Skoll Scholar alumnus Mike Quinn, malady CEO of Zoona mobile money transfer in Zambia, tells us how the Zoona story went from an idea to reality – and shares his vision for its future.
” In 2007, I experienced a turning point in my life. I was completing a theoretical master’s degree in Development
Management from the London School of Economics following three years of volunteering in Ghana and Zambia with Engineers Without Borders Canada. I was hungry to get back to Africa as a social entrepreneur, but deep down I felt that I lacked the experience and expertise in business I would need to have the impact I craved. A friend referred me to the Skoll Centre for Social Entrepreneurship at Oxford’s Said Business School, and the moment I opened their webpage I knew I wanted to be there. I applied and was extremely fortunate to be selected as a Skoll Scholar.
The year at Oxford was game changing in so many ways. I shook hands with the visiting President of Ghana in my first month, became friends with some of the most accomplished and talented people I had ever met, built a business network to draw on in the future, and filled my brain with knowledge on topics such as venture capital, organizational design, and social enterprise business models. I also got engaged to my wonderful wife Isabelle, thanks to all of the Oxford fancy balls I took her to!
I also came up with an idea. I would start a business connecting real entrepreneurs in Africa with impact-focused venture capital funds in Europe and North America. I made a business card with the name “African Enterprise Partners”
The Zoona Team
and the logo of a baobab tree and started handing it out at every opportunity. One of my professors of a social enterprise class, Kim Alter, helped me refine the idea into a pitch and introduced me to the Grassroots Business Fund (GBF). Shortly after finishing my MBA, I was back on a plane to Zambia on a GBF consulting contract in search of my first investment deal.
My very first day back in Zambia, I was introduced to two entrepreneurs who also happened to be brothers. Brett Magrath sat quietly while Brad sold me on their start-up mobile payments business that was about to launch called “Mobile Transactions”. They had had built a mobile payment platform from scratch and wanted to empower micro and small businesses in Zambia to process mobile money transfers for the 85% of Zambian consumers that don’t have bank accounts. They were motivated by making money, but the social mission was central to their vision.
Mobile money transfers empower small businesses
I spent the next two months emphatically selling the investment opportunity to GBF, which closed when the Fund boldly invested $200,000 of convertible debt into a business with only three months of revenues. They asked me to source new deals for them but my mind was made up that I was going to work day and night with Brad and Brett to make our business successful. And we had BIG dreams right from the beginning. When I stood in front of both brothers at our first ever strategy meeting and asked them what our vision was, Brad immediately replied, “Breakfast with Bill Gates”. We decided we should tone it down and be more realistic so we settled on a “Cashless Africa.”
Zoona in the market
The early days were exciting and we always thought we were on the verge of taking off. I remember how exhilarating it was handing out fliers in front of the government-owned post office in downtown Lusaka, which had a monopoly on the money transfer industry in Zambia, when Brad was placed under “citizen’s arrest” by the manager for attempting to steal their customers. So we set up one of our first agents 20 meters away. Five years on, that outlet now processes over $400,000 per month in transactions and is owned by a 24 year old woman named Misozi who operates an additional eight outlets, employs 14 people and earns over $9,000 per month in commissions. The social mission has become reality.
For the first three years we were constantly out of cash. I tapped into my Oxford network and recruited my MBA classmate Keith Davies to join the team and manage our finances while I went out to raise more investment. In early 2012, we closed what was the first ever international venture capital round in a Zambian start-up. The Omidyar Network, Accion Frontier Investments Group, and Sarona Asset Management Fundput in nearly $4 million of equity, the proceeds of which have helped to put the company on steroids. We rebranded to “Zoona”, which means, “It’s Real” in a local Zambian language and is one of our core values. We have built a customer base of 500 agent outlets that service 500,000 unique consumers and process $25 million per month in transaction value. And we are growing rapidly: our headcount has increased from 44 people to 75 in the first half of 2014 alone as we gear up for expansion into new markets.
Many Zoona agents are young entrepreneurs themselves
Zoona’s core purpose is to help small businesses grow. We want to become the best in the world at providing business solutions to micro, small, and medium enterprises in Africa that unlock their latent potential. Our mobile payments platform has evolved from money transfers to other transaction types, including payments from retailers to suppliers. We also provide affordable working capital finance and business management tools to our agents so that they can grow their businesses sustainably. Many of our agents are people under 30 years old who are first time entrepreneurs themselves and are creating jobs, servicing their communities, and helping their economy grow.
Our biggest challenge now is to prove we can do this at scale. Our vision is to build a billion dollar pan- African business that proves entrepreneurship can have social roots that make a big difference to people’s lives, while also making money.
As Steve Jobs once famously said, “We’re here to put a dent in the universe. Otherwise, why else even be here?” My job at Zoona is to make sure we do just that.”
This blog was originally featured on The Social MBA and is reposted with permission. You can also follow The Social MBA on twitter @Social_MBA.
This year’s Skoll World Forum on Social Enterprise only confirmed the accelerating levels of interest in social business. The event brought together representatives from the private, viagra 40mg public and non-profit sectors, all of whom agreed on one point: inclusive business is the future. However, there is one point which lacked any degree of accord: namely, what exactly inclusive business is.
Newcomers to the field might be forgiven for feeling a bit lost. Inclusive business, and the related disciplines of social entrepreneurship and social “intrapreneurship”, have evolved faster than practitioners’ ability to articulate exactly what it is they are doing.
Inclusive business is perhaps best defined by what it is not: corporate philanthropy.Inclusive Business and Corporate Responsibility:
The term arose from the need for a differentiator from the more widely known “corporate social responsibility”, or CSR, which had too great an association with company giving which benefited society but had at best a tenuous connection to core business practice. Think of a pharmaceutical company sponsoring a theatre production. Good cause? Yes. Inclusive business? No.
Rather, inclusive business refers to core business practice- design, sourcing, production, marketing or delivery- conducted in a way which benefits society through core business practice. It can be thought of as overarching strategy to use business for good, an umbrella term encompassing the narrower tactics of social entrepreneurship and intrapreneurship.
While broad enough to include most activities, there is some debate around the term’s use, particularly in regards to whether inclusive business should include all activities which create social good (e.g. creating jobs) or just those proactive steps to go beyond minimum legal requirements (e.g. paying a living wage rather than the minimum wage.)
CSR remains in use, but increasingly less so, and mainly within corporate sourcing teams with the fairly narrow mandate of social auditing. CSR may or may not be used synonymously with corporate philanthropy.
Key Elements of Inclusive Business
What it is
What it is not
What it may refer to in practice
– business practice which benefits society
– an overarching term to include all models which contribute to this goal, including social entrepreneurship, intrapreneurship, and ethical sourcing
– Philanthropy or charity
– Taking measures to mitigate harmful practice
– The nuts and bolts of the industry such as social auditing
If inclusive business can be thought of as an overarching strategy, social entrepreneurship and intrapreneurship can be thought of as two specific tactics to achieve it.
The key element separating the two terms is this: whereas social entrepreneurship involves forming a new venture with joint commercial and social purpose, social intrapreneurship involves working within an existing company to enhance its social impact.
Let’s take social enterprise first. While sometimes used as a synonym for inclusive business, in fact there are relatively clear parameters on what constitutes a social enterprise; namely, a venture which:
prioritizes social impact above profit;
receives a high percentage of income from commercial, rather than charitable, sources; and
in some definitions, reinvests profit earned back into the enterprise or other activities of social value (rather than paying out to shareholders).
However, there remains a fair degree of ambivalence as to where exactly these parameters should be set. Should a social enterprise prioritize social impact to the extent it risks going out of business? What percentage of its income should come from commercial activities, and how soon?
Does impact invest constitute venture capital or just another form of grant?
– A venture which receives a high degree of income from commercial, rather than charitable, sources but which prioritizes social impact above profit
– A charity without any commercial income
– A company which produces some social impact (e.g. jobs) but which retains the primary goal of maximizing profits
– A charity with some commercial income alongside other funding sources
While social enterprise is increasingly well-defined, social intrapreneurship may well take the highly contested award for most jargony term in the entire field of business and development.
Like social entrepreneurship, intrapreneurship is one tactic to achieve inclusive business outcomes. Unlike entrepreneurship, social intrapreneurship involves working inside existing companies which may achieve and even seek to maximize social impact, but which still seek financial profit as their primary objective. Unlike corporate philanthropy, intrapreneurs also remain intrinsically linked to the company’s core business activities.
Key Elements of Social Intrapreneurship
What it is
What it is not
What it may refer to in practice
– Working within a company to improve social impact through core business practice
– Setting up a separate business
– Corporate philanthropy
– Taking measures to mitigate harmful practice
– The nuts and bolts of the industry such as social auditing
In addition to the speed at which the field has evolved, there is another reason the definitions of inclusive business, social entrepreneurship and social intrapreneurship remain nebulous: the three increasingly intersect.
This convergence, to borrow Accenture’s phrase, can be taken as a promising sign of inclusive business moving from the purview of a few niche specialists into the mainstream. The increasing professionalization of the field requires ever more specific terminology. Inclusive business is the future. Let’s make sure we define it well.
This blog was originally featured on The Social MBA and is reposted with permission. You can also follow The Social MBA on Twitter @Social_MBA.
Over last few months, in our interactions with the students from other business schools we felt the need of a platform which can not only bring together energies of students inclined in the sector but also provide a platform where they can discuss and express their ideas and get guidance from the experts.
In the Oxford Launchpad
It is the first Social Impact-focused student conference of its kind hosted by any business school in Europe, and the plan is to for the organisation of future events to rotate between different business schools each year. With the inaugural edition hosted by Oxford and participation from some of the leading schools such as London Business School and Cambridge Judge Business School, we plan to scale the participation from next year.
The conference started with a speed networking session of the participants, where students worked in groups to come out with a product idea around a single word assigned to their team. The exercise helped the participants to get to know each other and get an overview of everyone’s interest and background in the space. Thereafter, and with an impressive speaker line-up, a social impact careers panel discussion provided insights to students about opportunities, expectations and challenges in the sector from experts who have gone through similar journeys after their business school education.
This interactive session was followed by a passionate debate amongst participants from LBS, Cambridge and Oxford with the proposition “The house believes that all social impact that matters can be measured”. The debate was hugely engaging and witnessed some really strong & diverse arguments through various examples shared by the contestants.
In the next half of the conference, students participated in workshops on impact measurement metrics and a real time social business case competition. These sessions not only exposed students to the methodology and the standard practices to these critical and important aspects of the sector but also provided them scope to come out with innovative ideas and brainstorm within smaller groups and get feedback from others. I always believe social impact is a team game and these sessions were a great way to work within different teams to learn not just from resource persons but also mutually from other students.
The event is definitely a great start to what could be a platform which can provide opportunities to collaborate and work together to future leaders of social impact space. The team is especially thankful to our guide and advisor, Dr Pamela Hartigan, Executive Director of the Skoll Centre for Social Entrepreneurship at our business school, who provided regular guidance and support in conceptualizing and making this event a reality.
MBA candidate and Weidenfeld Scholar Manas Nanda reports to us about the Skoll World Forum panel on clean energy.
This was a session that clean-energy and sustainability enthusiasts, hospital particularly those focusing on Latin America countries, would have found really interesting. The session brought together an interesting group of experts and practitioners working in the field of sustainability and clean energy. Opening the discussion was Sean McKaughan of Fundacion Avina, who drew an analogy of the current global energy consumption to a scene in the movie Matrix when Morpheus offers Neo the choice between a red pill and a blue pill. We could be smart like Neo to choose the blue pill – the clean energy alternative in this context and ensure a more sustainable planet. Or we could choose the red pill which is to continue with business as usual of consuming fossil fuels. He said, having signed up for this session means that the audience has already chosen the blue pill.
Sean McKaughan, Tasso Azevado, Sara Larrain, Dipender Saluja
Having set the ball rolling, Sean quickly gave a background of Latin America and the relevance of clean energy here. Environment is an important component in LatAm given that the region has the largest reserves of fresh water and tropical forests and is house 50 percent of bio-diversity. The good news is that since most of the countries here are democracies, it is possible to bring in policy changes that help conserve the environment. Sean referred to this really interesting map produced by the Global Footprint Network which color-codes regions based on their consumption levels of natural reserves vis-a-vis the supply levels. Apparently LatAm is much better off than some of the developing nations in Asia. However, the region is highly vulnerable due to its high level of deforestation.
Finally, Sean concludes that there are massive economic opportunities in this space given that the clean-energy supply potential of Latin America is 22 times more than the demand, as reported in an IADB study.
The session continued with Tasso Azevedo, a social environmental entrepreneur, who gave an overview of the situation in Brazil. He began with some data-based findings on the growth of emissions of OECD countries. Based on his estimates, emissions need to be limited within the 11 Gt CO2e in order to remain within 2 degrees Celsius cap in rise in temperature. So basically we are left with a small piece of cake to be shared among countries. However, some countries have been late to the party and they want to maximize the share of this small piece where as others who have already had a major share of the cake want to repeat it. He jokingly said, increasingly the emission problem can be simplified as a choice between having a car or eating meat, even as the audience burst into laughter.
Deep-diving into recent trends in Brazil, the country has witnessed a decrease in emissions between 2005-12. However, on breaking-up the total emissions by source, one can attribute the decrease in emissions to effectively controlling deforestation even as as emissions from energy continue to rise in line with the global trend. Given that emissions in deforestation anyway need to reduced, he laid emphasis on the need to reduce emissions from energy use. One of the problems with Brazil is that it has no policy on energy but mainly relies on plans. Also, oil sector has attracted some major investments in Brazil which has shifted the balance away from clean energy.
Sara Larrain, Executive Director of Chile Sustenable continued the discussion by an analysis of the situation in Chile. She began by saying that technology is not the only challenge in adopting clean energy. Lack of social and political structures within individual countries is a major bottleneck. Also there has been a political failure at the global level to de-carbonize the world energy matrix and reverse global warming. Technology is already present to provide universal access to energy services. She stressed the need to for an energy rebellion by from informed participants who would demand clean energy. She ended her talk by saying a shift in focus from consumerism to radical efficiency and conservation needs to be implemented.
Dipender Saluja from Capricorn Investment Group, shared his insight on the global trends in energy market. He highlighted the growing contribution of emerging nations such as India and China to global emissions. Per-capita energy consumption in China and India are at one-tenth and one-thirtieth levels of that of US and yet they are already the first and fourth largest emitters respectively in the world. Under such scenarios, solar was the only viable solution, particularly because the world is blessed with adequate solar resource. Solar technology has witnessed 5x reduction in costs, which is highly encouraging. He compared the switch from grid to off-grid solar energy to the switch from land-line to mobile telephony.
MBA student Michael Davis gives us his report on the Skoll World Forum panel, “Leading with Authenticity.”
Bill Drayton, Rafiatu Lawal, Sébastien Marot, Kelvin Taketa, Leading with Authenticity
It’s a business card bonanza! Now I’m the first to admit I’m no guru of conferences, particularly not of international standard or with the profile of people at SWF but this business card swapping is something to behold. Whilst this might be fun for some, for others it’s a nightmare – full of awkward conversations and fear of rejection. This is problematic given many of the greatest leaders, best thinkers and thought provokers are introverts. How do these introverts lead and influence, connect with others, promote their businesses, raise money and ensure they’re skills are being fully tapped?
These questions, along with many others on what is leadership, how a person becomes a leader and what makes a leader effective were some of the many interesting topics that were explored during the session on Leading With Authenticity. With a panel including: the “father of social entrepreneurship” – Bill Drayton (whom an extremely jealous social entrepreneur friend of mine in New Zealand challenged me to have a “selfie” with (challenge accepted and failed!)); the rambunctious and highly entertaining Rafiatu Lawal; the “self proclaimed introvert” who admitted a good night out involves a Where’s Wally puzzle and a cup of tea – Sebastien Marot; the incredibly insightful Kelvin Taketa; and mediated by Diana Aviv whose entertaining call of “don’t feel sorry for her, feel sorry for me” comment when having to cut off Rafiatu; made for a broad diversity of thoughts and opinions on what authentic leadership is.
Some things really stood out for me. As a current MBA student, I’ve been taught all kinds of things about leadership. Whilst there are some universal truisms to leadership, dealing with social challenges creates whole new sets of issues that require an abundance of skills. A leader who is a social entrepreneur needs to be able to see history. They work with people in incredibly difficult circumstances, requiring that they build a deep level of rapport, integrity and trust if they hope to be successful. Leading with authenticity or, as phrased by Bill Drayton, having “ethical fibre” is crucial.
How to do this? Aristotle noted that “he who cannot be a good follower cannot be a good leader”. This was a pervading theme through all the discussion. Leaders need to be servants to those they lead. They must be collaborative, aspirational and focused on changing the status quo. They don’t stand idly by watching things they’re frustrated by but actually get in and do something about it. Adversity or a challenging environment doesn’t hinder them. They love what they do. They know who they are and don’t try to act like someone else. They don’t play by the rulebook. They are authentic!
Diana Aviv, Bill Drayton, Rafiatu Lawal, Sébastien Marot, and Kevin Taketa, Leading with Authenticity
The business card swapping and networking has its place. Humanity’s biggest challenges are social and environmental. To fix these problems requires smart people working together, creating new ideas, and sharing what does and doesn’t work. Effectively initiating social change requires connection, networks, and an ecosystem of people working together. But this networking needs to be followed by action. You can hand out a thousand business cards and send a million emails but until you’ve actually got in there and done something it doesn’t really mean much. When it comes to doing something, authentic leadership counts! If you’re a leader who is right for the moment, can envisage change, is effective and leads with service as a core value, it doesn’t matter if you’re an extrovert or introvert; people will follow you and you’ll make a difference, whether a business card is in hand or not.
MBA student Grace Lam gives us a vivid account of “Closing the Gap:Tackling Global Health Challenges, health ” a panel at the Skoll World Forum.
Peggy Clark, Peter Drobac, Pamela Collins, Tapela Neo, Chris Underhill
With an audience filled with seasoned global health experts, there’s not much the “Closing the Gap: Tackling Global Health Challenges” panelists could say to shock their audience. Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) and mental disorders have been underfunded and largely neglected due to the widespread focus on malaria, TB, and AIDS. Sure. Less than 25 cents per person per day is spent on mental health. Unfortunate but familiar. There have been huge successes in the millennium development goals, especially since the country with the biggest improvement, Rwanda, was measured with its pre-genocide 1990 baseline. Impressive and noted.
What did garner a response, however, was Chris Underhill’s candid memory of his own childhood experience with mental health. As a 12-year-old boy, he had a mental health episode that required treatment. The British hospital naively thought the illness could be transmissible, so they placed Chris in a ward where the only other patient was one with an iron lung. The six month recovery period “was like living with Darth Vader”, recounts Chris. Though Chris’ jocular comment evoked a lively chuckle from the audience, his unfortunate treatment reminded us of the perils of erroneous healthcare decisions and our own responsibility to deliver not only efficacious but also ethical care. Anything less could become another’s Darth Vader.
Closing the Gap: Tackling Global Health Challenges
Chris’ story provided the perfect segway into a discussion of the shortcomings of today’s global health delivery systems. While most agreed more resources should be devoted to the treatment of NCDs and mental health, one critic questioned whether the disease-centric approach was appropriate or whether this approach only treated the symptoms while neglecting the underlying pathology of an inadequate organizational structure for delivering care. Regardless of the opinions of the feasibility of such an approach, all agreed that the structure need to expand diagonally to integrate more disease states and delivery personnel such as community health workers. As if anticipatory of the audience’s call for improved systematic change, Peter Drobac distributed copies of “Delivering Health. Care Redefined.” – a working paper on current successful expanded healthcare business models, and encouraged us to improve and expand on it. And so, with celebration of some successes and the weight of ever more challenges, we disbanded, each renewed with their own campaign to free global health from the grips of Darth Vader.