 |
|
|
|||||
Africas e-commerce sector is experiencing a renaissance. In 2025, Africas retail e-commerce is expected to reach over $39 billion, and $55 billion by 2029. This growth is driven by ambitious brands, from contemporary fashion labels to innovative lifestyle businesses, capturing both local and international demand. These businesses are leveraging digital commerce and modern payment rails to reach more customers than ever before. E-commerce is also emerging as a critical lever to help businesses recover from economic shocks and unlock the trade potential of the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA). Yet one critical barrier threatens to limit their growth: access to affordable, flexible credit. Medium-scale e-commerce enterprises, those beyond micro-entrepreneurship but not yet large corporations, face a unique financing challenge. These businesses are too large for microfinance but often too small, or perceived as too risky, for traditional commercial banking. Despite steady sales, loyal customers, and growing brand equity, they struggle to secure financing to scale production, expand logistics, or invest in technology to serve a wider market. The financing shortfall for sub-Saharan Africa exceeds $331 billion, with medium-sized consumer-facing businesses among the hardest hit. A report by USAID and eTrade Alliance which surveyed over 2,000 micro, small, and medium-sized enterprises (MSME) in Kenya, Nigeria, and South Africa, shows that these businesses are eager to expand e-commerce capabilities, internet connectivity, and invest in digital transformation, but access to finance remains one of their greatest barriers. Consider, for instance, a mid-sized Nairobi fashion retailer that grew steadily through an online storefront but struggled to finance improved packaging and marketing to reach buyers in Europe. Despite years of consistent sales, it was unable to access credit on reasonable terms because traditional lenders viewed its cash flows as unpredictable. Cases like this are widespread. As Africas middle class expands, with roughly 212 million people projected to reach middle income status by 2030 and consumer spending expected to hit $2 trillion in 2025the demand for e-commerce will surge. However, tight credit access could block supply-side growth. When growing brands cannot secure credit to expand inventory, strengthen logistics, or build new supplier partnerships, they risk ceding market share to bigger, better capitalised competitors. These missed opportunities ripple through ecosystems and impact suppliers, logistics firms, and technology partners that depend on a thriving e-commerce sector. 4 things that need to improve Credit is not a luxury for these businesses. It is essential to transform local brands with global ambitions into long-term economic engines. It can do so by following these four principles. Smarter lending evaluation. Information asymmetry hinders small and medium enterprise (SME) financing in Africa; many small businesses lack formal financial records and credit history. This leads traditional lenders to demand high collateral given difficulty in assessing risk. To overcome this, lenders should use real-time transactional data (e.g., e-commerce sales, inventory, customer reviews) to accurately assess creditworthiness for excluded SMEs. Data-sharing partnerships. Payment providers, marketplaces, distributors, and banks should collaborate to share transaction histories and supply chain data, helping lenders assess risk with confidence. Blended finance and risk-sharing facilities. Scale public-private instruments like the Africa Guarantee Fund and the Bank of Industry risk-sharing arrangements. These reduce lenders risks and help lower the cost of credit. Targeted financing for digital transformation. As the Alliance for eTrade Development research shows, many MSMEs want to invest in better internet connectivity, digital marketing, and fulfilment capabilities but cannot secure affordable loans for these upgrades. New financing products tailored to e-commerce investment would directly unlock their growth potential. The opportunity ahead As governments and the private sector work to advance e-commerce policy frameworks under AfCFTA, prioritizing simpler customs procedures, strengthening cross-border payments, and improving digital ID systems, credit access must rise to the top of the agenda. Payments are a foundation, but credit is a growth driver. We must build the financial tools that empower Africas most ambitious entrepreneurs to dream bigger, scale faster, and compete globally. When they grow, Africa grows. Olugbenga GB Agboola is founder and CEO of Flutterwave.
Category:
E-Commerce
Its time to admit it: Too much of the social impact sector is still funding yesterdays solutions while claiming to advance towards a better tomorrow. Ive been in this sector since I was a teenagerfirst as a volunteer, then a builder, and now the founder of one of the fastest-growing global tech-for-good ecosystems. In July, I spoke at the AI for Good Global Summit in Geneva, where my Tech To The Rescue team co-organized the inaugural Impact Awards with the U.N. Reviewing hundreds of applications made one thing clear: AI is not a spreadsheet upgrade. It’s not a shiny new tool to tape onto old processes. It’s a paradigm shift that will fundamentally change how social impact work gets doneor if it gets done at all. Yet as funding tightens worldwide, too many well-meaning philanthropies and public funders continue to back safe innovation. They’re pouring dwindling dollars into essential training programs and pilots, often without the deeper, fundamental work of building truly AI-native organizations. Or worse, they simply bolt AI onto outdated models as superficial add-ons. This isnt just a tactical mistake. Its a systemic failure. Because the stakes arent theoretical. When the wrong approach wins funding, real communities lose time they dont have. The sectors favorite stance: Were ready Tinkering and experimentation are crucial in innovation; they’re the messy beginning, the fearless exploration of doing something differently. But most current AI upskilling strategies don’t go deep enough. They promise transformation but deliver surface-level tool adoption. They teach nonprofits to use chatbots, or off-the-shelf SaaS without changing the underlying mindset or organizational DNA. Tools alone won’t bridge this glaring gap between today’s organizations and tomorrow’s reality. By 2027, technology will be talking to technology. And how do we respond to that? Currently we translate 20th century workflows into 21st century software. We optimize the wrong things. Were not preparing social impact organizations for a future defined by machine learning, large language models, and autonomous decision systems. Were handing them hammers and asking them to fix microchips. And yes, some of this is our own fault as an industry. We reward safe proposals. We praise incrementalism. We design funding cycles to avoid complexity. And then we act surprised when no one steps up with real change. What AI-native impact could look like At the AI for Good Summit, reviewing projects was a crash course in where the sector is getting it rightand wrong. Some of the winners point to exactly the kind of AI-native, partnership-driven future we need: CareNX Innovations built an AI-powered fetal monitoring system for rural clinics without specialists, helping reduce preventable infant deaths. Not just automation, but new, accessible medical capability. SmartCatch by WorldFish combines machine learning, computer vision, and on-device species recognition to help small-scale fishers manage sustainable catch while fighting biodiversity lossa systems-level intervention that includes everyone. Farmer.Chat from Digital Green offers localized, voice-based agricultural advice in low-literacy, low-connectivity settings. Large language models adapt to context, not just push generic tips. Sophia from Spring ACT is an AI-powered chatbot offering secure, anonymous, multi-language support to domestic violence survivors worldwideshowing how ethics and impact can be built in from the ground up. These arent just shiny demos. Theyre working examples of how AI can help build real, resilient, human-centered solutionsif were willing to fund them. Stop funding AI add-ons and start funding disruption If youre a funder, this is the call to get serious. Stop funding cosmetic changes. Invest in the transformative. Look for partners who dont just want to use AI, but who are ready to become AI-native. That means backing organizations willing to rethink how they deliver services, measure impact, and collaborate across sectors. It means funding those willing to merge, partner, or even cannibalize their old models to serve people better. We cant afford to keep funding NGOs that add AI as a feature. We need to help build the next generation of social impact organizations that are designed from the ground up for an AI world. A future worth funding What does that future look like? Its one where nonprofits stop solving problems in silos. Where they build shared infrastructuredata, models, platformsto tackle challenges at scale. Where small teams use AI to compress timelines and costs, making solutions accessible in the places with the fewest resources. Its a world where human expertise focuses on empathy, ethics, and hyperlocal context, while technology handles the repeatable, the predictable, the scalable. Weve seen glimpses of this at Tech To The Rescue. Through our AI for Changemakers program alone, weve worked with over 100 organizations in the past year to move beyond one-off pilots. Weve helped them build AI strategies, access affordable tooling, and design real solutions for crisis response, healthcare, education, and more. And even with all that, too many nonprofits still struggle to implement, let alone scale. Because the real barrier isnt tools. Its the ability to disrupt themselves before the world does. The case for betting on disruption If youre a donor, an investor, a policy maker: Your job isnt to make organizations comfortable. Its to make them effective. That means funding the ones ready for the rollercoaster. The ones that want to build shared systems, not own proprietary ones. The ones willing to be accountable for outcomes, not just activities. And yes, it means accepting some failure along the way. Because the alternative is pretending we’re changing the world while replicating the same failures at scale. Stop talkingstart funding disruptors For too long, our sector has been stuck in a looptalking, workshopping, strategizing, while advancing slowly. The world doesn’t need more frameworks. It needs action. Full disclosure: At Tech To The Rescue, we’re climbing the same hill. We wrestle with impact tracking, speed, and staying in the zone of truth over hype. Some days we move too slowly. Some days we move too fast. We dont always get it right. But this is the only way to build anything that matters now. It’s messy. It’s hard. But it’s also how were going to win. By 2030, the social impact sector wont look like it does today. Many nonprofits will merge or vanish. The ones that remain will be AI-native, collaborative, and ruthlessly focused on outcomes, not activities. If you want to fund something that will matter in 2030, start fuding those building that future now. Jacek Siadkowski is CEO and cofounder of Tech To The Rescue.
Category:
E-Commerce
How many McDonalds locations do you think youve been to across the U.S.? Ten, maybe twenty? One TikTok creator is aiming to hit all 13,589 of them. Posting under the handle @donnyboys10, the creator kicked off the challenge in July 2024 and has since visited 275 locations across the country, including stops in Illinois, California, Oregon, and Arizona. Each McDonalds gets its own rating out of 10, complete with a short review and a tour of the facilities. So far not every location has been up to par. @donnyboys10 I like McDonalds more then you #mcdonalds #fyp #donnyboys #fyp @McDonalds Laugh Now Cry Later – Drake A McDonalds on Hollywood Boulevard in Los Angeles came in at just 3 out of 10. The TikToker wrote: This very famous iconic location was absolute shambles. The main complaints were the bathrooms, as well as the food being overpriced. I almost didnt even want to pay for it. @donnyboys10 Hollywood dreams, McDonalds nightmares #donnyboys #goingtoeverymcdonaldsintheus #mcdonalds #hollywood @McDonalds Party In The U.S.A. – Miley Cyrus An Encinitas, California, location scored a solid 9. Everything was available. Everything was clean, the TikTok review said, noting that even the bathrooms were super luxurious. @donnyboys10 So close to 100k followers #donnyboys #goingtoeverymcdonaldsintheus #mcdonalds #fyp @McDonalds The Sweet Escape – Gwen Stefani Throughout the challenge, @donnyboys10 has built an impressive following of more than 128,000, with several videos racking up millions of views. In the comments, many fans request to be tagged when their local McDonalds gets reviewed. Im a day one, respect for you man, one user commented. Bro is slowly getting closer to my McDonald’s, another wrote. According to the Daily Dot, @donnyboys10 averages 60 to 90 McDonalds visits per month. At that pace, it would take him about 15 years to visit every single McDonalds in the U.S. (assuming no new locations open in that time). When Fast Company connected with @donnyboys10 over email, he was more optimistic, estimating the challenge would take about nine years to complete. For now, hes juggling his nationwide McDonalds tour with a part-time job and pursuing a bachelors degree. At the start there was one other person involved and we did it together, he told Fast Company. As the challenge got harder and we needed to visit locations farther from where we were from, he stepped back and left the challenge to only me. But that hasnt stopped him. I wanted to start this not only so I could go to McDonalds. I try to pick places that I genuinely want to travel to, he said. Besides going to every McDonalds in the U.S., it has always been my dream to go to every city in the United States. Fans can donate to help cover the costsor buy him a Happy Mealvia a GoFundMe linked in his bio. His favorite location so far? The famous blue McDonalds in Sedona, Arizona, where the traditional golden arches are painted to match the skyline and preserve the areas natural beauty. The worst? Between third and Pine in Seattle, or most McDonalds in downtown Portland.
Category:
E-Commerce
If youve ever fancied yourself on American Idol, you can now audition for the newest singing competitionwithout ever leaving home. In partnership with iHeartRadio, TikTok announced its Next Up: Live Music singing competition this week, with auditions taking place entirely within the app. Aspiring stars can submit auditions now through Aug. 11 by uploading an original song with the hashtag #nextuplivemusicwhich already has over 1,000 posts at the time of writing. The top 50 creators will advance to the Semi-Finals, where theyll perform via livestream. Scores will be determined by likes, views, comments, and shares, as well as feedback from a panel of judges. Fans can follow rising artists in real time, engage directly with their performances, and help shape their path to the spotlight, the press release explains. The final 12 performers will then take the stage live at the iHeartRadio Theater in Burbank, California, on Sept. 28. The competition is open to anyone in the U.S. over 18, but there are several requirements entrants must meet. Hopefuls must have at least 50,000 TikTok followers with real engagement (i.e. not bot activity). They must own the rights to at least one original song and cannot be signed to a major record label. For those who meet the criteria and feel ready to take a shot, TikTok adds, this isnt just a contest, its a launchpad. The platform has already helped launch the careers of numerous artists, including Olivia Rodrigo and Pink Pantheress. TikTok has long been a launchpad for musical talent, helping undiscovered artists break through and reach global audiences, TikTok executive Shen Gao said in the press release. Next Up: LIVE Music is building on that legacy by turning discovery into a shared, real-time experience.
Category:
E-Commerce
How are we doing against the industry benchmark? This question made me recoil, and I felt my body tense up. I heard it twice in a short period of time at two different organizations. In both cases, the question led toward the same outcome: justifying current performance and not seeking true excellence. Ever since customer satisfaction and employee engagement surveys began, survey companies have been selling benchmark data to their clients. I have personally been involved with surveys for over three decades and I consistently object to the practice. In short, survey providers who cannot help their clients truly address the issues discovered sell them excuses about why they are good enough. Yes, it makes me mad. Why? Because it is the ultimate deception. As long as there is a lengthy list of bottom feeders in your industry, you are safe. You are not that bad. And with this false sense of security, you will make the biggest mistake: understanding your customers and creating exceptional value that will be worth the price and profit margins you charge. Two cases exemplify the issue Let me explain using two examples. In the first, the organization was celebrating an improved Net Promoter Score (NPS). Their 10-point jump sounded very respectable. But it was based on a 9% sample of its customers. Where are the other 91% of your customers, I asked. If they refuse to respond to a 5 minute survey, how committed are they to a long-term profitable relationship? Stop celebrating relative successes and instead examine the true essence of your customer relationships. In the second case, the company enjoyed close to a 90% response rate from its employees and celebrated beating the benchmark by double digit points. Cause for celebration, right? Think again. The company is a top industry performer and should never compare itself to the average. This companys expectations are very different than the expectations of number 50 on the industry list. It ought to determine how to lead the industry, not follow it! Benchmarkingthe wrong perspective Using industry benchmarks has its flaws: Regression to the mean: Benchmarking directs the attention to the industry average, not the leaders. Imitation over innovation: When focusing on competitors perspectives, one imitates their practices, not creating new one to delight customers. Competitors over customers: Focusing on competitors provides the wrong reference point for business value creation. Instead, focus on the customers. Blind context: Companies factor many decisions into creating and delivering value, which is then reflected in their customer scores. Profitability, market segments, and cost positioning are a few factors that can direct different strategies and therefore different customer engagement. Lowering standards: Benchmarking often results in relaxed performance standards. If the mean is acceptable, so is the justification to ignore the performance of competitors exceeding it. Future backwards: Customer scores reflect past performance and past value delivery. Companies may already be innovating, but those new developments are not part of the overall discussion as they are not reflected in the scores. But beyond these arguments, there is simple trust. The business truth we ought to consider above all. Is 50% customer satisfaction a good or bad number? If the industry benchmark is 22%, you are killing it. Keep it up If the industry benchmark is 83%, you are in trouble. Do you understand how ridiculous this conclusion is? Fifty percent of your customers are not happy with the value you deliver. They are at risk of switching to the competition. Should that a big enough red flag for immediate attention? In the empowered-customer era, we can no longer afford to compromise and play with the number. We live in a world where every customer is a segment of one. A personal brand using our product or solutions to promote their brand. They create content publicly and share their opinions. No, 50% customer satisfaction should not be considered good results. Unless, of course, you decide to get rid of the other 50% of your customer base. The pursuit of absolute performance In the late 1970s, benchmarking was first introduced by Xerox Corporation to compare themselves to their intense Japanese competitors and ensure they raise their performance bar. The original purpose was constant improvements and adopting best practices. But like many great concepts, it has become a method to relax the pursuit of excellence. Even for the bottom feeders in any benchmark, the goal was to become average, not exceptional. In a time when we are concerned about the impact of AI on organizations and performance, we can be confident that average work will be automated and taken over by AI. True exceptional value will be the survivor of the fittest. If your response level is low, it means your customers do not believe the sincerity of the dialogue you proclaim to conduct. If your employees do not take the time to respond, your situation is dire. The current state of surveys does not seem to produce the sincere dialogue necessary to truly improve relationships (customers or employees). We need to rethink this system. The addiction to the false sense of security peddled by survey companies with benchmark data should end. It is the pursuit of relative performance over ultimate performance. Relative performance focuses on the good enough vis a vis the competition. Ultimate performance is delightful and surprising customers, so they have no reason to consider any other provider. The former creates a false sense of security the latter ensures business continuity. To achieve ultimate performance, we ought to establish a true dialogue with our customers. A dialogue in which customers take the time to provide the insights and organizations address it sincerely, completely, and on time. This is not a one-time event but rather an ongoing dialogue about the performance process, ensuring that we are always ahead, not with the industry average, but with our customers expectations. In a world of ultimate performance, the real question we ought to ask is How can we outdo the current performance and value? Lior Arussy is chairperson of ImprintCX and author of Dare to Author!
Category:
E-Commerce
Sites : [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [28] [29] [30] [31] next »