The reluctant advocate and getting closer to why and what to do about it

Often, the solution to a problem seems glaringly obvious. But those who have the power to implement it, may not always be motivated to do so. 

The success of an advocacy campaign depends on whether messages resonate and whether those closest to the problem are comfortable owning the messages, and speaking them loudly, publicly and with conviction. I face this challenge daily in my work at Africa Practice. How do we create spaces for those closest to an issue, to take a stance, highlight their challenges, and unite behind solutions?  This is a challenge that applies in every public space. Not only in the frontlines of civic action.

Over the past 12 months, we have worked with our partners at Endeavor Kenya, KPMG Kenya, and the Argidius Foundation to understand how we can design a policy framework that sets Kenya’s high-growth companies up for success. We combined a series of methods and tools – from big data social listening analytics, to in-app surveys, and A/B testing, to really understand what was happening. 

The insights were striking, and in contrast to what the initial KIIs had revealed. Observing how people interacted with different materials and measuring people’s willingness to actually “commit” was both telling and fascinating. Unfortunately, I couldn’t attend the working group in Nairobi where we trialled a message poster gallery walkthrough. But even being walked through the halls via laptop and phone, and witnessing how people voted with stickers and feet, was truly thrilling.

Kenyan founders are advocating alone

We started with the hypothesis that high-growth firm founders are actively trying to engage with the policy ecosystem but are struggling to engage effectively or make themselves heard.  But this turned out to be only the tip of the iceberg. 

Through our various testing methods, we learned that 84% of surveyed founders saw a correlation between ill-designed policy and growth barriers. Yet only 20% believe their voice is crucial to showcase the needs and impact and motivate for policy change. At the same time, over 85%  of the interviewed founders have already met a policymaker regarding one or more of their business challenges. 
In short, founders fight their own fights, alone, but struggle to unite. The reason?

“When you become an advocate, you get distracted and compromised”.

Two conversations that never meet

For policymakers, specificity in the messages they receive and consume was key. Even outright critiques didn’t repel policymakers unless they lacked specificity. Ecosystem support organisations – banks, donors, funders – on the other hand,  felt that critique of specific policies was repelling or at least a hindrance when engaging with policymakers. They wanted to be upbeat when they speak. Moreover, they thought that campaigns targeting founders to educate and guide policy processes would be effective. 

This stands in contrast to the founder feedback, which reports a reluctance to become advocates. What is known as the in-group / out-group effect clearly shows here. 

So how do we design for such an ecosystem mismatch? Where those closest to the issue are reluctant to own the issue, yet those with the power to make a difference want to hear and learn from them? Where one stakeholder group so fundamentally misunderstands what the other one needs, which leads to misaligned initiatives that ultimately fail? We will explore this question as we begin to deploy an inclusive process that nonetheless does not demand the type of involvement founders are unwilling to commit to.

The harder conversation underneath

The starting point cannot be policy or policy discourse, which will surprise many. Our research showed very clearly, that part of the problem is the very role that certain non-government ecosystem support players fill – or don’t fill. This includes the offers provided by ecosystem support organisations (ESOs). Their role in sensitisation and policy advocacy is limited.  But especially financial institutions require greater awareness, a nuanced understanding of the indirect costs that founders shoulder, and open exchanges on vehicle structures that can leverage the country’s untapped potential without using Western investment models that often fail.

And there is another uphill battle we will have to face as we continue the work: Shockingly, our research revealed that while women-founders make up more than a third of all founders (which is above the African average) and provide higher yields, women founders receive less support, scale more slowly and receive significantly less visibility, network support and funding. It’s a bro club. Yet the male founders generally provided feedback that this “wasn’t an issue” and that it wouldn’t require ecosystem rallying or policy reform. Most importantly, there was an even greater reluctance to be associated with pro-gender equity messages. Speak about the importance of mobilising our male allies! 

Every time we get a chance to dive into truly understanding the mindsets that move ecosystems or make them stuck, I am blown away by the nuance of insight. I wish the continent had more actors willing to listen, to explore novel ways to test resonance test, and to lean into what moves people. In today’s world, where large data profiling has become the norm, ensuring that we are truly close to people is crucial. And empowering ecosystems to shape the world to their needs should be everyone’s mode of operating. 

It promises to be a fascinating journey, yet one with an outsized impact. And I hope this time I can be in the room for it.