In the contemporary business world, leaders and managers are increasingly confronted with paradoxical environments in their decision-making process. Specifically, the decision making for corporate sustainability entails conflicting yet interdependent priorities like profitability and sustainability, which are challenging to reconcile and harder to balance. B Corporations (B Corps) exemplify this duality by embedding both commercial viability and stakeholder pluralism at the core of their business model. While prior research has examined the duality of corporate sustainability at the macro level with a focus on institutional logics and strategic positioning, scholarly understanding of the micro-foundations of paradox management in corporate sustainability remains under-developed. Particularly, limited attention has been paid to the tensions at the individual level, how individual managers perceive, interpret, and act upon these competing goals in their decision-making process.

This study investigates how managers in UK certified B Corporations engage in paradoxical sensemaking when confronted with corporate sustainability challenges in decision making. By adopting a qualitative, interpretivist research design, semi-structured interviews are carried out with sustainability managers in UK B Corps to uncover how latent tensions—such as purpose versus profit, innovation versus operational efficiency, and personal values versus organizational expectations—become cognitively salient for organizational actors within their decision-making process. Subsequently, it demonstrates how the paradoxical sensemaking is manifested with the influence of diverse multilevel factors by encapsulating cognitive, emotional, and behavioural processes which underpin the ultimate managerial responses for corporate sustainability in B Corps.

By focusing on micro-level decision making processes, the research extends the comprehension of paradoxical sensemaking and contributes to the development of paradox theory and sensemaking perspective. Practically, it offers insights into how managers can embrace competing demands as drivers of creativity, resilience, and strategic alignment within purpose-driven organizations. The findings have implications for effective leadership, governance, and the cultivation of paradox mindsets in organizations pursuing sustainable transformation.

This study explores the role of digitalization on Small and Medium-sized Enterprises in Albania, evaluating how the factors that enhance adoption of digital tools by SMEs. In a rapidly changing economic and technological landscape, digital transformation has become a key factor for business competitiveness and sustainability. Hence, the study aims to investigate the impact of digitalization on the performance of SMEs, focusing on how digital adoption, skills, institutional support, and training influence competitiveness and operational transformation. Using a quantitative research approach, data were collected from SMEs through structured questionnaires and analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistical methods.

The findings reveal that the adoption of digital tools has a significant positive relationship with market expansion and business performance, confirming that digital engagement enhances competitiveness and customer reach. However, no significant link was found between the number of digital tools used and the level of operational digitalization, suggesting that Albanian SMEs often implement technology in fragmented ways. High costs and a lack of digital skills were identified as the main barriers to digital transformation, while institutional support showed minimal influence on adoption levels. Interestingly, training initiatives displayed a reversed effect, indicating that existing programs may lack practical, implementation-oriented content.

The study concludes that although awareness of digitalization among Albanian SMEs is increasing, progress remains limited by financial constraints, skill shortages, and weak institutional coordination. The research contributes to the broader literature by providing empirical evidence from a developing economy context and by emphasizing the need for integrated policies, targeted financial assistance, and hands-on training to strengthen SME digital maturity in Albania.

Leadership is experienced in every sphere of human life and is a crucial tool for people management. This study could contribute to the proliferation of leadership studies, with extensive research focused on how effective leadership positively benefits people and organisations. Arguably, leadership is one of the most important phenomena that determines the direction of any organisation. Notwithstanding, there are contentions about the definition of leadership and a lack of consensus on a holistic perspective. Echoing some scholars’ contentions, it seems much of the field is tending towards creating more appealing or high-sounding theories that may be less practicable. A case in point is the undying nature of debunked and outdated ideas or zombie leadership and the ‘distinct similarities’ proposed by different studies.

Despite the discrepancies in the field, there is a widespread agreement that the dyadic nature of leadership supposes some form of influence in leaders on others. This hinges the relevance of leadership on the existence of followers, who are direct recipients of leadership and shapers of the leader–follower relationship. Yet most theories do not include followers as a core component. The status quo makes one wonder whether leadership scholarship has yielded diminishing returns. This is why a broader conceptualisation of leadership is required as a practical reference for leaders and relevant stakeholders.

Hence, following a semi-structured review and theme-based approach, this study covers noteworthy issues in the field of leadership and makes a compelling case for advancing a holistic view of leadership with a recommended burgeoning approach that converges the core scopes of leadership, including learning, tasks and processes, leader traits/behaviours, followership, ethical decision-making, the role of stakeholders, influence, and context. The argument is that existing theories are fragmented at best and can be unified to create an aspirational peak that inspires leaders to become lifelong learners.

Social accountability is a means to achieve good governance, increased public participation for improved public service delivery (Ahmad, 2008), and one of the strategies for deepening decentralised development administration (King, Owusi, Braimah, 2013). The literature on social accountability reveals that there is a relationship between social accountability and public participation. Most literature on social accountability and participation focuses on ward committees and the functioning of IDP prioritisation processes, and pays little attention to how social accountability is implemented and by whom. Civil Society Organisations are often the alternative actors that demand accountability in government or train citizens to hold duty bearers accountable. However, there is little research that analyses the effectiveness of CSOs in doing this work. This paper analyses the applicability of social accountability by three CSOs in four communities based in two provinces in South Africa. The paper is theoretically guided by the participatory democratic and principal-agent theories. In this paper, the principal-agent theory analyses the relationship between citizens and duty bearers in service delivery and accountability, while participatory democratic theory analyses the participation of the selected active citizens within Makana Local Municipality and the City of Johannesburg. The paper draws from a qualitative explorative case study. A qualitative purposive sampling method was used to select key active citizens who were trained by three CSOs in four communities. Data collection was conducted through semi-structured interviews, focus group discussions, and secondary data. The thematic analysis method was used to analyse data. The findings reveal how active citizens acquired knowledge and skills from the CSOs to apply social accountability in their municipalities. The paper makes recommendations to improve efforts to enhance citizen participation through CSOs and efforts to improve active citizenry through social accountability monitoring and advocacy.

Parliamentary oversight is a cornerstone of democratic accountability, intended to ensure that the executive remains answerable to the legislature and, by extension, to the public (Calland, 2019). In South Africa, portfolio committees serve as key instruments for this oversight function. However, the Judicial Commission of Inquiry into Allegations of State Capture—commonly known as the Zondo Commission—revealed that these committees largely failed to prevent or detect the systemic corruption that characterized the era of state capture (Zondo Commission, 2022). A qualitative document analysis will be used to examine the structural, political, and institutional factors that contributed to the weakness of parliamentary oversight. Therefore, this study aims to critically examine the weaknesses of parliamentary portfolio committees in exercising effective oversight and accountability in South Africa, as revealed by the Zondo Commission, and to propose strategies for strengthening their institutional capacity, independence, and effectiveness in promoting democratic governance. Drawing on findings from the Zondo Commission and comparative governance literature, the paper argues for a reimagining of the oversight role of portfolio committees to strengthen their effectiveness and autonomy. It proposes reforms including enhanced research support, depoliticization of committee leadership, and institutional mechanisms for public participation and transparency. These recommendations aim to restore confidence in Parliament’s watchdog role and reinforce democratic governance. Ultimately, the study highlights that rebuilding South Africa’s accountability framework requires not only institutional redesign but also a renewed culture of ethical leadership and constitutional fidelity (Madonsela, 2022).

• Introduction

Many South African households suffer with food insecurity; however, the COVID-19 pandemic could have pushed more people into a food crisis due to the increase in food prices, the loss of jobs, and various essential services and food programmes. Additionally, the need for food relief increased, and state-led intervention with limited state capacity were inadequate. The case of the City of Cape Town is selected due to its unique insights as, prior to the lockdowns, Civil Society Organisations [1] were excluded though regulation to deliver food relief, presenting a distinctive scenario to study the evolution and impact of CSO involvement and the emergence of novel networks in crisis response.

• Methodology

This paper employs a case study approach, focusing on the CoCT to explore the role CSOs and emerging novel networks in food governance during the COVID-19 pandemic and how they contributed to governance capacity [2]. To this end, this study adopted a qualitative research methodology through desktop study of secondary sources such as the existing literature, official reports, government policies, and the grey literature (third-sector reports) for a descriptive analysis.

• Results

This paper finds that CSOs and novel networks during the pandemic demonstrated adaptive capacity through novel governance arrangements which contributed to enhanced governance capacity in the CoCT. This is achieved through collective action, coordination, social learning and resource mobilisation towards resilience.

• Conclusion

Understanding the role of CSOs and novel networks in enhancing governance capacity is critical not only for addressing immediate crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic but also for informing long-term strategies to achieve SDGs in South Africa and beyond.

Legalistic and structural debates like constitutional provisions, revenue allocation, and judicial interventions continue to dominate the discourse on Nigeria's local government autonomy. The July 2024 Supreme Court judgement granting financial autonomy to local government councils exemplifies this approach. Yet a fundamental question persists: autonomy for what purpose? This paper challenges the prevailing framework by arguing that autonomy must be evaluated through a citizen-centric, outcome-focused lens grounded in Mark Moore's public value theory. This paper employs critical analysis of Nigeria's local government autonomy literature and policy documents, juxtaposed against public value theory's interdependent triangular framework. We examine the theoretical and practical implications of reframing autonomy debates from structural-legal concerns to public value creation outcomes. Drawing on Moore's three core dimensions, authoritative environments, public value creation, and operational capacity, we develop an analytical framework for evaluating whether local government autonomy translates to improved citizen welfare. Our analysis reveals three critical blind spots in current autonomy discourse. First, it assumes autonomy automatically equals better governance, ignoring evidence that decentralisation without capacity can worsen service delivery. Second, it treats citizens as passive beneficiaries rather than active definers of public value. Third, it overlooks whether local governments possess the organisational capabilities to effectively leverage autonomy. The paper demonstrates how public value theory addresses these gaps by asking: Do autonomous LGAs deliver services citizens want? Do they operate with democratic legitimacy? Can they execute given capacity constraints? Achieving legal autonomy is necessary but insufficient for public value creation. This conceptual reorientation suggests that sustainable reform requires simultaneous investment in capacity building, democratic strengthening, and citizen engagement mechanisms. This paper provides a robust analytical framework for evaluating local government autonomy and proposes a citizen-centred research agenda for Nigerian public administration scholarships.

Citizen participation in public service co-production is essential for enhancing service delivery and fostering democratic governance. However, various barriers hinder effective citizen engagement, particularly in developing countries like Pakistan. This study aims to identify and analyze the social, cultural, and institutional factors that impede citizen involvement in co-producing public services. Utilizing a qualitative approach, the research draws upon secondary data sources such as academic articles, government reports, and case studies to explore these barriers comprehensively. The analysis is guided by a three-pillar framework encompassing social, cultural, and institutional dimensions. The social pillar highlights how low civic awareness, weak social capital, and limited community networks undermine collective participation and trust in public institutions. The cultural pillar reveals that entrenched traditional norms, hierarchical power structures, and language barriers restrict inclusive participation, especially among women and marginalized groups. The institutional pillar underscores how bureaucratic rigidity, complex administrative procedures, and a lack of political will discourage citizen engagement in decision-making processes. Addressing these intertwined challenges requires multi-level interventions, including civic education programs to strengthen social participation, cultural sensitivity initiatives to foster inclusivity, and institutional reforms to enhance transparency, accountability, and responsiveness in public service delivery. This three-pillar framework provides a structured understanding of the barriers to citizen participation and offers a roadmap for fostering more collaborative and democratic public service systems in Pakistan.

Digital transformation in the public sector is no longer limited to technological upgrades or online service delivery; it represents a profound paradigm shift in how governance, innovation, and public value are understood. This study explores digital transformation as a conceptual reorientation in public administration theory, moving beyond the traditional bureaucratic and managerial logics that have historically shaped public institutions. Using the Digital Era Governance (DEG) framework proposed by Patrick Dunleavy and colleagues, the paper examines how digitalization reshapes the principles of efficiency, accountability, transparency, and citizen engagement within governance systems. Adopting a qualitative research approach based on secondary data, the study draws upon academic literature, theoretical writings, and policy documents to interpret how digital transformation redefines administrative processes and innovation practices. It investigates how governments transition from rigid hierarchies to more networked, agile, and data-driven models of governance. The paper highlights that digital transformation is not merely a tool for service improvement but a catalyst for conceptual innovation, altering how public institutions learn, adapt, and interact with citizens. By framing digital transformation through the DEG lens, the research underscores a theoretical evolution in public administration—one that shifts from control and compliance toward collaboration, co-creation, and public value generation. Ultimately, this study argues that digital transformation represents both a structural and theoretical transformation, redefining governance as an open, adaptive, and citizen-centered process in the digital age.

Pakistan’s digitally-driven Social Safety Nets (SSNs), notably BISP and Ehsaas, have been instrumental in decreasing poverty rates by 7 to 9% and promoted greater gender inclusion. However, this study identifies a critical paradox: the very technological tools designed to include often systematically exclude the most vulnerable. In practice, these programs suffer from serious flaws with 22% of the exclusion rate for those who qualify and 15% leakage of funds going to ineligible recipients, revealing a systemic failure in reaching the most vulnerable.

This study investigates this paradox by shifting the analytical lens from state-level efficiency to citizen-level experience. By using the theoretical framework of "administrative exclusion", we contended how the mechanisms intended for efficiency often inherently encode barriers that sideline the most disadvantaged. Using a qualitative case study, we examined how exclusion operates, categorizing it into three costs: learning costs of digital literacy, compliance costs from biometric failures and travel to distant payment points, and psychological costs stemming from opaque and non-responsive grievance mechanisms.

Initial results reveal that the burden of administrative exclusion falls disproportionately on marginalized groups including women, the elderly, persons with disabilities, and residents of conflict-affected or hard to reach regions, effectively cementing existing inequities under the facade of digital innovation. Furthermore, the short-term, relief-oriented design of programs, often influenced by political cycles, compound these digital barriers, limiting their ability to break intergenerational poverty cycles.

This study concludes that technocratic efficiency alone is insufficient. It calls for a fundamental, citizen-centric redesign of delivery mechanisms, including more robust digitized targeting, inflation-indexed benefits, and institutional reforms for greater coordination. By integrating these reforms into broader development agendas, Pakistan's SSNs can evolve from temporary aid into a system of genuine empowerment and equitable public value creation.