Volunteering, governance and the pipeline problem boards can’t ignore

Volunteering in Aotearoa New Zealand is not disappearing, but it is changing in ways boards should pay close attention to. 

The latest State of the Decade of Volunteering report shows participation remains strong, with 53% of New Zealanders volunteering in the previous four weeks. But the nature of that participation is shifting: more people are volunteering in flexible, episodic ways including microvolunteering, and time pressure is now the single biggest barrier to formal volunteering, cited by 46.1% of respondents.  

At the same time, the sector is grappling with an ageing volunteer base, growing succession pressure, uneven diversity and inclusion, and rising administrative burden. 

Volunteering trends are now a governance issue because governance is one of the most demanding forms of volunteering in New Zealand. 

Not-for-profit (NFP) governance is a critical part of New Zealand’s governance landscape. This system relies heavily on volunteers stepping into governance, often with limited preparation and support. 

The sector is highly committed but capacity constrained, with increasing expectations on boards and no corresponding increase in capability or support. 

Governance in this sector depends on people who are motivated to contribute, but the pool of those with the time and capacity is shrinking, particularly where governance roles carry considerable time and responsibility but little or no financial recognition. 

NFP and trust boards are not “light” governance. While they are often where directors first build experience, learn board craft and develop judgement, these roles increasingly sit at the intersection of high expectations, stakeholder scrutiny, limited support and a shrinking pool of people with time to serve. These pressures raise real questions about the sustainability of the current model. 

The volunteering report shows that long-term commitment is under pressure. Younger volunteers are more likely to seek roles that are meaningful, flexible and aligned with their values and development goals, rather than stepping into legacy structures or committing to traditional, long-horizon roles. 

The report also notes that 49.8% of organisations identified ageing volunteers as one of their biggest challenges in 2024, almost double the 2018 figure. Younger people are still perceived as less likely to commit to sustained leadership and succession roles. Boards should treat this as an early warning signal, not a distant risk, and consider whether current governance environments are accessible, inclusive and supportive of emerging leaders. 

The pipeline starts to narrow 

If fewer people move through sustained volunteer pathways, fewer people will build the experience, confidence and readiness that governance requires. If boards continue to rely on informal recruitment practices (with 57.9% of respondents in the IoD/EY Directors’ Fees Report reporting that appointments are sourced through networks and referrals), they will struggle to expand the pipeline beyond those already inside it. 

That may be efficient, but it is also self-reinforcing. It privileges the familiar and the already connected, and systematically limits who gets access to governance roles. In a country undergoing profound demographic change, that should give boards pause. 

According to Distinguished Professor Emeritus Paul Spoonley, the demographic data is clear. Aotearoa’s younger population is far more diverse than the older cohorts now dominating much of leadership. If boards continue to recruit largely through shoulder tapping, they will not only miss talent, but risk becoming increasingly out of step with the communities, workforces and stakeholders they are meant to understand. 

To be fair, there are encouraging signals. The not-for-profit insights from the Directors’ Fees Report show 44.5% of respondents took on an NFP role as an opportunity to build governance experience, while the top motivations remained giving back to the community (70.9%) and interest in the organisation or cause (69.2%). That tells us the appetite is still there. Governance is still seen as a pathway for contribution and development. 

But appetite is not the same as access and the system begins to fail here. The Directors’ Fees Report also shows women outnumber men among trustees (58.4%) and hold a majority on incorporated society committees and councils (53.8%). Yet men still dominate many of the more traditional and more highly remunerated governance roles, including non-executive directorships (62.1%) and chairs (74.4%). 

Progress is real, but uneven, and in some areas, structurally restrained. When combined with shoulder-tap recruitment, it is easy to see how governance pathways can look open in theory but remain narrow in practice. 

Practical steps for boards: 

1. Treat the governance pipeline as a strategic issue, not an incidental one. If succession matters, then so does the system that produces future directors. Yet the 2025 IoD Director Sentiment Survey suggests succession planning is slipping across boards, indicating this issue is receiving less attention when it should be strengthening. 

2. Look beyond the usual networks. If almost six in 10 appointments are still coming through referrals, that is not just a recruitment habit, it is also a structural filter. Boards that are serious about diversity and renewal need more transparent search processes, broader talent identification, and more deliberate efforts to spot capability outside traditional circles. 

3. Create stepping stones. Advisory boards, committee roles, observer opportunities and mentored appointments can all help bridge the gap between volunteering and formal governance, particularly where younger or first-time directors may otherwise feel excluded or underestimated. 

4. Be honest about the demands. Not-for-profit governance is often unpaid, but it is not low accountability and, in many cases, not a low workload. If boards want capable people to step in, they need to think about support, development, induction and workload, not simply goodwill. 

5. Be willing to have the remuneration conversation. Time is now the biggest barrier to volunteering and governance roles are becoming more demanding. Boards should at least consider whether fees, expense coverage or other forms of support could widen access and make these roles more sustainable. However, remuneration alone is unlikely to address constraints on participation. 

The volunteering ecosystem in Aotearoa is evolving and governance will need to evolve with it. Boards already have a pipeline problem. The question is whether they are prepared to do something about it.