King V is written with listed and large organisations in view — audit committees, integrated reporting, formal board evaluations. The Code's own Foundational Concepts provide for this: the thirteen principles are “essential and foundational” and apply as they are, while the recommended practices “may be adapted and scaled” to an organisation’s size, complexity, ownership and impact. King V SMME does exactly that. All thirteen principles are kept. 28 controls and 65 questions, in the language of someone who runs the business, with the obligations that bind every company regardless of size kept at full strength.
This framework contributes to the following governance domains in your Encircle score:
Every control here is King V, translated into what a smaller organisation actually holds. Where the Code recommends a committee, this asks who carries the responsibility — a committee, one named person, or the governing body as a whole — because King V expressly permits a smaller organisation to delegate to an individual member. Statutory obligations keep their formal names and their full strength: the POPIA Information Officer appointment, Record of Processing Activities and breach notification procedure, and the Companies Act director register, decision records and annual financial statements.
King V is the standard a court measures a director against when something goes wrong. The IoDSA puts it plainly: without sound governance structures it is difficult for a director to show they took reasonably diligent steps. Encircle scores you against all thirteen principles on the evidence you have loaded, and every gap becomes an assigned task. Because this is derived from King V you can see how it maps back to the Code, and step up to the full assessment when you are ready. Encircle does not audit or certify, and this is not published or endorsed by the IoDSA.
Live demo
The same organisation seen through the King V SMME lens. Red is where the exposure is. Every domain King V reaches at this scale, scored on the evidence loaded.
King V SMME: the basics are being done, and roughly a third of them cannot be evidenced. The strategy is reviewed and the review is never minuted, nobody is named as carrying responsibility for ethics, and the approval limits stop at the bank mandate.