requires deep relational governance, where coalition partners establish long-term cooperation frameworks, rooted in mutual accountability rather than short-term survival. Formalised cross-party governance councils can facilitate ongoing dialogue and crisis management.
Embedding iterative learning into policy-making. Coalitions must shift from static governance models to adaptive learning processes. Institutionalising foresight-driven governance through policy labs, scenario planning, and pilot initiatives ensures coalitions refine governance strategies without destabilising partnerships. Learning mechanisms must be embedded into HRM systems, ensuring adaptive leadership is not personality-dependent, but systemically institutionalised.
Expanding institutional infrastructure for coalition governance. Coalitions must evolve beyond informal agreements toward structured governance mechanisms within national institutions. Institutionalising coalition-focused training programs, embedding multi-party policy research units, and creating cross-party governance frameworks can ensure stability beyond political cycles. Strengthening the National School of Government’s role in coalition learning would support long-term transformation.
Implications for South Africa’s Coalition Future
South Africa’s coalition governance often struggles with short-term survival strategies rather than long-term institutionalisation. By embedding adaptive governance models, structured agreements, and relational governance, coalitions can transition from fragile power-sharing to stable, transformative governance frameworks.
Job Mokgoro
