It just feels like 2026 has kicked off with a bit more underlying confidence.
This was one of the key messages I delivered at our recent Distribution Partner event in Sandton.
Anecdotally, we’ve had more new conversations in the past few weeks than we did for long stretches of last year. A fair amount of that is coming out of Gauteng, and the sector mix is wider, too. Mining is active again, particularly around critical minerals and the Private Equity sector seems to be back in the room and looking for transactions.
This wasn’t happening six to twelve months ago.
There is more appetite to transact; more willingness to look forward instead of simply sitting on cash. That shift matters for confidence, but confidence and cash flow stability are not the same thing.
Cashflow pressure does not disappear
The recent reporting around The Spar Group has given me pause for thought – particularly around the role of executives and specifically the dynamic between the CEO and CFO. The company indicated it had asked certain suppliers to accept staggered payments, describing it as a timing adjustment in its cash cycle. It also flagged margin pressure in the first half of 2026 while resolving operational issues linked to its KwaZulu-Natal distribution centre. At the same time, the CEO has stepped down.
While Spar is in the news around a potential cashflow crunch, they are not alone. This issue of cash management doesn’t just impact small businesses, it extends to big private companies, State Owned Entities and even political parties.
When it comes to a small business, an entrepreneur might be able to argue: “Oops we have made a mistake” – when it comes to larger organisations, these issues create operational, governance and reputational issues.
The bigger the operation, the more cash is tied up across inventory, receivables, supplier arrangements, distribution networks and systems, and each moving part affects liquidity.
It is possible to grow revenue and still tighten cash. It is possible to show accounting profit and still experience strain in the operating cycle. However, working capital does not always move neatly with turnover.
When cashflow tightens, the conversation shifts quickly to oversight. King V now applies to financial years starting on or after 1 January 2026. Boards are asking more detailed questions around forecasts, scenario modelling and funding headroom. Lenders are less comfortable with static reporting. They want forward visibility and clarity around assumptions.
That requires a finance function that is close to the numbers, not just reporting them.
Forecasts need to be updated regularly, and assumptions need to be challenged. Debtor days and stock turns cannot drift for quarters before someone intervenes. Liquidity pressure tends to build gradually and then surface suddenly.
The businesses that manage this well usually have one thing in common: someone senior is actively monitoring the mechanics of cash, not just reviewing monthly packs.
Where the dynamic between executives becomes important is when the CFO does not have the strength of personality – or is not empowered – to put issues like liquidity on the risk register. This is where an independent set of eyes, can become incredibly important for de-risking businesses.
The case for fractional and “access” C-suite resources
This discussion around cashflow is a great segue into a topic, I am particularly interested in – the rise of fractional or “access” C-suite resources.
The difficulty most businesses face is finding an optimal cost structure.
Payroll is typically the largest fixed line item in any business and as your business matures, you have to invest in more experienced and higher-quality people resources. Strengthening financial leadership at the top level usually means appointing permanent executives. That might make sense once complexity justifies it. The risk sits in the period before that point.
Hiring too early can increase fixed overheads before cash generation is consistent.
This is where fractional and access models are rapidly gaining traction both in SA and abroad.
For many growing mid-size businesses in the R50 million to R500 million turnover range, access to experienced senior financial leadership for a few days per week (per month) can be a game-changer for improving forecasting discipline, strengthen working capital management and providing more structured reporting to lenders or shareholders. It raises the standard of financial oversight without immediately locking the business into another full-time executive salary.
It is not a shortcut – some organisations may still choose to hire a full-time CFO at a certain point in their growth journey. Others in a transitional phase or needing extra capacity where they have grown beyond founder-led financial management but are not yet operating at a scale that comfortably absorbs additional permanent overheads.
Larger corporations may not want the extra burden of several senior resources on the payroll permanently and may decide to access this on-demand C-suite Service as their capacity needs change and fluctuate, effectively turning fixed costs into variable ones, no matter the size of the organisation.
If 2026 proves steadier than the past few years, opportunities will follow – growth tends to accelerate before systems catch up. That is often where pressure starts.
If you would like to discuss investing in a senior fractional financial leader for your business, please do not hesitate to reach out.
Authored by our CEO, Rowan de Klerk who shares insights tailored for CFOs and business leaders. Subscribe here to receive future editions.