Wednesday, April 29, 2009

Entrepreneurial traits span time and distance

You must seize your dreams and ambitions and act on them” – Titus Muya, founder of Family Bank, Business Daily 29th April 2009.

Today’s Business Daily had an in depth feature written by Titus Muya, the founder of Family Bank who started the bank in 1984 as a building society; and which has grown to become one of Kenya’s leading banks, with a customer base of close to 600,000 clients with assets in excess of Sh10 billion.

Fascinatingly, on the same page, there was a story on Bank of America (though on different content) that brought forth striking parallels between Muya and Bank of America’s founder Amadeo Peter Giannini. Though both entrepreneurs created their banks in different eras (the pre-cursor to Bank of America, the Bank of Italy was founded in 1904 in San Francisco) and on different continents, their stories of starting and growing their banks into large industry players makes one wonder if maybe the Business Daily editor had the same thought in mind when placing the two stories next to one another.














Heritage

Just like Giannini who was born into a poor immigrant family, Muya also came from what he calls a less “well-known” family. The Kenyan banking sector back in the 1980’s was only composed of multi-nationals and banks whose ownership emanated from society’s elite. Thus when he approached the Treasury to get a banking licence, he was met with stares of disbelief from civil servants who were only used to dealing with the “who’s-who”. However, this did not deter Muya’s passion and belief in his quest to take the dream first implanted by a magazine article to grow from idea to a thriving business.

But you are NOT a banker!

Due to the poor circumstances of his childhood, Giannini quit school at the age of 14, and just like Muya, he had absolutely no training in banking. As Muya writes in his article “officers at those (Treasury) offices used to look at me and wonder how I could start a bank when I was not even a banker”.

Maybe it is this lack of banking experience that led both entrepreneurs to approach sector in a new way, seeing opportunity in what was a hitherto unexplored market. Giannini “was the first to challenge the unwritten rule that banks should only lend money to people who don’t need it” (agilewriter.com), whilst Muya saw the future in providing banking services to low-income people, who ordinarily would have been ignored by the big banks of the day.

At a time when the Grameen Bank model was unknown, Muya focussed on the poorer sections of society, who were mainly small holder peasant farmers. He believed, just like Giannini that hard-working poor people who wanted credit would pay back. In Giannini’s words: "give the little guy a bank that will do business with him."

When you find a brick wall, find a way around it

When Giannini decided to open the Bank of Italy, the bank’s first office was in a converted saloon, and he even kept one of the bartenders on as an assistant teller. Similarly, Family Finance’s headquarters and first branch was in Kiambu on the outskirts of Nairobi, adjacent to tea and coffee small holder farms. Indeed, as the building society grew, it more or less steered clear of the nation’s capital, focussing instead on rural agricultural areas.

Comparable to the Bank of Italy which was the first American bank to offer loan products to people who had no experience with credit, Family Finance under Muya’s stewardship also developed products that were specifically targeted at the bottom end of the market. As Muya says “the now universal word and industry term for business of ‘microfinance’ did not even exist”.

When life hands you a lemon

When the 1906 San Francisco earthquake rocked the city, Giannini was not discouraged. As a Time Magazine article on the top 100 builders and titans titled “Consumer banking owes a big debt to a produce seller who refused to say no” notes:

“In the days after the disaster, the man known as A.P. broke ranks with his fellow bankers, many of whom wanted area banks to remain shut to sort out the damage. Giannini quickly set up shop on the docks near San Francisco's North Beach. With a wooden plank straddling two barrels for a desk, he began to extend credit "on a face and a signature" to small businesses and individuals in need of money to rebuild their lives”.

Similarly Muya showed fortitude when faced with nay-sayers from the established banking sector who doubted the capacity of poor people to be worthwhile banking depositors and loan re-payers. Nevertheless, holding onto his goal of “enabling people to advance their quality of life” finally paid off. Self belief in his dream meant that Muya had already resigned from his stable government job on receipt of his building society licence to in his words, take up the post of CEO and first employee. There was no turning back.

The Pinnacle

In 1928, Giannini’s efforts had grown Bank of Italy to a stage where he managed to purchase the Bank of America, an old and respected institution in New York, and consolidated all of his banks under that name. He continued to open branches all over the United States in the same spirit, making Bank of America the first nationwide bank By 1945, Bank of America was the biggest bank in the United States and remains to date the largest with US$ 3.2 trillion of assets. He died in 1949.

Muya likewise continued opening branches close to his niche market and finally started offering financial services to SME’s as well as students in Nairobi. Family Finance was finally granted a banking licence in 2007, transforming itself into what is now known as Family Bank with 50 branches nationwide.

What legacy can the story of Bank of America and Family Bank offer? Maybe the most apt message is Muya’s conclusion in his article which offers wise advice for young entrepreneurs: “No one is born with expertise; it is learning experience born of utmost commitment to goals, to set benchmarks, self belief and God-given determination”.

Friday, April 17, 2009

Business activism: Positively transform Kenya with the 2009 Budget Campaign

As any entrepreneur knows, business in the current economic climate is becoming well-nigh impossible.

With inflation adversely impacting raw material and final product prices, instability as a result of political bickering, a tax regime that places punitive impositions on micro-enterprises as well as dwindling consumer purchasing power, Kenyan small business enterprises are now under threat.

A few weeks ago on this blog, we decried the fact that the way the government to which we pay taxes was spendthrift, positing that if it were a business, it would have collapsed ages ago.

Well the season of the National Budget has come upon us again. And this time we can make our representatives to parliament more accountable by ensuring that government expenditure provisions reflect the will of the people of Kenya.

As the accountability portal Mars Group and the Partnership for change point out:

“The National Budget as presently constituted is enmeshed in corrupt and wasteful expenditure and there is need for Kenyans to educate each other on this so that we can pressure our representatives to scrutinize the budget to identify such expenditure. Savings can be used to boost development expenditure.”


As entrepreneurs are the main drivers of the economy, we should be in the fore-front of such an initiative. For instance we can demand accountability from our parliamentary representatives on the following:

• A reduction in the size of the Government of Kenya via the enactment of a statute pursuant to section 16 of the Constitution to cap the number of Executive Cabinet Ministries; and the need for integrity criteria for public service.

• A reduction of the recurrent expenditure of Government and the setting of ceilings on recurrent expenditure.

• Demand for full accountability and transparency in the External Public Debt Register which records all debts incurred by the Government of Kenya with international multi-lateral, bi-lateral and commercial creditors.

Apart from contacting your MP, you can also write a letter to the Commissioner General of the Kenya Revenue Authority (either when making payments or not) to register your displeasure that you are fulfilling your business obligations, albeit to a government that does not manage its resources responsibly.

Or, you can join the Partnership for Change 2009 Budget campaign to mobilize public support so that the Government of Kenya becomes accountable and transparent in the borrowing and implementation of the funds it collects from the public in taxes.

This time the onus is on us entrepreneurs to make the change we wish to see in Kenya today.

Update: read Kachwanya's take on the upcoming Budget in "A Letter That Finance Minister will never read".

Monday, April 6, 2009

Bashing without researching the Kenya Youth Enterprise Development Fund

This morning, we received a comment from an anonymous reader on a post Kenya Youth Enterprise Fund: Show us the money - "tusiharibu wakati bure!"

“Anonymous said...
This idea of bashing things without reearching should just stop. Why do we bash the youth fund even without endeavouring to find out how it works? Do we expect the fund to put labels on the foreheads of those it loans money?

Let us take time to study processes. Of course it is much easier to criticise.”

Here is our response to Anonymous:

Anonymous,

These are the researched FACTS regarding the youth fund:

1. The process of accessing the fund remains an obstacle to youth entrepreneurs. Forcing the youth to form “groups” in order to access Kshs. 50,000 is not in tune with the times. Many youth entrepreneurs are sole-proprietors and compelling them to dilute their shareholding in their enterprise is simply unfair.

2. For those individual entrepreneurs who can access upto 5 million shillings from financial institutions, they too are faced with a credit worthy assessment system that does not take into account the innovativeness of young enterprises. When they approach these banks they continue to face the same stereotypical and patronising attitudes as well as a perceived lack of credibility from the loan officers. Furthermore, they are also supposed to have bank accounts of at least six months standing.

3. The youth fund in its current form does not go far enough in building the capacity of young entrepreneurs to make their businesses growth oriented and market competitive. The fund should apart from holding short workshops for prospective loan recipients, conduct a nationwide programme of ensuring that young businesses can operate effectively and prosper. They could even go further by insisting that government procurement processes take into account youth enterprises for small tenders.

4. Research has proven that small business owners have a natural aversion to exposing their business to risk via debt financing. This has also had an adverse impact on the number of youth accessing the fund. The Youth Fund has done nothing to work on changing this state of affairs. For those interested in these studies, we shall happily provide citations.

5. Finally, just the process at the constituency level for accessing the fund is untenable, particularly in urban areas. The process of registration of groups is riddled with bureaucratic barriers. Secondly the number of banked youth is small in a country where 10 million Kenyans remain un-banked. The M-Pesa system has become a popular money transfer and financial management system solely because it uses mobile phones that reduce the time it takes in normal banking and money transfer processes, something that is attractive for young entrepreneurs who are time constrained. Third, the process of getting an ID card is similar to the group registration process. The Provincial Administration, specifically the local area chiefs, need to facilitate and support youth to acquire such documentation. Fourth in urban areas, getting to know who apart from meeting the local youth officer, Social Development Assistant or the Secretary of the Locational Social Development Committee is a tedious process. Imagine the sole-proprietor who has to close their kiosk every time they go looking for these officials, and probably has to queue for a long time waiting to meet them or even doesn’t manage to meet them. The opportunity cost is too high for such a small business who lose revenues they could have acquired in this time.

Now since we have been accused of criticising without merit, Anonymous, if you had really read this as well as other posts (http://yipeorg.blogspot.com/2008/11/opening-public-procurement-door-to.html and http://yipeorg.blogspot.com/2008/10/youth-and-women-enterprise-development.html) you would know that we have in the past suggested several reforms for the youth fund process:

1. Respecting individual youth entrepreneurs and their efforts so they do not have to form “groups” just to get the loans.
2. Ensure the financial institutions recognise the innovativeness of young enterprise in their loan application assessment process.
3. Build youth capacity to create and manage business by undertaking free training workshops that also take into account the time constraints of youth entrepreneurs. Also ensuring a level playing field for young enterprises as compared with other enterprises in the same industry.
4. Make the loan products attractive to young entrepreneurs, maybe by diversifying into short-term equity based financing.
5. Finally facilitate the process of accessing the fund by removing the need for so many stamps and signatures required.

If you still feel that this is “bashing without researching” then there’s really nothing else that can be said.

Youth Interactive Portal for Enterprise (Yipe.org)