At TapTap Send, I'm watching the same gap from the financial services side. A Moroccan worker in Paris sends €400 to Casablanca every month for five years. France never counts it: the country runs no positive credit bureau, only negative-only files for missed payments, so five years of perfect behavior produces zero data points anywhere in the system. Morocco never counts it either, but for a different reason: the worker lives in Paris, not Rabat, and Morocco's bureau only sees people with formal financial relationships inside the country. Two countries, one household, €24,000 in documented flows, zero credit profile on either end.

Different industries, different continents, same diagnosis: the people you most want to underwrite are the ones the bureau has never heard of. Their income is sitting in plain sight.

Nigeria's adult credit bureau coverage is 13.9%. The U.S.: 100%. (World Bank, 2019), barely moved since. Even that 100% hides a gap: more than 20 million US adults hold credit records too thin to generate a score (CFPB) (gig workers, freelancers, recent immigrants), the exact population alternative income data exists to bring into the system. Nigeria has over 200 million people, the continent's most-funded fintech ecosystem, and three central-bank-licensed bureaus running on Anglo-American reference architecture. 86 of every 100 adults are invisible to the underwriting system the country imported.

The same shape repeats everywhere outside the OECD. Pakistan: 6.7%. Philippines: 13.5%. Côte d’Ivoire (WAEMU): 22.1%. Mexico and Argentina nominally hit 100%, but fewer than one in five Mexican adults have borrowed formally, well below the 19% OECD average (World Bank), and 11% of Mexican MSMEs use bank credit. The bureau is a 20th-century data product built on payslips and tradelines, ported into economies where neither exists at scale.

Disclosure: I invested in Rollee, a company building infrastructure for this gap, a modest angel check, one of the first I'm making as I build toward venture. This article is “the why”.

The thesis in one paragraph: in emerging markets, the credit bureau is not the underwriting layer: income data is. Every successful EM lender has accepted this in practice and said so on the record. A new infrastructure category emerged in the US to monetize the equivalent gap: Argyle, Pinwheel, Truv, Atomic, Truework, collectively raised $300M+. Outside the US, a handful of regional players have emerged to chase the same gap: Belvo layering income data onto open banking, Palenca in Mexico and Brazil, Tartan inside India's Account Aggregator framework. Africa, MENA, and the diaspora corridor remain an empty quadrant. The companies that fill it become the bureaus.

I. A Bureau Built for the Wrong Economy

85.8% of African workers are in informal employment (ILO, 2024). Central Africa hits 92.5%. West Africa hits 91.8%. The female informal share continent-wide is 89.4%. 14.2% of African workers receive a regular salaried payslip with social-security deductions, the single input around which every imported bureau’s data model is built.

Informality isn’t a developing-world peculiarity. Asia-Pacific: 68.2%. Arab States: 68.6%. Latin America, where bureau coverage looks healthier on paper, sits at 47.6%. Europe & Central Asia, the lowest ILO region: 25.1%. The bureau works there because Europe & Central Asia is the only region where the bureau’s data spine matches how most people earn.

Identity is the second failure. Nigeria’s Bank Verification Number, the foundational identifier any bureau pull has to resolve against, reached 68.6 million by March 2026 (NIBSS via Nairametrics). Nigeria has roughly 165 million adults (total population: 232.7 million, World Bank). 42% BVN coverage on top of 13.9% bureau coverage. Nova Credit’s integration documentation makes the constraint explicit: “consumers are required to have a BVN to authenticate with the bureau.” Without a BVN, the bureau is functionally blind. Mexico’s CURP, India’s Aadhaar, and Kenya’s M-Pesa-SIM-bound KYC perform better in their respective markets, but none was designed to be the identity backbone for an Anglo-American consumer credit file.

Third failure: the data model. The World Bank’s depth-of-credit-information index, rated 0–8, sat at 0/8 in WAEMU for years. Brazil only acquired comprehensive positive credit data in 2019, when Cadastro Positivo took effect, which drove the founding of the Quod bureau by the country’s five largest banks. Nigeria’s 2017 Credit Reporting Act was the first to authorize utilities, telcos, retailers and landlords to share data with bureaus. Most West African telcos still can’t share with Creditinfo VoLo without case-by-case central-bank consent.

Every dominant EM bureau is one of five firms: Experian, Equifax, TransUnion, CRIF, Creditinfo, or a consortium of local incumbent banks running their reference architecture. Morocco’s bureau was licensed to Experian in 2008, sold to Creditinfo in 2015. A consortium of leading financial institutions and Dun & Bradstreet set up Nigeria’s CRC Credit Bureau. Experian has owned Brazil’s Serasa since 2007.

Three things follow. First, the bureaus are young, most are as old as M-Pesa, their data models aren’t. Second, the data architecture is licensed-in, not built from EM-first principles. The dominant question in Anglo-American consumer credit is “how does this borrower’s tradeline history predict repayment?” In EM, it should be “how does this borrower earn money at all?” The bureaus don’t ask that question. Third, regulators noticed, but only partially. BCEAO, RBI, SBP, OJK all maintain public credit registries as separate utilities, bureaus negotiate access to bank loan tapes one institution at a time. The result: shallow files, fragmented data, a structural blind spot for the 85% of the population that doesn’t show up on a payroll system.

IFC’s Nigerian Credit Infrastructure Reform (September 2023) is blunt: despite the 2017 CRA, only 13.9% of adults are in any bureau, and “awareness among bank clients about the National Collateral Registry is low.” BCG’s Beyond Payments (2026) goes further: “fewer than 10 percent of fintechs currently have access to comprehensive, interoperable data systems.”

The structural mis-specification is the spine of every other problem in EM consumer credit. The price shows up next.

II. The Trust Tax

Borrow ₦60,000 at 181% APR over 62 days. That’s Branch International’s representative disclosure on its Nigerian Google Play listing in 2025, not the worst-case price, the advertised one. Tala’s customer FAQ notes customers “start at a 15% one-time fee on 21–90 day terms,” which on a 30-day tenor annualizes well past 100%. The Ecofin Agency describes the typical sub-Saharan mobile-money loan as “below US$50, repayable within 30 days, with annualized interest rates exceeding 100%, making it suitable for emergencies but not for building working capital or productive assets.”

These prices are the empirical answer to bureau failure. When the underwriter cannot verify income, identity, or prior obligations, the rational response is to charge enough to absorb the expected default. Not a margin grab, the cost of operating without a working data layer.

FairMoney is the cleanest public case. In 2024 the company grew revenue 62% to ₦121.9B and its loan book 80% to ₦129.9B gross (TechCabal figure, OpenAfricaPod cites ₦68.5B net-of-provisions from the same unaudited statements, gross used here for cleaner impairment-ratio comparison). The numbers look like a textbook fintech growth story, until you reach the impairment line. FairMoney took a ₦59.4B impairment charge in 2024, equal to 46% of the gross loan book and 49% of revenue. CEO Laurin Hainy has publicly linked the company’s 30–260% APR range to default expectations. FairMoney told TechCabal: “We begin to make provisions on facilities immediately they are disbursed.”

The price isn’t an outlier, it’s the model. Branch’s published dollar-weighted default rate in Kenya, per Cenfri’s 2017–2018 data, was ~7%. FSD Kenya’s FinAccess 2019 survey of 8,267 adults found 16% of borrowers defaulted on a loan in the past year, and “digital borrowers have the largest rate of default.” Carbon’s co-founder Ngozi Dozie has said the company’s cumulative write-off rate over its history is roughly 10%. Carbon prices 4.5–30% monthly (max 195% APR). Same shape across the category: short tenors, triple-digit APRs, double-digit losses on unsecured consumer apps.

Frontier Fintech’s Samora Kariuki gave the phenomenon a name. His “Trust Tax” framing locates the cause in the absence of shared data infrastructure: “In Nigeria, the vast majority of borrowers have no financial footprint outside of the lender’s own app… When a Nigerian fintech claims a default rate of 4%, an investor cannot independently verify if those borrowers are paying back other loans or if they are in a debt spiral.” The tax shows up in valuation multiples, Nigerian digital lenders trade at compressed multiples vs. Brazilian peers because investors can’t audit performance against any common spine.

Carbon’s response to that asymmetry is unusual. Dozie’s diagnosis is brutal: “We have not seen a lot of transparency from Nigerian startups in recent years. Partly because many FinTechs are concerned that full disclosure could attract the wrong kind of attention or expose flaws and weaknesses to competitors.” Carbon has published audited financials since 2019 (the rare outlier) and treats disclosure itself as a differentiator. The fact that this is unusual is the point. In a healthy underwriting system, performance is verifiable by default. In Nigeria, transparency is a competitive choice.

A flattering reading exists, high APRs subsidize financial inclusion for borrowers who would otherwise have no access at all. The Tala reject-inference experiment (HBS, Kang et al.) found “significant improvements in financial well-being” for marginal-approved borrowers in Kenya. M-KOPA reports 37% of its customers accessing their first formal loan via M-KOPA. Inclusion is real. But a system that creates inclusion at 181% APR with 7–16% defaults and ₦59.4B impairment lines isn’t the system anyone designed, it’s the system operators built around a broken bureau.

What they built instead is the next section.

III. What Underwriting Actually Looks Like in Lagos, Nairobi, and Mexico City

The EM underwriting stack has five layers, in rough order of signal: (1) national ID/KYC, (2) bureau pull where useful, (3) bank or mobile-money transaction history via open-finance API, (4) smartphone behavioral data, and (5) where available, platform-specific operational data, gig-platform earnings, CFDI/SAT e-invoices, mobile-money wallet flows, POS terminal histories. Hybrid by necessity: no single layer is sufficient.

Three patterns hold across every market.

Pattern 1: Asset-anchored beats pure unsecured. Every company with strong public economics anchors the loan to a physical asset, a payroll deduction, or e-invoice cash flows. M-KOPA has deployed $1.6B in cumulative credit in Kenya alone, to 4.8M customers, with daily-repayment telemetry locked to the financed device. Moove, Uber’s largest vehicle supply partner in EMEA, hit $400M ARR by late 2025 and raised a $1.2B debt facility in July 2025 to finance Waymo’s autonomous fleet in the US. Moove’s repayment is fixed weekly deduction or revenue-share auto-swept from the driver’s Uber/Bolt/Yango/Glovo earnings. Per Rest of World, Moove’s India regional manager Mishra cited vehicle impoundment after non-payment affecting “less than 5% of Moove’s Indian customer base” (repossession, not default, Moove’s all-markets default rate isn’t publicly disclosed). Konfío in Mexico has supported $1.3B+ in cumulative origination across ~85,000 SMEs, drawing credit facilities from Goldman Sachs, Gramercy, and JPMorgan, plus equity from IFC, SoftBank, and QED, primarily by underwriting against CFDI/SAT e-invoice data rather than bureau pulls. Creditas in Brazil runs an R$7.6B portfolio (Q1 2026) anchored entirely on real estate, vehicles, and employer payroll integrations. None of this is reproducible by improving the bureau.

Pattern 2: Captive operational data beats scraped behavioral data. Moniepoint processed ₦412 trillion across 14 billion transactions in 2025 and disbursed ₦1 trillion+ in credit to ~70,000 businesses (avg $9,500 per business), built on POS-terminal data they own outright. Notadeepdive’s analysis of Moniepoint’s December 2025 Orda acquisition called it a lending-data play, not a payments one: a Moniepoint executive on the Moniebook beta described the tool sending “real-time operational data to the credit team, including transaction counts tied to specific products, inventory turnover rates, margin health, and peak sales hours.” JUMO, the pan-African telco-mobile-money lender, has disbursed >$8B to >31M customers and claims a “cost of risk for lending to <4%” per the Orange Money partnership announcement (July 2025), company-stated, not audited, but one of the few specific numbers from a pan-African digital lender. Branch, by contrast, scrapes >2,000 data points from the borrower’s smartphone, “phone make/model, call/text/data logs, contents of text messages, phone contacts, location and movement patterns”, and runs at the ~7% Kenyan default rate. Both work, one works much better.

Pattern 3: Infrastructure monetizes the bottleneck. The structural move in this category is the pivot from lender to API. Palenca's origin story is canonical: the founders built a gig-worker lender in Mexico, concluded banking data was insufficient to underwrite gig income, and pivoted to selling the income-verification API. Palenca processed 5M verifications in 2025 and projects 20M in 2026 (company-stated, not audited), backed by Experian Ventures. Its LatAm customer base is real, but sits in a contested, consolidating market, the same financial-institution logos appear on more than one provider's pipeline. Belvo powered Mercado Libre's 20% credit-line lift in Mexico from employment-data integration. Mono powered Renmoney's 70% faster underwriting and 30% reduction in credit risk (per Mono customer data) before its January 2026 sale to Flutterwave for $25–40M all-stock. Pngme infers income from SMS/USSD/mobile-money flows in SSA. The lender layer is converging on the captive-operational-data thesis, the infrastructure layer is converging on the income-data thesis.

Four founders. Four countries. Same diagnosis:

• José Carlos Aguilar (Palenca CEO): “The best available variable for origination is income. Without that, the system simply cannot grow into new segments.”

• Pierpaolo Barbieri (Ualá CEO, Bloomberg Nov 2024): “What has been difficult is to underwrite credit in Mexico to people that don’t have a credit history… We use [debit data], plus cellphone data, bill-payment data, remittance data and merchant acquiring data to build our own score.”

• David Arana (Konfío CEO, LAVCA): “In a market like Mexico, where 60% of working adults are in the informal sector and don’t formally record much of the information we need, we couldn’t really deliver our services as effectively as we wanted.”

• José Vicente Fernández Abril (Bankuish CEO): “The banks saw these workers as untouchable. But when you looked at their data, you could see reliability and patterns. The problem wasn’t risk. It was how risk was being measured.”

The bottleneck isn’t risk modeling, it’s verified income. Every founder in this category has spent a decade arguing it. The infrastructure layer is finally being built.

IV. The Plaid Pattern, Applied to Work

The US income-data category is the template. Not because the market is the target (it isn’t) but because it shows what the EM market becomes when the infrastructure matures, and who captures the value when it does.

Plaid’s arc: a $5.3B Visa acquisition killed by DOJ antitrust in 2021, a $425M Series D at $13.4B that followed, and a $575M primary raise at a reset $6.1B valuation in 2025, traces the pattern precisely: when a data aggregator can’t be acquired by an incumbent, it becomes the data utility itself. Plaid has since bought into identity (Cognito, $250M, Jan 2022), fraud, KYC, and FCRA-compliant credit-decisioning products (Cash Advance Index). Once you have read-access to a sufficient share of the data, you become the de facto record-keeper. Every regional player below is trying to replicate this.

In US work and income data, four players have built variations on the model, plus one acquired:

• Argyle (~$108M total, NYC, 2018): mortgage-led, Fannie DU approved. Direct-source income via 90% of the US workforce. ~1.6M annual verifications, ~140 customers including Floify, Rate, PennyMac, Snappt, Checkr (also an investor).

• Pinwheel (~$77M, NYC, 2018): deposit-switch-led, FCRA Consumer Reporting Agency. Block (Cash App) and, per Pinwheel, three of the top five US neobanks. Direct deposit switching for >half of US neobank flows by company claim.

• Truv (~$28.5M, Miami/SF, 2020): price-disruptor against Equifax’s The Work Number. 150M+ Americans covered across 12,800+ payroll/employer/gig integrations.

• Atomic (~$84.8M, Salt Lake City, 2019): bank-distribution-led. 450+ payroll integrations and ~75% US workforce coverage (per company), ~195 financial-institution partners.

• Truework: acquired by Checkr in April 2025, all-stock, undisclosed price. Checkr last valued at $5B. Truework served “8 of the 10 largest mortgage lenders” at exit.

The category’s defining battle is against Equifax’s The Work Number (TWN). Argyle’s comparison content puts TWN per-transaction prices up 272% since 2012 to $66.45, with some surveys finding $200+ per pull. First Financial Lending and Greystone Mortgage filed a 2024 antitrust class action arguing TWN’s pricing is a monopoly extraction. Most observers read TransUnion’s $24M strategic investment in Truework (June 2023) as the precursor to acquisition, then Checkr swooped, which makes more sense given Checkr’s background-check vertical: work-history is the connective tissue between employment screening and income verification.

Why income data beats bank data structurally:

1. Gross income is a stronger signal than net deposits. Net deposits are the residue of income after every other claim, gross income is the source.

2. Employer attribution is harder to fake than transaction patterns. A salaried payment from a known employer payroll system is a primary record. A pattern of deposits flagged as “salary” by ML inference is a secondary one.

3. Income data is verifiable for thin-file populations. Bank-data aggregation requires the borrower to have a bank account with a usable transaction history. Income data works for a gig worker with no traditional bank relationship as long as they have a payout history on Uber, Rappi, Upwork, Glovo or a similar platform.

Argyle, Pinwheel, Truv, Atomic aren’t “Plaid for payroll” in the Visa-acquirer sense. They are the bureau-substitute layer, built for an economy where income comes from places a traditional payslip doesn’t describe. Equifax bought TWN in 2007, the FCRA designation made that purchase work. API-native consumer-permissioned players are walking the same path, faster.

That’s the saturated US category. The question is what happens when the same model meets the EM data gap.

V. In EM, Two Players and a Wide-Open Map

Palenca is the most-capitalized name in LatAm, but not the settled winner. Founded 2021 in Mexico City by José Carlos Aguilar, Antoine Nguyen, and Pierre Delarroqua, the trio behind a previous gig-worker lender. The company is anchored in Mexico and Brazil and reaches into the wider Spanish-speaking market, integrating the LatAm gig economy and the formal-employment record alike: Uber, DiDi, 99, iFood, inDriver, plus IMSS (Mexico’s social-security backbone), private-employer portals, and HR systems. But LatAm is not locked. The category is consolidating rather than settled, and the same financial-institution logos sit on competing pipelines, including challengers winning business by inbound on the strength of product fit.

5M verifications processed in 2025, 20M projected for 2026 (company-stated, not audited), a 4x trajectory. Funded by a $4M round in late 2025 led by Experian Ventures (with Foundation Capital, Gilgamesh Ventures, Dhow Ventures), on top of an earlier April 2024 strategic investment from Experian Ventures that integrated Palenca’s tech into Serasa Experian’s analytical intelligence stack.

The Experian relationship is the most important structural read in the category. Experian isn’t building its own gig-worker income API, it’s buying distribution into one. The implication: bureaus understand work/income data is the underwriting layer for thin-file populations, but won’t build it from scratch in markets where their reference architecture wasn’t designed for it. Strategic equity into the specialist is the bureaus’ preferred route, the Equifax-TWN playbook from 2007, run faster and with less integration risk. The double edge: a corporate-VC tie can read as dependency as easily as endorsement, and it does not, by itself, lock the market.

The adjacent partial coverage:

• Belvo (Mexico/Brazil/Colombia, $72M–$120M+ raised) is the LatAm Plaid analog. Its loudest income-data proof point is Mercado Libre using Belvo’s employment data to increase Mexican credit lines by 20%. But Belvo is fundamentally a bank-data + payments platform, employment data is one feature, not the wedge.

• Mono → Flutterwave (January 2026, ~$25–40M all-stock per TechCrunch) is the Africa template, but Mono is bank-data, not income-data. The acquisition is a strong consolidation signal, Flutterwave brings open-banking infrastructure in-house to compete with Moniepoint/OPay, but leaves the income-verification gap fully open.

• Tartan in India (~$6M funding) operates inside the regulated Account Aggregator framework, integrated with EPFO and Indian HRMS systems. India-only.

The empty quadrants:

• Africa work/income API: No specialist exists. Mono and Okra both attempted bank-data only, Okra shut down in May 2025, reportedly returning remaining capital to investors. Pngme covers mobile-money-inferred income but isn’t a payroll connection. No continent-wide gig-platform-aggregation play exists, striking given that Uber, Bolt, Yango, Glovo, inDriver, Jumia, and the entire boda-boda and ride-hailing layer are now meaningful employment categories across Lagos, Nairobi, Cairo, Accra, and Casablanca.

• MENA work/income API: Rollee claims MENA coverage as one leg of a broader cross-border footprint, no fully verified competitor. Dapi was the closest from the 2020 open-banking conversation but pivoted into payments and banking-as-a-service.

• Diaspora corridor (US ↔ Africa, EU ↔ Africa, GCC ↔ South Asia / Africa): The most interesting empty quadrant. Wise’s thesis applied to underwriting data: the worker is in market A, the lender is in market B, the income record is fragmented across both, and no specialist exists to consolidate it.

The structural map is clear. Argyle/Pinwheel/Truv/Atomic own the US. Palenca, with Experian’s backing, is the most-capitalized name in a still-contested LatAm. Tartan sits inside India’s Account Aggregator framework. Africa, MENA, and the diaspora corridor have no winner and no second-place, and the bureaus, watching the LatAm partnership template play out, have not yet moved.

The empty quadrant is the bet.

VI. Why Rollee

Restated disclosure: I invested in Rollee. The bet is cross-border, not single-market.

Rollee is a fully verticalized alternative-data infrastructure for credit underwriting, built for global, cross-border coverage, with its sharpest edge in the corridor the category hasn’t saturated: Africa, MENA, and the diaspora. Founded 2021 in Paris by Ali Hamriti (Moroccan-French, ex-head-of-data at a Paris SME-lending fintech where the freelancer-credit-scoring gap was a daily operational problem) and co-founders including Pierrick Legrand. Hamriti’s background is the strategic asset: the founder’s positioning matches the underserved corridor while the product reaches well beyond it. €4M seed in March 2022 led by Seedcamp, Speedinvest, Kima Ventures, The Twenty Minute VC, and Foreword Fund, with an undisclosed Series A as of late 2025.

The product surface spans six data-source types and 140+ integrations (per company materials and probably more now): gig platform earnings, payroll, government/tax portals, bank, telco/utility, and POS, built to underwrite any type of worker, from the self-employed to full-time salaried staff to the informal earners who make up the 85.8% the bureau can’t see. The 2024 partnership with ABHI (Pakistan-based earned-wage-access fintech) is the first real customer signal on the diaspora-corridor thesis.

The macro tailwind is the consolidation of demand. Nubank, after Mexico and Colombia, is entering the US, it has also backed TymeBank across South Africa and APAC. Revolut is scaling credit, Monzo just announced Spain. Every embedded-finance player expanding across borders needs one modular income partner rather than a different data vendor per market, and the proliferation of single-country providers has become a procurement headache for exactly these buyers. Rollee built a global go-to-market from day one and, on company figures, has onboarded six fintech unicorns operating across the EU, Africa, and LatAm.

The thesis fit, in three points:

1. The diaspora corridor is Wise’s thesis applied to underwriting data. A Nigerian gig worker in Toronto wants credit in Toronto, a Moroccan freelancer in Paris wants credit in Paris, a Pakistani EWA borrower wants advances against future earnings on platforms that don’t talk to the local bureau. The fragmentation creates the demand for cross-border income consolidation. No US specialist will build this. No EM bureau will either.

2. Bankuish and Djamo are operating the same workflow against the same data gap. Bankuish (US, Latino gig workers, partners include Santander, BBVA, Sabadell) sells the “Bankuish Score”, a parallel credit profile built from work-platform reputation. Djamo (Côte d’Ivoire, $34.6M raised, 1M+ users, microcredit piloting July 2025) underwrites salary-credited account history because the WAEMU bureau is shallow. Both are demand-side proof points that the workflow Rollee enables is real, not theoretical.

3. Denial rates in lower-bureau-coverage markets are mechanically higher. Rollee’s own commissioned research of UK gig workers found 74% denied access to financial products despite having a good credit score. That’s a developed market with a functioning bureau. The EM version has no safety net.

Three risks underwritten openly:

• Coverage breadth is heavily claimed but light on independently verified country-by-country integrations. The single biggest open item in the landscape research. MENA, Africa, and LatAm geographic claims should be treated as expansion ambitions until contract-level customer evidence emerges. The milestone to track: named, contracted country-by-country integrations published over the next 12–18 months.

• PSD3 compresses European margins. PSD2’s successor reached provisional political agreement November 2025, formal adoption expected through 2026. Pure data-aggregation moves toward commodity in the EU, differentiation accrues to whoever sits above the API layer (orchestration, identity, scoring). The bet is that Rollee gets meaningful EM revenue before PSD3 becomes binding on European margins.

• Experian backing Palenca telegraphs that bureaus will buy into this layer rather than build it. Rollee needs to be acquisition-attractive, or independently capitalized, before a bureau (Experian Africa, Creditinfo) builds its own African option, or before a US incumbent (Argyle, Truv) decides EM is worth the cost. The offensive read points the other way: Rollee is taking the Taktile/Persona path: a global, independent infrastructure play aiming to become the default income-verification layer for the next generation of FI winners (Revolut, Nubank, Tala), positioned against the traditional bureau rather than waiting to be absorbed by one.

The product risk is execution. The category risk is competitor capital. The cross-border bet is the moat: the value isn’t sitting in empty geography, it’s in consolidating fragmented income records across borders, the part no single-market player has built.

VII. What Has to Be True

Three things have to hold for the income-data-as-underwriting-layer thesis to compound.

(1) EM digital lenders keep losing on unsecured smartphone-scraped underwriting and shift budget to verified-income origination. FairMoney’s impairment trajectory is the leading indicator: a ₦59.4B impairment line on ₦121.9B of revenue is not a sustainable model in any rates environment, let alone a Nigerian one. The lender response is already starting, Moniepoint’s Orda acquisition, Umba’s pivot to asset-backed lending, Djamo’s salary-credited microcredit pilot, Creditas’ entire collateral-anchored book, and each pivot increases the budget available to spend on cleaner income-source data. If FairMoney’s impairment ratio drops below 25% on a comparable basis for FY25, the pure unsecured consumer model in Nigeria becomes investable again and the thesis weakens. If it doesn’t, capital migrates.

(2) Bureaus accept disintermediation for new-to-credit and informal segments, partnering with API specialists rather than building. Experian → Palenca is the explicit template. TransUnion’s path with Truework, a $24M strategic that didn’t convert before Checkr acquired, is the cautionary tale: a bureau that should have bought the specialist outright lost the asset to a better-fitting acquirer. The bet is that Experian Africa, Creditinfo (which already controls Morocco and runs WAEMU’s BIC), and the local consortium-bureaus follow the LatAm template rather than the legacy one.

(3) MENA/SSA regulators adopt a hybrid PSD2-style consent-manager approach without commoditizing the data layer via mandatory standardization. India’s Account Aggregator framework is the cleanest example of a regulator picking a model that commoditizes pure aggregation (Setu, FinBox) while leaving the value-creation layer (Lentra, Perfios, the lenders themselves) intact. Nigeria’s open-banking framework, operational from August 2025, points in this direction. The risk is that a regulator over-standardizes, e.g., mandates that all income-data sharing flows through a state-sanctioned utility, and turns the category into a regulated rail rather than a competed-for layer.

Three killing-counter scenarios worth tracking:

• A pan-African super-app builds its own income-data side-product. Moniepoint owns the POS layer, Flutterwave just bought Mono, MTN MoMo has the largest mobile-money footprint. Any of them building an income-verification API as a side-effect of their primary business would close the African quadrant from the inside.

• A bureau (Experian Africa or Creditinfo) buys faster than Rollee can build. Plausible if Rollee’s coverage-breadth claims don’t convert to verified integrations on a tight timeline.

• A US incumbent (Argyle, Truv) decides EM is worth the price of building. The least likely scenario given how saturated US revenue still is, but the most disruptive if it happens.

Benchmarks that would change the call:

• Palenca crossing 50M annual verifications by end-2026 = category maturity signal. Income-data API as a scalable LatAm business is no longer in doubt, the geographic-expansion question becomes the only question.

• FairMoney impairment ratio dropping below 25% = the unsecured-consumer model is investable again and pressure on the income-data thesis decreases.

• A Mexican fintech crossing $1B loan book with NPL <3% disclosed = category maturity on the demand side, and the playbook becomes copy-pastable for African and MENA operators.

Operators should be tracking these three lines. Investors should be allocating against them.

VIII. Closer

Return to 13.9%.

The bureau was engineered for payslips and tradelines, salaried work, national identity. Most of the world has neither. Africa’s 85.8% informality isn’t a phase it grows out of, and Mexico’s 100% coverage isn’t underwriting, it’s bookkeeping. Two decades of localizing Anglo-American architecture into emerging markets didn’t fix the mismatch. It documented it.

Income data replaces it: verified at source, consented by the worker, delivered by API. Plaid, Argyle, Pinwheel, Truv, Palenca, the space is real and it’s filling up. But all of them work one market at a time. None is consolidating income across borders, where the bureau’s failure runs deepest.

That’s the layer Rollee is building: 140+ integrations, every worker type, consent at the core, one infrastructure across the markets everyone else runs separately. I invested because it’s the bet nobody else is making, and it’s the one that wins.

The bureau was never going to underwrite the way most of the world earns. Income data already does.

Sources & Data

Credit Infrastructure & Regulatory Data

• World Bank, Doing Business 2019 (retired 2021): adult bureau coverage by country (Nigeria, US, Pakistan, Philippines, WAEMU, Mexico, Argentina)

• IFC, Nigerian Credit Infrastructure Reform (Sept 2023): ILO, World Employment and Social Outlook Trends 2024 (informality by region)

• NIBSS via Nairametrics: Nigeria BVN enrollment; Nigeria open-banking framework launch (Aug 2025)

• European Parliament/Council: PSD3 provisional agreement (Nov 2025), BCG, Beyond Payments (2026)

Digital Lender Financials

• FairMoney 2024 financials and CEO statements via TechCabal, OpenAfricaPod (unaudited statement review)

• Branch, Tala, Carbon: company disclosures, Google Play listings, co-founder public statements (Dozie via BusinessDay)

• FSD Kenya FinAccess 2019 survey, Cenfri 2017–2018 Kenya default data

• M-KOPA, Moove, Konfío, Creditas, Moniepoint, JUMO, Djamo: company disclosures and reporting (Sacra, Notadeepdive, Orange Newsroom, LAVCA, Mexico Business News)

Income-Data Infrastructure Category (US, LatAm, India)

• Plaid: DOJ/TechCrunch reporting on the blocked Visa deal, 2025 funding rounds, Cognito acquisition

• Argyle, Pinwheel, Truv, Atomic: company disclosures and funding data

• Truework: TransUnion strategic investment (2023) and Checkr acquisition (2025); antitrust filing on The Work Number pricing

• Palenca, Belvo, Mono, Tartan, Pngme, Okra: company disclosures, press releases, TechCrunch/Mexico Business News coverage

Founder & Executive Interviews

• Pierpaolo Barbieri (Ualá), Bloomberg, Nov 2024, David Arana (Konfío), LAVCA, José Carlos Aguilar (Palenca) and José Vicente Fernández Abril (Bankuish), company/press interviews

• Samora Kariuki, Frontier Fintech #107 (”Trust Tax” framing)

Company & Sector History

• Equifax/TALX acquisition of The Work Number (2007), Experian’s Serasa acquisition (2007), Brazil’s Cadastro Positivo law

• Creditinfo Morocco/WAEMU presence, CRC Credit Bureau corporate history

• GSMA, State of the Industry Report on Mobile Money

Rollee-Specific

• Rollee company materials, mission page, and seed disclosure (March 2022), French corporate registry

• Rollee–ABHI partnership announcement (2024), Rollee/Opinion Matters UK gig-worker survey (Nov 2022)

Operational Experience

• Author’s direct experience in gig-logistics operations across Sub-Saharan Africa (Glovo) and the remittance industry (TapTap Send)

The African Generalist is an independent newsletter. All analysis is the author's own. The author is a disclosed investor in Rollee, the subject of this piece. Data points are sourced from company disclosures, public filings, and direct operator experience unless otherwise noted; company-stated figures not independently audited are flagged in-line.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

I spent few years running food delivery operations across these markets. The pitch was always the same: massive population, rising middle class, smartphone penetration growing. The reality was a driver on a bicycle staring at a GPS pin that pointed to an unpaved road, holding a ₦4,600 order that cost ₦5,200 to deliver, for a customer who wanted to pay cash.

Nigeria’s grocery market is worth $200 billion. That’s 200 million people spending $1,000 a year on food. Investors see Instacart economics. Term sheets get signed. Companies raise tens of millions to capture “just 1% of the TAM.”

The actually profitable market is $800 million. Zero point four percent of the number in the pitch deck.

Jumia burned through over $1 billion chasing the $200 billion number. Their final economics: lose $1.89 on every $10 order. After a decade of optimization, Bolt Food exited Nigeria and South Africa on December 7–8, 2023. Days later, Jumia shut down Jumia Food across all seven remaining markets. Glovo wrote off €3.5 million in Ghana five months after that. Kenya’s entire online food delivery market, after a decade of operation, generates $535 million in GMV annually. Ghana’s: $225 million. These aren’t early markets waiting to explode. These are the mature numbers after years of consumer education, infrastructure investment, and cash burn.

The pattern is consistent: raise on TAM, die on unit economics. The problem isn’t bad execution. It’s that the standard market-sizing framework, built for economies with credit cards, delivery addresses, and $15 average order values, systematically overstates African markets by 99% or more. What follows is one operator's attempt to build the framework these markets actually need.

I. THE FRAMEWORK: TAM → SAM1 → SAM2

TAM works in mature economies. Count the people who could theoretically buy your product, multiply by annual spend, and you’ve got your market size. It’s clean, fundable, and completely useless in Africa.

In markets where 56% of the population lives below the poverty line, where a $60 smartphone costs 80-95% of monthly income for the bottom 20%, and where “middle class” means $150-500 per month (not $50,000 per year), the gap between “might buy” and “can actually afford to buy” swallows companies whole. Silicon Valley’s TAM model assumes infrastructure that doesn’t exist in Lagos, Nairobi, or Accra. When you stack a $10 order on top of $4 in structural costs, the model doesn’t break —> it bleeds you out one transaction at a time.

The framework that determines whether your business lives or dies has three layers, and only the last one matters.

TAM is the pitch deck fantasy. Nigeria’s $200 billion grocery market. Kenya’s food delivery opportunity across 50 million people. Everyone who eats food (which is everyone). Technically true. Operationally meaningless.

SAM1 (Serviceable Addressable Market) is who can actually afford your product today. Not theoretically: “today”. This requires three things simultaneously: enough income to pay your prices, a payment method you accept, and enough trust in digital transactions to hand over money before seeing the product. Each filter alone captures 40-60% of the population. The intersection captures 12%. In Nigeria’s food delivery market, SAM1 is roughly $8 billion, 25 million consumers out of 200 million who clear all three bars at once. The “addressable” market is 96% smaller than the total market.

SAM2 (Sustainably Addressable Market) is the number that actually determines outcomes. It’s everyone in SAM1 you can serve profitably. Not just reach: “profitably”. In a market where last-mile delivery costs 4x the US rate, where 24% of cash-on-delivery orders fail entirely, and where average order value is $6.80, reaching a customer and making money on that customer are entirely different problems.

Run the math on Nigeria food delivery:

• TAM: $200 billion (200M people × $1,000 annual food spend)

• SAM1: $8 billion (25M middle-class consumers with smartphones, internet, and digital payment capability)

• SAM2: $800 million (the subset you can serve without losing money per transaction)

For context: Nigeria’s entire online food delivery market generates roughly $1 billion annually, after a decade of platform investment. Kenya’s generates $535 million with far better payment infrastructure. SAM2 at $800 million isn’t pessimism. It’s saying that nearly the entire current market sits at the edge of profitability, and it’s still 0.4% of the TAM. Not 4%. Zero point four percent!

The invisible tax between SAM1 and SAM2 is infrastructure, not the kind you can build, but the kind that doesn’t exist yet. Across Sub-Saharan Africa, 60% of consumers are unbanked or underbanked. Digital payment penetration is 3% for credit cards, 18% for debit cards. Even Kenya, the most mature market with 82% mobile money adoption, still sees 35% cash-on-delivery rates in e-commerce. When you accept COD to reach SAM1, you’re not adding a payment option. You’re adding 12-15% to your cost structure: cash handling, failed deliveries, fraud, working capital drag, reconciliation overhead.

The payment infrastructure determines who’s in SAM1. The delivery infrastructure determines how much of SAM1 becomes SAM2. In African cities, delivery infrastructure means roads that flood during rainy season, traffic that turns 5km into 45 minutes, and GPS that fails in high-density informal settlements where “the yellow house near the MTN shop after the third junction” counts as a precise address.

SAM2 stays brutally small because you can’t expand it by optimizing operations. You can’t growth-hack your way to lower delivery costs when the roads don’t work. You can’t A/B test past 60% of household income going to food, leaving zero room for delivery premiums. You’re building on infrastructure that’s either there or it isn’t.

Chowdeck cracked this by refusing to play the SAM1 game entirely. They didn’t try to expand SAM2, they built a business model that only works inside the existing SAM2, then optimized ruthlessly for that segment. Digital payments only, no COD, ever. Bicycle deliveries in dense Lagos neighborhoods where 5km coverage serves 500,000 people. Local food at ₦4,600 ($2.87) per order instead of ₦8,000 pizza. Profitable at 40,000 daily deliveries while Jumia burned a billion dollars trying to serve everyone.

II. THE INFRASTRUCTURE TAX

Every food delivery order in Lagos looks simple from the outside. Customer opens app, browses restaurants, places order, food arrives. Behind that transaction sits a cost stack that doesn’t exist in San Francisco, London, or Singapore, and each layer costs money.

That table understates the problem. Each cost component connects to infrastructure that either exists or doesn’t. You can optimize delivery routes all you want, when roads flood and GPS fails, your sophisticated algorithm routes drivers into traffic jams anyway. You can A/B test checkout flows endlessly, when 60% of users are unbanked, conversion rates stay brutal regardless of UX polish.

The infrastructure tax shows up in three layers that stack multiplicatively, not additively.

Layer 1: Payment Infrastructure

Kenya has 82% mobile money penetration. M-Pesa processed $309 billion in the first ten months of 2024 alone, more than any other mobile money market on earth. By every metric, Kenya is the success story. The model that works.

Cash-on-delivery still represents 35% of e-commerce orders.

The gap between mobile money adoption and digital merchant payments is where the model breaks. Consumers transfer money peer-to-peer constantly, $309 billion proves the infrastructure works and consumers trust it. But trusting M-Pesa to send money to your cousin is different from trusting an online merchant with prepayment. Consumer-to-business payments require a different trust layer that doesn’t exist yet. The infrastructure is there. The behavior isn’t.

When you accept COD to bridge that gap, you’re restructuring your entire business model. Cash-on-delivery adds 5-7 percentage points to order costs through direct expenses: cash handling, reconciliation, working capital tied up in cash float. Failed delivery rates hit 24% for COD orders versus 3% for digital payments, customers change their mind, aren’t home, can’t find exact change, or just ghost the delivery entirely. Each failed delivery costs you the full delivery fee plus food waste. Do the math on 24% failure rates at $3 per delivery and suddenly your $10 order needs a 40% gross margin just to break even.

Nigeria shows the opposite pattern: 9% mobile money penetration but lower COD rates in food delivery. The reason is banking penetration. Nigeria’s banked population trusts card payments to merchants because they’ve used cards for years. The infrastructure is formal banking, not mobile money, but the outcome is the same, digital merchant payments work when trust exists.

The paradox: countries with the best mobile money infrastructure (Kenya, Ghana) still see high COD rates because consumer trust in merchant payments lags infrastructure by 5-10 years. Countries with lower mobile money penetration but higher banking penetration (Nigeria, South Africa) see lower COD rates. The infrastructure isn’t the constraint. Trust is.

Flutterwave spent seven years building payment infrastructure and processes $34 billion annually across 34 countries, roughly 11% of M-Pesa’s transaction volume. The trust gap closes slowly. There’s no growth hack to accelerate it.

Layer 2: Delivery Infrastructure

Last-mile delivery in Lagos costs $3.00 per order. In San Francisco, $0.75. The 4x multiplier isn’t a temporary inefficiency you can optimize away. It’s structural.

The roads in Yaba flood during rainy season. Not sometimes, reliably, predictably, every year. Traffic turns a 5km delivery into 60 minutes during rush hour. GPS fails in high-density informal settlements where streets don’t have names and buildings don’t have numbers. Your routing algorithm can’t parse reality on the ground.

Back when I was working at Glovo, data showed delivery costs varied 61% within the same city based on neighborhood infrastructure. Areas with formal addresses, paved roads, and reliable GPS (your SAM2 areas) cost $2.40 per delivery. Areas with informal addressing, unpaved roads, and spotty GPS (still technically SAM1 because people there have smartphones and money) cost $3.90 per delivery. Same city. Same day. Different infrastructure reality.

The constraint isn’t operational efficiency. When the road floods, your optimization gains disappear. When GPS puts the pin 200 meters off in a settlement where buildings are 3 meters apart and none have addresses, technology can’t solve the problem.

Layer 3: Economic Infrastructure (Currency Instability)

Nigeria’s Naira traded at ₦380 per dollar in January 2020. By December 2024, it hit ₦1,535, a 75% devaluation in four years. Ghana’s Cedi went from GHS 6.0 to GHS 15.0 per dollar, a 60% devaluation over the same period.

Food delivery companies operate on thin margins in stable currencies. In Nigeria, your unit economics aren’t just thin, they’re evaporating in real-time. A customer with a ₦50,000 monthly budget could afford ₦6,000 in food delivery in 2020 ($15.79 at ₦380/USD). By December 2024, that same ₦6,000 budget is worth $3.91. Their purchasing power for dollar-denominated costs, imported ingredients, tech infrastructure, VC-backed growth capital, collapsed 75%.

Your variable costs are Naira-denominated. Your fixed costs are dollar-denominated. Salaries track inflation partially. Cloud hosting is in dollars. Investor expectations are in dollars. The spread between what you can charge (local currency, deflating) and what you must pay (global currency, appreciating) compresses margins until they invert.

This isn’t a temporary shock. Currency instability is structural across frontier markets. Since 2015, the Naira has lost over 85% of its dollar value, the Cedi: 75%, the Ethiopian Birr collapsed 83% after the July 2024 float. Even Kenya’s relatively stable Shilling lost nearly 40% at its 2023 trough before partially recovering. This is the norm.

When VCs model your business, they assume currency stability or predictable inflation. Reality is a step-function devaluation that cuts purchasing power 40-70% in 18 months, reprices your entire cost structure overnight, and eliminates half your SAM2 because customers can’t afford delivery premiums anymore.

The infrastructure tax: payments plus delivery plus currency, added $4 to costs on Jumia’s $10 orders. No operational efficiency overcomes a 40% structural cost disadvantage. That’s not a problem you optimize. It’s a constraint you design around.

III. WHY THE MIDDLE CLASS ISN’T 50% OF THE POPULATION

The pitch deck shows 200 million people in Nigeria. The McKinsey report says 50% of households earn above the “basic needs” threshold of $5,000 per year, and the pitch deck calls all of them “middle class.” Multiply 100 million people by modest annual spend and you get a $50 billion TAM. Investors nod. Rounds close.

The actual middle class, defined by ability to afford digital premiums, not aspirational income brackets, is 25 million people. Not 100 million.

Africa’s “middle class” definition includes anyone spending $4-20 per day. That’s $1,460 to $7,300 annually. In that range, you’re bundling three completely different consumer segments with entirely different purchase behaviors (supported by African Development Bank data):

The Floating Class ($2-4/day): 70-100 million people in Nigeria who technically clear the poverty line but spend 60-80% of income on food and housing. A smartphone costs them 80-95% of monthly income. They’re not buying food delivery. They’re not your SAM1. But they’re in the TAM because the definition says “middle class.”

The Lower Middle Class ($4-10/day): 15-20 million people with enough surplus income for occasional digital purchases. They have smartphones. Some have bank accounts. They use food delivery once a month during a special occasion. They’re theoretically SAM1. They’re economically marginal, a currency devaluation or inflation spike pushes them back into the floating class.

The Core Middle Class ($10+/day): 6-12 million people who can afford regular digital purchases, have reliable payment methods, live in areas with decent infrastructure, and won’t churn when currency devalues 30%. This is SAM2. Everyone else is noise.

The Nigerian Living Standards Survey 2022/23 shows the reality. The middle 60% of households earn ₦2.5 million annually ($1,600 at current rates). That’s $133 per month. For a family. After food (60% of income) and housing (25%), there’s $20 monthly for everything else. You’re not selling food delivery subscriptions to people with $20 in monthly discretionary spend.

When Jumia modeled their business on 100 million “middle class” consumers, they weren’t lying. They were using McKinsey’s definition, which includes people spending $4/day. The problem is that $4/day consumers can’t afford ₦8,000 food delivery orders. They can barely afford the food itself.

The middle class will grow, smartphone penetration will increase, infrastructure will improve, but the timeline is 10-15 years, not 3-5. Venture timelines don’t accommodate 15-year infrastructure buildouts. The companies that survive either build for the market that exists today or raise enough capital to survive until it materializes.

IV. WHAT IT ACTUALLY TAKES TO WIN

The playbook that works in San Francisco, London, or Singapore doesn’t translate. The companies that survive in African markets do four things differently, and none of them are optional.

They accept they’re building a different business. DoorDash nets 12-15% of GMV after paying drivers and costs, on thin margins at massive scale. That model works because delivery costs $0.75, customers have credit cards, failed deliveries are rare, and AOV exceeds $35. Transplant it to Lagos and every assumption breaks. Chowdeck runs 22-25% take rates, not because they’re greedy, but because at $2.87 AOV with $3.00 delivery costs, there’s no margin cushion. The model isn’t “DoorDash for Africa.” It’s a different business with different economics and different paths to profitability.

They solve for infrastructure gaps, not customer acquisition. The US playbook optimizes the funnel: reduce CAC, increase LTV, scale through paid acquisition. In African markets, delivery success rate matters more than conversion rate. Payment reliability matters more than checkout UX. When 24% of orders fail due to address issues, cash problems, or customer no-shows, optimizing your landing page is irrelevant. The constraint isn’t marketing efficiency. It’s infrastructure reliability. Flutterwave didn’t optimize acquisition funnels, they built SDKs, compliance systems, fraud detection, multi-currency support, and API reliability for seven years before the revenue followed.

They plan for compressed margins and extended timelines. US food delivery runs 3-5% net margins at scale. African food delivery runs 0-2% if profitable at all. Lower margins mean you need more capital for the same milestones, a US company at $10 million ARR with 5% margins generates $500K to reinvest; an African company at the same revenue with 1% margins has $100K. Most African ventures are undercapitalized by 3-5x. Moove raised $500 million+ to build vehicle financing across eight markets. Payback: 7-10 years. Most founders raise 1/10th of what they actually need, then die when runway ends before unit economics improve.

They expect 3-5 years to unit economics, not 18 months. Chowdeck: 24 months to positive contribution margin in Lagos. Moove: 36 months to fleet profitability. Flutterwave: 48 months to break-even. M-Pesa: seven years, and that’s the canonical success case. The timeline reflects reality, not poor execution. Infrastructure doesn’t exist, so you’re building it. Payment trust doesn’t exist, so you’re creating it. Customer habits don’t exist, so you’re forming them. If breakeven is Year 4, you need enough funding to survive four years of losses. Most African seed rounds are $1-3 million, 12-18 months of runway. You’re forced to raise Series A before proving unit economics, selling on TAM and growth instead of margins and sustainability.

V. THE CHOICE: SERVE THE 5% OR BUILD FOR THE 95%

The strategic choice most founders avoid is the decision that matters most.

Option A: Serve SAM2 profitably. Build for the customers who exist today. Accept the market is small. Optimize for profitability within that constraint.

Chowdeck built for SAM2 from day one and hit profitability with $12 million total funding. Shokudo in Nigeria hit profitability in eighteen months serving Lagos’s top 2-3% with $15+ AOV. Eden Life runs a $100+/month subscription concierge in Lagos (laundry, cleaning, meal prep, errands) with roughly 5,000 subscribers. Customer acquisition runs $100-150, but LTV exceeds $1,200 annually because subscription retention is strong among the segment that can afford it.

The math works at contained scale. SAM2 represents 3-6% of the urban population, that’s still 6-12 million people in Nigeria. Serve 1% of SAM1 and you’ve got 60,000-120,000 customers. At $50-100 monthly spend and 20-25% take rates, that’s $600,000-$3 million in monthly revenue. Real business. Not venture scale. Exit potential caps at $50-200 million. Capital: $5-15 million. Timeline: 2-3 years.

Option B: Build infrastructure to expand SAM2 over 5-7 years. The swing-for-fences bet. You’re not serving today’s market. You’re building the infrastructure that makes the market possible.

Opay raised over $1 billion for payment infrastructure, agent networks, USSD access for feature phones, logistics partnerships, and fintech services for the 50% of Nigeria excluded from digital commerce. The thesis: if you build the rails, the transaction volume follows. Moove’s $500 million+ finances vehicle fleets across eight markets. Timeline to payback: 7-10 years. Exit if it works: $1 billion+. The trade-offs are explicit — you’re raising $100 million+ and promising investors an outcome in 2030-2032. Risk: extreme. The winners take all because infrastructure moats are defensible.

Option C: Build for the mass market with low-margin, high-volume models. The path VCs won’t fund but that serves the largest number of people.

M-Kopa sells pay-as-you-go solar systems in Kenya and East Africa. Average customer LTV is $200. Gross margins are 15%. They’ve served 4 million+ customers through mobile money micro-installments, repossession-enabled devices, and agent distribution networks. Their 4 million customers dwarf the entire food delivery market in Africa. VCs ignore this model because margins are thin, capital intensity is high, and timelines are long. The impact is real. The venture returns are questionable.

Most founders pitch Option B (the billion-dollar vision) to raise Option A capital ($5-15M) while accidentally building Option C economics. Then they die because unit economics never work and capital runs out.

The choice requires honesty. Are you building a $100 million business serving the premium 5% profitably? Are you raising $100 million+ to bet on infrastructure maturation by 2030? Or are you building a high-impact, low-margin business that VCs won’t fund but that actually serves the mass market?

Pick one. The market will force you to choose anyway.

VI. THE RECKONING

African tech’s reckoning arrived in 150 days. Jumia Food shut down in December 2023 after ten years and over $1 billion in losses. Bolt Food exited Nigeria and South Africa within 24 hours. Glovo wrote off Ghana four months later. VC funding dropped from $5.2 billion in 2022 to $3.5 billion in 2023, a decline that continued into 2024.

The losers followed the same pattern: raised on TAM, expanded to multiple countries before proving the model in one city, optimized for growth metrics (GMV, order volume, geographic coverage) instead of solving the infrastructure gaps that made their unit economics unworkable. The exits weren’t failures of execution. They were failures of measurement.

The next wave of African tech winners will be infrastructure players, not consumer apps. Payment rails, logistics networks, agricultural supply chains, credit systems. The consumer companies that succeed in 2030 will be built on rails that don’t exist in 2025. Someone has to build those rails first.

The opportunity is real. Mobile money processes $1.1 trillion annually, 74% of global volume. Smartphone penetration hit 52% in 2024 and climbing. The middle class is growing, slowly. The 2030 market will be materially larger than 2025. But the infrastructure timeline is a decade. Venture funding timelines are 18-36 months. That mismatch will kill you faster than any competitor.

The affordability trap isn’t that African markets are too poor to serve. It’s that the frameworks everyone uses assume infrastructure that doesn’t exist, measure customers who can’t afford digital premiums, and model unit economics that work only in mature markets. By the time you realize the framework was wrong, the capital is gone.

Build for the market that exists. Not the one in the pitch deck.

Sources & Data

Market & Consumer Data

• GSMA State of the Industry Report 2024: mobile money volumes, mobile money penetration by country, smartphone penetration, smartphone affordability data

• Nigerian Living Standards Survey (NLSS) 2022/23: household income distribution, poverty rates, expenditure breakdowns

• African Development Bank: middle-class segmentation framework

• Statista: Kenya and Ghana online food delivery market GMV estimates

• Central Bank of Nigeria, Bank of Ghana, Central Bank of Kenya: exchange rate data, mobile money transaction volumes

Company & Financial Data

• Jumia Technologies SE, SEC filings (Q4 2023, Q4 2024): unit economics, take rates, COD failure rates, cumulative losses

• Chowdeck TechCrunch (August 2025): company data funding, daily deliveries, digital-only payments model, average order value

• Flutterwave company reports, Crunchbase: funding, processed volume

• M-Kopa company reports: customers, average LTV, pay-as-you-go solar model

• Opay funding data via TechCrunch, Crunchbase: total raised

• Moove company data: funding

• Bolt Food company announcements (December 7–8, 2023): Nigeria and South Africa market exits

• Glovo company announcements (May 2024): Ghana market exit

• DoorDash SEC filings: take rates, AOV benchmarks, margin data

Payments & Infrastructure

• M-Pesa/Central Bank of Kenya: transactions value

• AfricaNenda World Bank Global Findex: banking and digital payment penetration

• dLocal, PPRO: country-level payment method snapshots

Industry Reports

• Partech Africa annual Africa Tech VC Reports: funding data

• McKinsey “Lions on the Move”: household income thresholds and consumer segmentation

Operational Experience

• Author’s direct experience in food delivery operations across Sub-Saharan African markets (Glovo, 2018–2022): delivery cost differentials by neighborhood, last-mile infrastructure constraints, COD operational costs, unit economics modeling. Specific data points, cost variance within cities, delivery costs by infrastructure quality are sourced from internal operational data.

The African Generalist is an independent newsletter. All analysis is the author’s own. Data points are sourced from publicly available reports, SEC filings, and direct operational experience unless otherwise noted.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

If you only have a few minutes to spare, here’s what you need to know: 👇

TL;DR

• Morocco’s funding “boom” is misleading. A record year on paper, but most of the capital went to three startups. Everyone else is still stuck at seed, and the capital ladder snaps the moment founders need a real Series A.

• Morocco can start startups, but it still can’t scale them. Growth money dries up fast, top teams leave to raise abroad, and the exit market is basically nonexistent. No exits → no liquidity → no recycled capital → no ecosystem.

• The talent base is thin where it matters. Too few builders, too many talkers, and an education pipeline that produces degrees, not product execution.

• High-friction operations, slow regulation, and a dormant diaspora drain momentum. Until Morocco fixes these fundamentals, it will remain “promising but not delivering.”

Subscribe now

Introduction

Morocco finally posted the kind of funding numbers it has been chasing for a decade. $80M+ raised in 2024 (almost 3x previous year) in a global market that was cooling everywhere else. It was enough to push the country into Africa’s top six and trigger a wave of optimism. Headlines called it a breakthrough. Founders felt the momentum. On paper, Morocco had “arrived.”

Look closer, and the story is far less glamorous, 2/3 of that money came from three deals. One of them (Nuitée’s $48M raise) accounts for half the country’s annual total! Outside those outliers, most founders can’t close $300–500k, let alone a real growth round. The truth is simple: “Morocco is good at starting companies, it’s bad at scaling them.”

The early-stage pipeline may look healthy. The rest of the funnel isn’t. Seed funding flows, then disappears. The “Series A trap” is real. Exits are rare, which means there’s no recycled capital, no second-generation founders, and no reinforcement loop to compound the ecosystem. Add the quiet frictions everyone knows but rarely says out loud: thin product leadership, slow hiring cycles and talent bottlenecks, high trust costs, cash-heavy commerce, regulatory walls around promising verticals, and the picture becomes clearer.

This piece is my humble contribution to mapping the gap between starting up and scaling up in Morocco, and outlining what it will take to close it.

Early Wins… Then the Wall

By surface metrics, Morocco’s early-stage scene looks healthy. A decade of groundwork finally shows: more local angels, active accelerators, global players setting up shop, and a handful of homegrown seed funds. Pre-seed and seed capital is easier to access than ever. Most strong founders can pull together a few hundred thousand dollars to build an MVP and validate demand. The pipeline is real, and 2024’s funding spike proves investors are paying attention, at least at the starting line.

The problem starts the moment a company needs a real growth round. Once a Moroccan startup needs $5–10M to scale, the ecosystem disappears. There are plenty of small funds, but almost no one with the capital to lead a proper Series A. Al Mada Ventures is the only institution openly positioned for these rounds, and even it invests with a pan-African lens. A few state-linked vehicles sometimes write larger checks, but they do so inconsistently. The result is simple: Morocco’s capital ladder has a missing ring. The country can seed startups, but it cannot scale them.

This is Morocco’s “Series A trap.” Promising companies reach seed, look up, and see nothing above them. The data reflects it: sub-$1M rounds dominated 2024, while growth capital barely registered. The outcome is predictable. Founders either stall or leave. Increasingly, they leave, shifting HQs to Dubai, London, Paris, or Delaware to access investors who can actually fund their growth. The product might be Moroccan, the team might start in Morocco, but the scaling and the value creation happens elsewhere. Founders often put it: “When we needed big money, we went where the money was.”

This dynamic isn’t just a threat to Morocco’s long-term trajectory, it undermines the entire premise of building a tech ecosystem. If the best startups leave the moment they need real capital, Morocco isn’t an emerging hub: it’s a subsidized training ground for other markets. The country does the hard work of nurturing early talent, then watches the economic upside, jobs, and innovation migrate elsewhere.

Fixing the Series A trap isn’t optional. It’s the single most important decision point for Morocco’s tech future. Without larger fund sizes, real syndication capacity, and public capital willing to shoulder risk at growth stage, nothing changes. And until those pieces exist, the pattern will repeat: Morocco will keep generating promising startups/founders and then exporting them the second they show signs of becoming category leaders.

No Exits, No Recyclables

The growth-stage squeeze is inseparable from a tougher truth: Morocco barely has any exits. In three years, the country produced roughly four notable ones. You can list them without taking a breath. Meanwhile, Egypt cleared 20+, Nigeria more than a dozen. This isn’t cosmetic! It’s a structural fault line. Exits are the recycling mechanism that keeps a venture ecosystem alive. They create liquidity, reward risk-takers, and signal to bigger investors that the market is real. Without them, the whole cycle breaks.

That’s exactly what’s happening. The absence of exits makes later-stage investors especially international funds hesitate. They don’t see a path to a payout. Without their capital, startups fail to reach the scale required to generate meaningful exits. It’s a self-fulfilling loop: no exits → no big checks → no exits. Escaping it requires a few clear wins to reset expectations.

Why has Morocco struggled here? Partly because the ecosystem is still young, meaningful exits often take a decade. But the bigger issue is structure. Morocco’s market is mid-sized and relatively low purchasing power. Winning Morocco doesn’t automatically produce a company that moves the needle for a global acquirer. Compare that to a Nigerian winner, the scale is undeniable. Or a Kenyan player that can naturally expand across East Africa. Morocco, by contrast, sits in a linguistic and geographic limbo. It’s not embedded in the Francophone African bloc, not part of the GCC opportunity set, and not aligned with Anglophone Africa. Expansion paths are less obvious, so many Moroccan startups plateau early.

The exits we’ve had all fit the same pattern: foreign players buying Moroccan startups to establish a foothold: EMPG/Mubawab, Autochek/Kifal. Useful, but far from transformative. Even the first “local” deal, Ora Technologies acquiring Cathedis, doesn’t change much, the numbers were small, the impact minimal, and no meaningful liquidity flowed back into the ecosystem. It’s a milestone on paper, but the hard truth remains: Morocco still hasn’t produced exits that generate real wealth or convince later-stage investors this market can return capital. Until that happens, everything else is noise.

As for IPOs: there are none. The Casablanca Stock Exchange has never listed a true high-growth tech startup. Local rules are strict, investor appetite is conservative, and liquidity is limited. Listing abroad introduces its own hurdles: currency controls, scale constraints, risk perception. The once-promising SPAC window has closed. For now, the public markets are effectively off-limits.

The ecosystem is finally admitting this is a crisis. Ask any Moroccan VC: exits are the missing piece. Solutions are being floated: IPO incentives, lighter listing rules, secondary markets for private shares, more corporate M&A. But corporate Morocco has been reluctant to buy startups. In mature ecosystems, corporates drive 20–40% of tech acquisitions. Here, they’ve barely participated. Apart from isolated moves like Orange and Axa acquiring DabaDoc (still tiny again), local banks, telcos, and industrial groups have stayed on the sidelines. Until they treat startups as part of their innovation pipeline, exit options will remain thin.

The reality is simple: Morocco doesn’t need a unicorn tomorrow. It needs a handful of solid, believable exits in the $20–50M range to show the machine can work. Those proof points would pull in more capital, more talent, and more ambition. Momentum has to start somewhere. In this ecosystem, a few good endings are what make new beginnings possible.

Founder Archetype Gap: Where Are the Builders?

Any startup ecosystem lives and dies by its People, and Morocco’s startup scene has a talent problem no one wants to say out loud: too few people who can actually build things. If you look closely, and with a bit of exaggeration because there’s always exceptions, most “founders” here wouldn’t qualify to be PMs or engineers at a decent tech company. The ratio is upside down, a sea of business generalists pitching ideas, and almost no technical founders who can ship product without hiring an agency (hello India).

The smartest engineers don’t touch startups because the upside story doesn’t exist. No big outcomes, no wealth creation, no reason to believe this path beats a stable job abroad. So the people who could build breakout companies… don’t. And the people who do start companies often outsource the core product (hello India again). That’s how you get startups with more pitch decks than users.

The absence of real second generation founders networks makes it worse. No PayPal mafia. No ex-Scaleups mafia. Just a handful of returnees trying to inject standards into an ecosystem that hasn’t seen world-class execution up close. You can’t fake this, ecosystems without experienced builders stagnate.

And yes, as my friend Hamza said once Morocco has a “talkers vs. builders” problem. Lots of panels, lots of vision, lots of LinkedIn thought leadership. But open any product and you’ll see the truth: slow, buggy, outsourced, zero analytics, zero experimentation. Everyone wants partnerships with banks, almost no one is running A/B tests or instrumenting funnels, or making an awesome product that users love. Of course, this is a generalization, there are definitely strong builders in Morocco, but it’s a noticeable gap.

If Morocco wants real tech companies, the culture has to flip. Celebrate builders. Reward technical founders. Stop giving microphones to people who haven’t shipped a product. Until there’s a breakout success that proves building pays, the best talent will keep opting out, and the ecosystem will keep wondering why it’s stuck at the starting line.

The Talent Bottleneck

The founder gap bleeds directly into a bigger problem: the talent pipeline is thin where it matters most. Even if you manage to assemble a solid founding team, you hit a wall the moment you try to hire for real execution. Morocco simply doesn’t have enough people who can build, ship, iterate, and scale.

Ask any startup CEO about their toughest hires and you’ll hear the same list: product, growth, UX/UI, senior engineering, data. These aren’t “nice-to-have” roles, they are the core machinery of a tech company. And the local supply is shallow. Need a salesperson or finance manager? Sure, you can pull from banks or telcos. Need someone who’s actually taken a product from zero to one, or one to ten? Good luck!

So founders improvise. They hire juniors and pray they level up fast. They bring in freelancers in Europe. Or they skip entire functions and do it themselves, badly. None of this is how you build a high-velocity startup.

The education pipeline doesn’t help much. Engineering schools produce smart grads, but too theoretical and risk-averse. Business schools churn out managers who’ve never seen a real product sprint. Yes, bootcamps and new programs are emerging, but they’re years away from filling the gap.

There is one obvious lever everyone underutilizes: the Diaspora. Morocco has product managers at Meta, engineers at Google, data scientists in top fintech hubs. That network is real, massive, and mostly untapped. A structured effort (advisors, fractional roles, short-term rotations) could close the skills deficit faster than any local reform.

Zoom out and the truth is simple: talent is Morocco’s only durable advantage. The raw ingredients are here: young, educated, multilingual. The issue isn’t potential, it’s direction. Until more of that talent is funneled into startups and equipped with modern skills, the ecosystem will keep running on enthusiasm instead of horsepower.

High Costs of Low Trust

Morocco doesn’t just make building a startup hard, it adds friction that eats your margins, your time, and eventually your conviction. The irony is brutal: operating costs can be higher than in developed markets because the basics still aren’t dependable.

Start with the core bottleneck: trust and payments are broken. Cash on Delivery (COD) still dominates e-commerce, with north of 70% (various sources) of customers paying only after they’ve inspected the item. It’s rational behavior in a low-trust market, but it turns startups into logistics companies with a side hustle in tech. You’re running cash-collection fleets, absorbing insane return rates, dealing with cash flow delays, and praying nothing gets lost or stolen. The whole point of e-commerce (scalability and efficiency) gets wiped out because every order requires manual labor and handholding.

Recurring payments aren’t better. SaaS in Morocco is basically “SaaS with field agents.” No Stripe. Low card penetration. Spotty digital rails. Founders hack together workarounds that are clever but fundamentally unscalable. As a result, churn spikes, acquisition costs balloon, and the payment step becomes the enemy of growth.

Then comes the trust deficit. B2B buyers hesitate because they assume you might disappear, consumers hesitate because they assume you might scam them. Every new product must over-prove itself. That means endless meetings, institutional validation, and customer support costs that would be unthinkable in mature markets.

Infrastructure is better than it used to be, internet usage is at it’s highs, but the basics still bite. Addresses don’t match maps sometimes, deliveries fail. Logistics outside major cities is slow. It’s death by a thousand operational cuts, none fatal individually, all costly together.

The result: Moroccan startups operate with a tax that founders in SF, London or Paris don’t even think about. You’re building your product and the rails your product needs to function. Every hour spent fixing payments, reconciling cash, or chasing skeptical customers is an hour you’re not innovating.

There is a path forward, fintech adoption is rising, wallets are hopefully spreading, and user behavior shifts faster once the right incentives show up. But today, the truth is this: if you’re building in Morocco, you must budget for friction, design around mistrust, and accept that you’re competing against markets where your peers start on third base while you’re still negotiating for a bat.

Red Tape: Can’t Move Fast in a Slow System

Startups can survive bad markets, they rarely survive bad regulation. And Morocco’s most promising sectors are still wrapped in outdated rules that slow everyone down.

Mobility is the classic case. Uber operated in Casablanca for years in a legal gray zone, fought taxi unions, and finally gave up in 2018. Fast forward to today they are back, and there’s still no real ridesharing framework! If you’re a mobility founder today, you either break the law or don’t build. Meanwhile Egypt and Nigeria turned ride-hailing into mature, scaled industries. Morocco simply lost the window to create its own champions.

Fintech isn’t much better. You can’t run peer-to-peer lending. You can’t issue cards without a bank. You can’t touch cross-border payments without navigating foreign-exchange rules so rigid that founders often set up entities abroad just to operate. Regulators talk about sandboxes and modernization, but the pace is glacial. By the time laws move, the opportunity usually has too.

Healthcare faces the same drag. Telemedicine was stuck in limbo until Covid forced exceptions. Anything involving remote care, prescriptions, or digital workflows bumps into legacy definitions of “medical practice.” The demand exists, the regulation doesn’t.

This isn’t a Moroccan anomaly. “Bureaucracy” slows innovation everywhere. The real issue is that Morocco’s inertia is starting to cost it. Tunisia passed a Startup Act in 2018 that gave founders currency flexibility, easier procurement, and real incentives. Morocco promised something similar. Years later, we’re still waiting…

Even basic company admin is a tax on ambition. Incorporation is better than before, but closing a failed startup (a normal outcome) can trap entrepreneurs in months of paperwork and tied-up capital. Nothing kills risk-taking faster than making failure expensive.

If Morocco wants to be a real startup hub, it needs a regulatory reset: fast-track licensing for fintech and healthtech, real sandboxes with teeth, clear frameworks for mobility, and a government that talks to founders before (not after) innovation happens. There are bright spots (Bank Al-Maghrib’s new fintech center, Morocco Digital 2030), but they’re exceptions, not the norm.

Talent and capital matter. But without modern rules, none of it compounds! Until Morocco fixes its regulatory bottlenecks, the ecosystem will keep underperforming its potential.

Diaspora: Morocco’s Global Ace

One of Morocco’s biggest untapped advantage is its diaspora. Five million Moroccans live abroad (15% of the country) many of them highly educated, well-paid, and plugged into global tech networks. This should be a powerhouse of capital, expertise, and deal flow. Instead, it’s barely being used.

Look at the pattern: Moroccans build massive companies, but almost always outside Morocco. Eyewa’s $100M raise? Dubai. Color Genomics’ unicorn ascent? Silicon Valley. InstaDeep’s multi-hundred-million acquisition? Tunisia proved it could be done, Morocco hasn’t. The talent exists. The ambition exists. The ecosystem at home does not.

For years, this was written off as “brain drain.” The reality is harsher: Morocco hasn’t created an environment where its top talent wants (or needs) to build locally. Only recently have we started reframing it as “brain gain,” but the gap between slogan and execution is still wide.

A few bright spots may (barely) exist: diaspora syndicates like M Founders pooling checks, Endeavor connecting overseas operators to local founders, and the occasional returnee launching a venture in Casablanca. These are exceptions, not a system.

The state knows the opportunity but moves slowly. Currency controls still choke the flow of foreign capital. Investing from abroad is harder than it should be. Incentives for high-skilled returnees remain theoretical. Until the rules change, the diaspora will keep cheering from the sidelines instead of wiring money.

Even if regulation improves, there’s a deeper issue: no one has built the pipes. A Moroccan angel in Boston doesn’t know which founders are real. A founder in Casablanca doesn’t know how to reach that angel. Trust, matchmaking, and consistent community building are missing. Occasional pitch events in Paris or Dubai won’t fix that!

If Morocco wants diaspora capital, it needs to de-risk it. For example a matching scheme (where the Mohammed VI Fund doubles diaspora investments) would move faster than endless roundtables. Other countries have done it. Morocco can too, if it’s serious.

The same applies to diaspora-founded companies. A handful have opened engineering offices in Morocco. Good start, but still marginal. If the government wants nearshoring, it should make it a no-brainer: cheaper space, tax breaks, talent pipelines.

Behind all this sits one inconvenient truth: diaspora goodwill is massive, but goodwill is not a strategy. Moroccans abroad already send over $10B annually in remittances. They’re ready to contribute more (capital, mentorship, networks) but only if the ecosystem stops fighting them at every turn.

Activate even a small fraction of that global network, and Morocco’s startup landscape changes overnight. Keep doing what we’re doing, and the diaspora will keep building world-class companies…just not in Morocco.

Scale or Stall: The Make-or-Break Moment

Morocco’s startup scene currently is a study in contradictions: real ambition powered by real friction. The activity is undeniable, founders everywhere, programs multiplying, officials finally paying attention. But volume isn’t progress. Morocco risks becoming an ecosystem that looks busy while failing to produce companies that scale.

The next few years are the moment of truth. Either Morocco breaks through the ceiling or gets locked into a long-term reputation as “promising but not delivering.” The only metric that matters now is scale: bigger rounds, bigger revenues, bigger outcomes.

A true breakthrough is simple to define: a few startups raising $10–20M growth rounds without relocating, backed by both local and foreign VCs and the Mohammed VI Fund on top. A couple of exits north of $50–100M. Maybe even a modest IPO. These events would reset confidence, recycle capital, and finally establish a real venture engine. Without them, nothing changes.

The downside is equally clear: if the Series A gap persists, the best founders will keep moving their headquarters elsewhere. Without exits, local VCs won’t raise successor funds. Talent will drift to safer corporate jobs. Global investors will conclude Morocco is too small to matter. The ecosystem won’t implode…it’ll quietly stagnate.

The fixes are not complicated, but they require actual commitment:

• Government must stop issuing press releases and start removing friction: capital controls, slow policies, weak startup laws.

• Local VCs need to syndicate up, not sideways: bigger rounds, foreign co-investors, more discipline.

• Founders have to raise their ambitions and their product standards: “good for Morocco” is not good enough.

• Corporates must decide whether startups are strategic or irrelevant and act accordingly.

• Diaspora must shift from sentimental support to real capital, real mentorship, real company-building.

Other markets have made this jump. Egypt did it and a handful of growth-stage winners emerged. The UAE sprinted ahead by importing brains and money at scale. None of this is mysterious. Morocco doesn’t need a new playbook, it needs to execute one that already works.

The country is now at a binary fork: scale or stall. Early wins got Morocco on the map, but they don’t guarantee anything. The future depends on whether the ecosystem can produce not just many startups, but materially large ones. That means fixing the funding ladder, kickstarting a real exit cycle, upgrading talent, simplifying operations, and mobilizing Moroccans everywhere.

Here’s the uncomfortable truth: Morocco hasn’t earned the right to celebrate the beginning until it proves it can handle the middle. The next few years will show whether this ecosystem becomes a durable force, or another case study in unrealized potential. The mandate for anyone serious about building here is straightforward: “Make Morocco a place where startups don’t just launch, but scale and stay.”

See you in the next one!

Leave a comment

During the last few weeks in Rabat, the founders of Done.ma unveiled what they proudly called “Morocco’s first super app.” In one platform, Done promises to handle everything “from food to shopping and various services”, as one excited launch announcement put it. The buzz is real: local tech circles have been eager to see a homegrown “app of apps” that can do it all, inspired by the WeChats and Gojeks of the world. Done’s launch follows a broader trend in Morocco – and Africa at large – where startups are racing to label themselves super apps. Another Moroccan startup, ORA, recently raised funding to build a similar all-in-one platform, touting features ranging from peer payments and e-commerce to social networking, all inside one app. Enthusiasm for this model is palpable, and it’s easy to see why: who wouldn’t want to be the digital hub of their users' daily lives?

Yet amid the fanfare, a crucial question lingers: Are these startups putting the cart before the horse? History suggests that the most successful super apps did not start out trying to be super apps at all. And that might be where many Moroccan aspirants are getting it wrong. Before we dive headlong into the super app gold rush, it’s worth examining how the giants of the genre actually got to be so “super.” Spoiler: it wasn’t by doing everything from day one :)

Subscribe now

Big Super Apps started small (really really small)

Think of any tech giant known as a super app today, and trace its origins. A striking pattern always emerges: they began with a razor-sharp focus on a single, high-utility service, earned user trust and high engagement there, and only then methodically expanded into new offerings and services. A few examples illustrate this focus-first strategy:

• WeChat (China) – In 2011, WeChat launched simply as a mobile messaging app, akin to WhatsApp. No payments, no games, no shopping – just chat. It gained hundreds of millions of users on the back of that core messaging experience. Only later did Tencent layer in payments (WeChat Pay came in 2013), and then a plethora of mini-apps and services. By not trying to be “everything” upfront, WeChat first became the default daily communication tool for a billion users. That gave it the primacy of user relationship needed to introduce payments, shopping, ride-hailing, and more without users blinking. (Fun fact: after WeChat added its wallet feature in 2013, its user base surged to 400 million within a year – a testament to how a trusted core app can quickly convert users to new services.)
  

• Gojek (Indonesia) – Gojek’s story starts not with an all-purpose app, but with ojeks (motorcycle taxis). In 2010 it was a humble call center for ordering bike rides. When it launched a smartphone app in 2015, it offered just a few related services (ride-hailing, courier delivery, food delivery) to solve everyday transport and logistics needs. Crucially, all those services leveraged the same core asset: a network of drivers. Only after Gojek became synonymous with getting around Jakarta did it branch out. Fast forward, Gojek transformed into a true super app with 20+ services from massages to digital payments, and amassed about 170 million users in Southeast Asia by 2020. The key was that each new service piggybacked on a platform that users were already opening daily for rides and deliveries.
  

• Grab (Southeast Asia) – Similarly, Grab started in 2012 as MyTeksi, a simple taxi-hailing app in Malaysia. It solved a specific local problem (unsafe, unreliable taxis) with a mobile solution. Over years, Grab expanded stepwise – private cars, then food delivery, then fintech – effectively earning permission from users to move into new domains. Today, Grab is a NASDAQ-listed super app operating in eight countries and valued in the tens of billions, but its origin was nothing more complicated than booking a cab. As Emeka Ajene article noted, unlike WeChat’s messaging roots, “Gojek & Grab both offer ride-hailing as their core service and have become ‘must-own’ apps” largely because public transport in their markets was underdeveloped. In other words, they nailed a high-frequency, high-friction use case “ daily transportation “ before attempting to conquer other verticals.
  

• Paytm (India) – Now one of India’s prominent super apps, Paytm didn’t burst onto the scene doing 50 things. It launched in 2010 as a mobile recharge service, a simple wallet to top up prepaid phone credits. This was a frequent need in a country where most people’s phones were prepaid. Once Paytm became a verb for recharging (“Paytm karo” became slang for “make a payment”), it gradually expanded into bill payments, e-commerce, movie tickets, banking, investments, you name it. A decade on, that single-use-case start blossomed into an app offering “a thousand plus” services in payments, commerce, and finance to over 333 million consumers and 21 million merchants. It’s a classic case of land and expand: land with a narrow service that hooks users, then expand into their adjacent needs. Paytm’s massive user base was built on trust earned from something as mundane as phone bills.

The are many other example around the world, Alipay began as an escrow payments service for Alibaba’s e-commerce site. Meituan in China started with group-buy deals before becoming a catch-all lifestyle app. The pattern is so consistent it’s almost a playbook: get users to rely on you for one thing first. In short, focus bred loyalty, and loyalty became the foundation for expansion.

Why focus first matters (especially in emerging markets)

If you think the stories above sound far removed from Morocco, think again. The underlying logic “start with a high-frequency, high-utility wedge“ is even more critical in emerging markets like Morocco. Here’s why a focus-first strategy isn’t just a nice ideal but a practical necessity:

1. Trust is hard to earn (and easy to lose). In markets where many consumers are coming online for the first time or are generally skeptical of digital services, trust is everything. A new startup asking users to do ten different things in one app, from hailing rides to storing money to ordering groceries, is asking for an enormous leap of faith. Users will hesitate: Is this app really good at any of these services? It’s far easier to convince someone to try you for a single service that clearly meets an immediate need. Deliver on that promise exceptionally well: a hot meal delivered fast, or a safe ride home at 2 AM, or a seamless bill payment → and you’ve built a reservoir of trust. That user is now much more likely to try your second service. But if you fumble any one of the many promises a super app makes early on (late deliveries, glitchy payments, etc.), you sour their perception of the whole platform. Focus acts as a quality filter: it forces you to nail the experience. It’s no coincidence that WeChat’s meteoric rise in engagement came after years of perfecting chat, or that Gojek’s brand was built on reliable rides. In Morocco, a focused app can more quickly become synonymous with quality in one domain, a reputation that can later carry over to other domains. I had the privilege of launching Glovo and witnessing its rapid scale in Morocco. If there was one core obsession that guided us, it was becoming the go-to app for anything you needed delivered: fast and reliably.

2. Customer acquisition costs (CAC) are sky-high when you’re doing everything. Each service in a super app is essentially a mini-business with its own economics and user acquisition channels. Acquiring a user who wants food delivery is different from acquiring one looking for a loan. Giants like Grab and Gojek could spend billions to cross-subsidize and promote multiple services, but a Moroccan startup as of today (hopefully it changes soon) isn’t sitting on that kind of war chest. It’s far more efficient to win a narrow customer segment deeply than to scratch the surface of many segments. For example, if you become the go-to app for, say, ordering lunch in Casablanca’s business district, you can gain a critical mass of engaged users relatively cheaply (perhaps via word-of-mouth and targeted marketing in that niche). With that user base in hand, layering a new offering (maybe a grocery service in the evenings) has a much lower CAC, you’re marketing to existing users in your app for “free.” On the flip side, launching with six mediocre services means six different marketing campaigns and a diluted value proposition (“We do everything, kind of okay” doesn’t convert). iFood founder once said that if you layer a mediocre service into your app, the churn in your core service will be impacted and hence you impact negativity the whole customer experience. In a resource-constrained startup environment, focus is and will always be your friend.

3. Infrastructure and operations are limiting factors. Let’s face it: executing even one of these services is hard. To do food delivery at scale, you need drivers, restaurants, strong algorithms, customer support and a ton of money. To do payments, you face integrations with banks, regulators, and agent networks for cash in/out. To do e-commerce, you need inventory or seller onboarding and reliable shipping. Now imagine trying to build all of that simultaneously as a startup. It’s a recipe for broken systems and burnt cash. Many African super apps have learned this the hard way. OPay in Nigeria tried to juggle ride-hailing, food delivery, a bus service, and even a tricycle taxi service alongside its payments business. The result? Within two years, it had to shut down or “pause” its transport and logistics offerings (OBus, ORide, OCar, OExpress) and refocus purely on its fintech core. The company cited harsh conditions (regulatory bans on bike taxis, COVID-19, etc.), but the underlying issue was trying to do too much too soon. In contrast, the one part of OPay that truly broke out was its mobile money service, which had always been its primary play. The moral: each additional service is not just a software feature, it’s an operational beast. Morocco’s infrastructure (from courier networks to digital payment rails) is improving, but still presents enough challenges that a startup would be wise to tackle them one at a time.

4. The user experience can suffer. Super apps promise convenience, one login, one interface for everything. But if not executed well, they can become jack-of-all-trades, master-of-none platforms that frustrate users. Imagine an app where the food ordering section has limited restaurants because the team also spent time building a mediocre shopping section with limited stores, and a half-baked chat feature no one uses. A savvy user will simply stick to the dedicated food app or the dedicated chat app that does it better. This is a real risk!! If Moroccan super apps bombard new users with a buffet of half-ready services, they may end up using none. Onboarding flows, UI design, customer support, all these have to scale with complexity. Many of Morocco's new internet users might not have high-end phones or unlimited data, a bloated app trying to load dozens of features could literally perform poorly on their devices. A lean, focused app avoids becoming a UX swamp.

All these factors boil down to one principle: earn the right to expand. You don’t get to be a super app just by deciding to bundle many services together: “you gain the right to be a super-app by first gaining primacy of the user relationship through a core use case”. In plain terms, do one thing so well that users keep coming back, and only then do you have a shot at successfully offering them a second, third, or tenth thing.

The Moroccan context: Hard truths and Opportunities

It’s worth noting that the super app craze in Morocco isn’t happening in a vacuum. Across Africa, entrepreneurs have been eyeing the successes of Asia’s super apps and asking “why not here?” Following the Chinese examples, many African startups have launched with ambitions to replicate the super app model. A few examples are Gozem in West Africa, SafeBoda in East Africa, and Yassir in North Africa, all are in the game, trying to bundle services from transport to payments. The investor dollars behind them suggests there is real appetite for all-in-one platforms on the continent. After all, Africa’s digital boom is fueled by a young, mobile-first population and increasing internet connectivity, a fertile ground for super apps.

But the same context presents unique challenges. Fragmented regulation, cash-based economies, and the dominance of global incumbents in certain verticals (hello, WhatsApp and Facebook) mean a copy-paste of the Asian super app playbook is not straightforward. Take messaging, for instance. WeChat could start as a messaging app in China partly because there was no entrenched alternative at the time. In Morocco (and virtually all of Africa), WhatsApp is already the default messenger. A startup that dreams of being a WeChat-like super app via messaging is probably dreaming, detroning an app used by literally everyone is a fool’s errand. This is why most African super apps choose a different wedge: often ride-hailing or payments, where there’s still white space or unmet demand.

The Moroccan market itself has some clear “wedge” opportunities if one looks closely at local needs and pain points. Understanding these can point the way to a smarter super app strategy, one that starts focused on solving a real problem before expanding. For me, a few potential wedges stand out:

• Digital Payments & Financial Inclusion: Morocco, like many African markets, has a large population of unbanked or underbanked citizens. Cash remains king. A trustworthy, easy-to-use mobile wallet could be a game-changer as a foundational service. This might mean enabling peer-to-peer transfers, bill payments, or mobile phone top-ups digitally, these are services with nearly universal demand. A super app that first becomes the way people send money to family, receive remittances from abroad, or pay utility bills could quickly become a daily habit. Once you’re managing someone’s money flows, you’ve earned a huge amount of trust, and you can leverage that to offer commerce, loans, or any number of services. Put simply, fintech can be the anchor, few players are already very well positioned for this (think of CashPlus). For Moroccan startups, focusing on a payments wallet or mobile banking service might be the most potent entry strategy, setting the stage for a broader platform down the line (but again stay focused and do not try to do everything at the same time).

  

• Urban Mobility or Delivery Logistics: Morocco’s cities are modernizing fast, but transportation and delivery infrastructure haven’t fully caught up. Ride-hailing faced setbacks (Uber’s rocky exit in 2018 is well-known, though its subsidiary Careem still operates and they recently announced their comeback to the country!) due to regulatory friction. Still, solving urban mobility remains a massive opportunity! (Hello World Cup 2030). A startup that can lawfully and reliably move people in cities like Casablanca or Marrakech would fill a real gap. Daily commutes are a high-frequency need, crack that, and users will happily check your app multiple times a day. If not people, then goods: the rise of e-commerce in Morocco means there’s growing demand for efficient last-mile delivery. A focused service on fast, affordable delivery could become indispensable to a segment of users, the best example for this is Glovo, wherever you go now food delivery in the country is linked with the Glovo brand. How did they do it? well as we said a single-service focus always wins mindshare. Still, a word of caution here: logistics is operationally heavy, so whichever slice (people or packages) a startup picks, it should double down on doing that better than anyone (faster pickups, better coverage, better prices) rather than prematurely launching ten services. There’s a reason Gojek and Grab started with rides, it allowed them to build driver networks and routing tech that later powered food and parcel deliveries. Moroccan super app aspirants could follow a similar path: build the network first with one service, then extend its use.
  

• Hyper-Local Services with Cultural Fit: Another angle is to focus on a service that taps into specifically Moroccan habits and then expand outward. For example, a super app might start by being the go-to platform for hiring local domestic help (cleaners, handymen) in a country where these services are often sourced informally. Or perhaps a focus on marketplace for local goods, imagine an app that first becomes known as the place to buy and sell traditional Moroccan crafts or argan oil products, building a community of buyers/sellers, then later adding more categories. The initial user base might be smaller than something like payments, but passionate. Once you have that niche, you can grow horizontally. The key is that initial vertical should be something with high engagement and a local twist that global competitors aren’t already dominating. Think of how Bukalapak in Indonesia (not exactly a super app, but instructive) focused on digitizing mom-and-pop shops, or how Careem in the Middle East introduced local features like scheduling car rides for prayer times. In Morocco, culture-specific insights could reveal a unique wedge that’s not obvious from the outside.

Avoiding the “All-In-One” trap

The vision of a super app is undeniably attractive: if you succeed, you become a gatekeeper of the digital economy, touching every transaction. But trying to launch as a super app on day one is like trying to be a decathlete before you can run a 5K. As we’ve explored, the global champions earned their stripes by starting with a singular focus. They reached what we call product-market fit in one area, and only then did they leverage that position to expand. In the words of Samora: the focus on solving real-world, everyday services first is what sets up a super app for success in emerging markets. It’s after you’ve won the morning (perhaps by getting someone to commute with your service daily) that you can win the afternoon (by delivering their lunch) and the evening (by being their mobile bank).

For Moroccan founders and investors fascinated with the super app concept, here’s a grounded playbook to consider:

1. Pick your battle wisely: Identify a service that is frequent, high-need, and currently underserved. One test is to ask: will users potentially open this app daily or weekly for this one thing? If not, keep iterating on the concept. The super apps that thrive are the ones users habitually use. If the initial use case is too niche or infrequent (buying concert tickets, for example), it won’t give you the engagement needed to expand into other services.
   

2. Be the best at that one thing: This can’t be overstated. Your version 1.0 needs to absolutely delight users in the core service. That means outdoing any single-vertical competitors on their turf. If it’s food delivery, offer the fastest delivery or best selection in your launch city. If it’s payments, make it the simplest, lowest-fee experience around. Early user love will translate into organic growth, and stories you can tell when you introduce feature #2 or #3 down the line. In contrast, a lukewarm reception to a do-it-all app is hard to recover from, users will have labeled you “so-so” and moved on.
   

3. Leverage cross-service synergies, but one at a time: Once you have that loyal user base for Service A, design your expansion to Service B in a way that adds value rather than distracts. The expansions that work often make the original service even stickier. For instance, when WeChat added payments, it supercharged the chat experience, suddenly you could send money to friends in a message. When Grab added food delivery, it gave their drivers more jobs (lowering wait times) and gave riders a new reason to open the app at meal times. The idea is to layer services in a way that they reinforce each other, not just coexist under one roof.
   

4. Scale operations in step with offerings: A super app isn’t just an interface, it’s an ops machine. Ensure that before you launch Service B, Service A’s operational backbone is solid and maybe even able to support B. For example, if you have a fleet of couriers doing restaurant deliveries, that could be extended to pharmacy deliveries or document couriers without starting from scratch. The lesson here is: don’t hesitate to focus on what’s working and hold off on what’s not. You can always launch new services later, but if you burn user goodwill early, you might not get “a later”.

Conclusion: The Long Game for Morocco’s Super Apps

The dream of building “Morocco’s WeChat” or “Africa’s Grab” is a compelling one, and not impossible. The country’s demographics and digital trajectory mean that one day, an all-in-one app could indeed become the central hub of people’s digital lives. But the path to that summit isn’t a straight line, it’s a stepwise climb. The first generation of super app aspirants in Morocco have the unenviable task of being both pioneers and guinea pigs. They will shape how consumers perceive super apps, and by extension, they carry the responsibility to get the model right.

The early signs suggest a need for course correction. Done.ma’s launch fanfare about doing everything or ORA’s rapid expansion into multiple services might need to give way to a more grounded narrative of doing one thing well to start. This isn’t a setback, it’s simply stage-appropriate strategy. Consider it a chapter in the lean startup ethos: do things that don’t scale, until they do. In this context, “not scaling” means perhaps not scaling your scope too wide too fast. It’s entirely plausible that the incoming players find their groove in one vertical, say, dominating food delivery or payments, and that becomes the cornerstone of a future super app empire. The founders just have to be patient and disciplined enough to follow that playbook rather than chase the super app label prematurely.

There’s also a role for investors and ecosystem supporters here. Rather than push startups to pitch themselves as “the next super app” from the outset (because it sounds sexy), they should encourage focus and measure success by engagement depth, not breadth of features. The irony is, if you focus on depth first, breadth often follows naturally. If you focus on breadth first, you might achieve neither.

Morocco is at an exciting juncture. The ingredients for big tech successes are coming into place: talent, capital, market hunger. A Moroccan super app that truly wins users’ hearts and minds will likely emerge in the coming years. But it will emerge not as an overstuffed super app at birth, rather as a generalist that earned its credentials as a specialist initially. The super apps of tomorrow may very well rise from the single-purpose apps of today.

So, to all the ambitious builders in Casablanca, Rabat, and beyond: dream of the super app, yes, but start by building a super app (small “s”, small “a”) a superb application for one essential service. Nail that, and you’ll have all the momentum (and user trust) you need to layer on the rest. After all, the pyramids of Giza weren’t built by trying to place the capstone first, they were built brick by brick, level by level, and stand the test of millennia. Morocco’s digital pyramids should be no different.

Have fun!

See you in the next one!

Leave a comment

The Talent Dilemma: Undiscovered vs. Proven

The typical approach to hiring focuses on filling roles with experienced candidates. Rabois argues that startups can’t afford to rely on traditional candidates, the ones everyone else is competing to hire. Instead, he encourages looking for “undiscovered talent,” the individuals overlooked by bigger players but full of potential. Think of the 1980 U.S. Olympic hockey team, as Rabois describes it: a group of “misfits” who, despite lacking professional experience, defeated the Soviet powerhouse.

This isn’t about rejecting experience but identifying individuals with raw skills and ambition. For startups with lean budgets, the lesson here is crucial: take calculated risks on people with potential over those with polished resumes.

Actionable Insight: Instead of aiming for traditional “safe hires,” leverage personal networks. Ask each new hire to list the ten most impressive people they know, and reach out to them. This practice helped companies like PayPal and Facebook in their early days and may yield untapped potential.

Building a Recruiting System: Gene Pool Engineering

Rabois emphasizes creating a deliberate recruiting process he terms “gene pool engineering.” He suggests looking at companies known for having employees with the skills you need and then focusing on finding talent within that “gene pool.” Once you identify companies with a rich talent base, reach out directly to those individuals with a compelling pitch.

Startups can also use social media and company visibility as tools for recruitment. Rabois advises that announcing a funding round, for example, is more useful for attracting talent than securing customers. For candidates, a visible startup with some brand recognition can reassure family members or friends skeptical of career risks.

Actionable Insight: Build a “trailer” for your company, akin to a movie teaser, highlighting why your startup is the most exciting venture for ambitious professionals. Think of your startup’s “trailer” as a tool to attract candidates beyond just the first few employees in your network.

The Power of Nontraditional Interviewing

For Rabois, standard interview scripts fall short. He champions a dynamic approach, matching candidates’ strengths and motivations with real problems the company faces. This perspective views interviews as opportunities to assess not only skills but also whether a candidate has an “unfair advantage” in solving a particular problem.

He offers two revealing questions:

1. What would you have done differently as CEO in your last role?

2. If you could do anything with your life, what would it be?

These questions serve a dual purpose. First, they allow the interviewer to gauge candidates’ independence and creativity. Second, they offer insights into the person’s values and motivations—essential for determining cultural fit.

Actionable Insight: Look beyond resumes. People can demonstrate the qualities you seek—like problem-solving and risk-taking—in unconventional ways. Rabois hired a key player based on how they played soccer, not for their business experience.

Speed as a Strategic Advantage

The longer a hiring process, the more likely it is to lose a strong candidate to a competitor. After all, speed is one of a startup’s greatest assets. A lean interview process with quick decision-making shows candidates that your company is agile and decisive, enhancing your attractiveness as an employer.

Additionally, Rabois cautions against excessive interviews. Meeting with five people or fewer is usually sufficient. “Every additional person slows down the process and dilutes focus,” he says, and research supports that diminishing returns set in quickly in extended interviews.

Actionable Insight: Keep your hiring pipeline lean and prioritize quick turnarounds. Challenge your team to reduce interview rounds and extend offers promptly to avoid losing top talent to slower processes.

Hire for Value Creation, Not Just Value Protection

When evaluating potential hires, Rabois draws a line between roles focused on “creating” value and those dedicated to “protecting” it. Value creation roles benefit from fresh, creative thinkers who are likely to be unconventional. In contrast, value protection roles, like compliance or legal positions, require experience to navigate established practices and mitigate risks.

Rabois also believes in hiring potential founders, even if they express an interest in starting their own company someday. These individuals tend to be highly motivated, ambitious, and likely to push boundaries —> qualities valuable in a fast-growing startup.

Actionable Insight: Embrace candidates who see your company as a stepping stone to their own future ventures. They are often some of the most driven, innovative employees you’ll ever have.

Avoiding Mediocrity: The Case Against A-Minus Hires

There is a clear distinction between having an incomplete team and a mediocre one. Mediocrity spreads and compounds within an organization, while gaps in a team can often be managed until a top-tier candidate is found. Keith’s advice: If you’re unsure, don’t hire. The opportunity cost of waiting for the right candidate is far outweighed by the negative impact of a mediocre hire.

Actionable Insight: In roles critical to your startup’s trajectory, aim for top-tier talent even if it means waiting longer. Consider every hire as a critical contributor to your company’s “cult” of excellence.

Conclusion: Embracing the Art of Hiring

Hiring isn’t just filling roles, it’s about building a team that aligns with your company’s mission, ethos, and ambition. By focusing on unconventional talent, prioritizing speed, and crafting a process that seeks not just skills but cultural alignment, you can create a team that is a competitive advantage in itself.

Hiring may be one of the hardest skills to master as a founder, but with a deliberate and contrarian approach, it becomes a powerful lever for growth. Embrace the challenge, and remember: the team you build is the company you build!!

Happy Hunting!

The Power of Probing: Going Beyond the Surface

Interviews often start with well-rehearsed answers. A candidate might explain their departure from a previous job as a "disagreement with the Manager." It's a common narrative, neatly packaged. However, the real story unfolds when you push deeper. Imagine peeling back the layers: initially, the candidate describes raising objections in a meeting. As you probe further, they admit to a heated argument. Finally, the truth emerges—they slapped the Manager and were fired. Each level of questioning peels back another layer, bringing you closer to the unvarnished truth.

This technique, asking more than three levels down, is crucial. It reveals the raw, unprepared responses that give genuine insight into a candidate's behavior and mindset. It's not just about what they did, but why and how they did it.

Reading Between the Lines: The Subconscious Cues

Often, the most telling details come not from direct answers but from the subconscious fillers and side comments. When a candidate dismissively mentions, "I guess a job is a job," it speaks volumes. This offhand comment may suggests a lack of passion or motivation, a potential red flag for any role that requires enthusiasm and engagement.

Paying attention to these nuances helps in assessing not just what a candidate says, but how they truly feel about their work and their role in a team. It's about catching those fleeting moments of honesty that slip through the cracks of their prepared responses.

Efficiency and Direction: Maximizing Interview Time

Time is a precious commodity in interviews. With limited minutes to make a significant decision, it's essential to be strategic. This might mean interrupting a rambling answer to steer the conversation back to critical points. The goal is to extract as much relevant information as possible within the constrained time frame.

Moreover, avoiding vague answers is key. Ambiguity often hides a lack of knowledge or an attempt to evade the truth. By asking for specifics—"Can you walk me through a specific product's roadmap process?"—you force clarity and precision, leaving no room for generalities.

The Candidate Experience: Balancing Rigor with Empathy

While the primary goal is to assess the candidate, it's equally important to sell them on the role and the company. An interview should be a rigorous process that challenges candidates to think differently, but it should also be respectful and considerate of their stress levels. A question like, "What do you do for fun?" at the start can help build rapport and ease nerves, setting a positive tone for the rest of the interview.

Cultural Fit: What to Look For

In the fast-paced world of tech and startups, cultural fit is the secret sauce that turns a good team into a great one. Beyond just the resume, it’s about finding people who mesh with your company’s vibe and mission. Here’s how to spot them:

1. Team Player: Are they all about collaboration, or do they play the blame game? Listen to how they talk about past projects—do they own up to mistakes collectively, or do they point fingers at "management" or "other teams"?

2. Ambitious and Gritty: Look for those who’ve hustled through tough times. Ask them to share war stories where they’ve gone above and beyond. This kind of tenacity often predicts who will push your startup forward.

3. Intentional Decision Maker: People who know why they’re here usually stick around. Candidates who can explain their career choices thoughtfully are likely to be more focused and content in their roles.

4. High Standards: Have they thrived in high-performing environments? Their past can be a crystal ball for future performance. Dig into their experiences to see if they’re used to high bars and tough challenges.

5. Positive Attitude: Past happiness can be a great indicator of future enthusiasm. If they’ve never found joy in a job before, it’s a red flag. Your startup deserves someone who’ll bring positive energy.

6. Humble and Open-Minded: Flexibility and respect for differing opinions are non-negotiable. Check if they can roll with decisions they might not agree with—this is key for maintaining harmony and dynamism in a team.

7. Self-Aware: Do they have a realistic grasp of their strengths and weaknesses? People who understand how they’re perceived are better at personal growth and teamwork. 

8. Diligent: Did they do their homework on your company? This shows they’re genuinely interested and serious about the opportunity, not just sending out blanket applications.

9. Clear and Concise Communicator: In the startup world, clarity is king. A candidate who can articulate their thoughts effectively is invaluable for collaboration and decision-making.

Finding the right cultural fit isn't just about checking boxes—it's about envisioning how a candidate will gel with your team and propel your mission forward. Look for these traits to build a powerhouse team that's ready to tackle the next big challenge.

Mastering References

References are more than just a formality. They should deepen your understanding of the candidate’s strengths and weaknesses. Here’s how to get the most out of them:

1. Triangulate: Probe different references on the same points to confirm your hypotheses.

2. Push for Specifics: Avoid settling for generic positive feedback. Ask for concrete examples.

3. Evaluate the Referencer: The credibility of the reference giver is crucial. A high performer’s endorsement carries more weight.

4. Confirm Professional Relationship: Ensure the references are professional, not social acquaintances.

5. Percentile Question: Ask where the candidate ranks among people they've worked with. Top performers will usually rank high.

Conclusion: The Art of Uncovering the Truth

Interviewing is as much an art as it is a science. It's about asking the right questions, digging deeper, and paying attention to the subtle cues that reveal a candidate's true character. By combining rigorous assessment with empathy and respect, you can not only find the right fit for your team but also create a positive interview experience that leaves candidates with a good impression of your organization. In the end, the goal is to discover the truth beneath the surface and make informed decisions that benefit both the company and the candidate.

And remember if it’s not a HELL yes!! it’s a no.

Happy interviewing!

Subscribe now

Breaking Down the Journey to a Promotion

There are a few common roadblocks many face when aiming for a promotion. Let’s dive into these challenges:

1. 🪄🪄Having Someone in Your Corner: Seeing the Magic in you 🪄🪄

In any great game of soccer, the roar of the crowd often follows a fantastic goal. But seasoned fans know that behind that spectacular shot was a series of strategic passes, blocks, and maneuvers. Each player, from the star striker to the steadfast defender, contributes to the team's victory. This dynamic isn’t limited to the soccer field. In the fast-paced realms of tech and startups, success is often carved out of collective effort, support, and mentorship.

Many of us can relate to feeling like the unsung hero. In the world of tech, where innovation is paramount, it's easy for consistent performers to be overshadowed by the dazzling new app or the groundbreaking product launch. But remember, behind every Steve Jobs there was a Steve Wozniak, behind every success story, there’s a mentor or guide who believed in that spark of talent and nurtured it.

It’s crucial to recognize the value of mentorship. Mentors offer not just knowledge but also connections, opportunities, and encouragement. They can guide you through challenges, celebrate your achievements, and most importantly, they can see the 'magic' within you when others might not.

However, this mentorship relationship is a two-way street. If you feel as though your contributions and potential are flying under the radar, be proactive. Communication is paramount. Initiate discussions with your supervisors about your ambitions, seek feedback, and clarify where you see yourself in the company's future. Every great athlete communicates with their coach, and in the business world, it’s no different.

That said, self-reflection is vital. Sometimes, our current roles might not align with our skills or aspirations. Just as an athlete might seek a transfer to better showcase their talents, pivoting to a role that truly appreciates and utilizes your unique capabilities could be the right move. Remember, there's a vast tech ecosystem out there, with myriad roles where your particular set of skills can be recognized and cherished.

Feedback isn’t just for bosses. Your peers, those in the trenches with you, can offer valuable insights. Their perspective can provide a new angle, offer constructive feedback, or even help identify opportunities that might have been otherwise overlooked.

In the grand scheme, your career is a marathon, not a sprint. Along the journey, there will be hurdles, triumphs, and invaluable lessons. Embrace the mindset of a team player, seek out mentors, communicate openly, and continuously strive for growth. By doing so, you ensure your unique 'magic' isn’t just recognized but also becomes a pivotal part of your team's success story.

To sum it up, find your “magic” and let others talk about it.

2. 🪜🪜Finding the Next Step: Available Job Roles 🪜🪜

Imagine your career as a ladder. Each rung represents new roles or responsibilities. It symbolizes our aspirations, the milestones we set for ourselves. But often, even when we're ready, we find the next rung missing. This isn't a measure of our ability or worth; it’s a reflection of the circumstances. There might not be a higher position open right now, or maybe the company is restructuring. Whatever the reason, it's essential to remember it’s not about us being insufficient.

Much like waiting for an elevator, there are moments in our career when we're all set, eagerly waiting, but it feels like the opportunity is delayed. Maybe the elevator is temporarily out of service or is just taking a bit longer. We’ve all experienced that frustration, haven’t we? You’ve pressed the button, and you know the elevator works, but it’s just not there yet. Similarly, even if you've got the skills, put in the hard work, and are eager to climb, sometimes the next opportunity just doesn't align with your timing.

However, these pauses allow us to reflect. Even without a step up, there’s plenty happening on the step you're on. Are there new skills emerging around you? Is there a side project you could take on? How's the work culture feeling these days? Sometimes, our growth isn't just vertical; it spreads outwards, expanding our horizons in ways we hadn’t anticipated.

But, if the pause feels prolonged, and you feel the ladder you're on isn't taking you any higher, it might be time to shift your gaze. There’s a whole world of ladders out there, after all. Talk to peers, mentors, and industry friends. You'd be surprised how often a casual conversation can lead to a lead. By being proactive, you're not only ensuring you’re ready for the next step but also making yourself a top choice when opportunities arise.

Your career, much like any journey, will have its straight roads and detours. It’s all about navigating them with grace, learning from each experience, and being ready for the next adventure. Remember, it’s the journey, the experiences, the lessons, and the stories that make the destination worth it.

3. 🕰️🕰️ Staying Patient: Growth Takes Time 🕰️🕰️

In an era where immediate results are glorified, it's easy to be swept away by tales of overnight success, especially in sectors like tech and startups. But it's essential to remember that these stories, while inspiring, often don't paint the whole picture. Much like the patience and nurturing a tree needs to grow tall and sturdy, carving a significant career path demands a mix of patience, resilience, and continuous effort.

Instant fame is a tantalizing prospect. We've all heard stories of apps going viral or individuals skyrocketing to success. However, there's an inherent difference between a meteoric rise and sustained growth. Consider the one-hit wonders that momentarily dazzled but faded away. Contrast them with figures who, over years, built their reputation, fine-tuned their skills, and became industry cornerstones. Their success stories might not have been about instant glory, but they're enduring and impactful.

In the realm of tech and startups, each role, irrespective of its scale, offers learning opportunities. It's in the challenges that we often find our most significant growth. Instead of being disheartened, these moments should be embraced. They not only shape our outlook but also bolster our problem-solving prowess. And this journey is not without its set of failures. Yet, it's persistence that sets apart many entrepreneurial legends from the rest. Their initial paths were far from smooth, but they persevered, learned, and emerged stronger.

Leadership narratives of individuals like Jeff Bezos or Elon Musk are illustrative. Today, they might be tech titans, but their beginnings were filled with obstacles and naysayers. Their stories underscore the importance of staying committed to one's vision, even when immediate results seem elusive.

While keeping an overarching goal in mind is vital, it's equally important to relish the journey. Celebrate the small victories, learn from the setbacks, and constantly evolve. Remember, moving slowly doesn't equate to stagnation. Sometimes, it's about ensuring that when you do scale those career peaks, you're equipped and ready.

In essence, the professional world is not just about quick sprints but also marathons. It's about understanding that with patience, dedication, and a growth mindset, you're not merely racing towards a finish line but crafting a rich, enduring legacy.

4. 💪💪 Improving Yourself: Always Room to Grow 💪💪

In both our personal and professional lives, there's always a chapter yet to be perfected. Imagine two scenarios: a conversation with a customer that could have been smoother or a software tool where familiarity might have saved hours. The beauty lies in acknowledging these nuances and seeking growth. Let's delve into why and how we should harness this approach for a soaring career.

Understanding our strengths and shortcomings starts with a dash of introspection. It's the small moments - like wishing we had communicated better or noting that a colleague seems more adept with the latest software. By being attuned to these signals, we lay the first brick in our improvement journey.

Communication, especially with customers, can't be emphasized enough. They're the pulse of any business. Honing our interaction skills, being more receptive, and conveying ideas succinctly can transform casual interactions into lasting relationships. Attending a workshop or even a casual chat with a customer can offer pearls of wisdom.

In this digital era, a command over technological tools is like a feather in one's cap. Whether you're diving into data analytics or creating a compelling graphic, proficiency adds value to your role and team.

However, it's not just about self-assessment. The world around us - colleagues, mentors, and even friends - can offer insights we might miss. A casual coffee chat or a structured feedback session can provide a roadmap to where enhancement is needed. Embracing feedback isn’t about focusing on criticism but cherishing the chance to grow.

Continuous growth is also about being in tune with the dynamic world. The spheres of business and tech are like shifting sands. Subscribing to a relevant newsletter, engaging in a seminar, or merely having an enlightening conversation can make you stand out in the crowd.

Remember, while sharpening specific skills is essential, nurturing qualities like adaptability, resilience, and an ever-curious mindset can be equally impactful. Sprinkle in some reading, a dash of mindfulness, or even pursuing a hobby. These seemingly unrelated activities can stoke the flames of personal growth.

Consistency ties everything together. Progress is a marathon, not a sprint. Setting aside moments, even if they're brief, for self-reflection and growth can work wonders.

In summation, as the world brims with talent, what distinguishes one is the zest for continuous improvement. By identifying gaps, seeking knowledge, and embracing feedback, not only do we enrich our current roles, but we also pave avenues for future opportunities.

📝📝 Wrapping Up: Moving Forward in Your Career

When we break it all down, aiming for a promotion can seem like a clearer path. It's about more than just being good at your job. It's about having supporters, understanding your company's structure, being patient, and always looking for ways to grow. With these insights, I hope you feel more prepared to take on the challenge and move up in your professional journey. Remember, everyone's path is unique, so find what works best for you and keep pushing forward.

Share The African Generalist