We often celebrate the number of entrepreneurs trained.But we rarely stop to ask: how many actually build sustainable businesses afterward?
That’s where the real question begins. Are we actually using and designing entrepreneurial programs in a way that leads to real outcomes?
My Perspective: From Experience
I say this from personal experience.
I am a product of the Reach for Change incubation program (2013), and that experience played a significant role in shaping my journey.
The program broadened my understanding of how business can be used as a tool to drive social impact. The mentorship, the barrier-breaking sessions, and the exposure did not just build skills, they reshaped how I approached problems and opportunities.
That experience contributed meaningfully to where I am today.
But looking back, one thing stands out clearly: The real impact came from what happened after the program.
So, are we using entrepreneurial programs the right way? Not always. In many cases, we are using them for participation, not for progress.
Programs Are a Starting Point, Not the Outcome
Programs are designed to equip, expose, and accelerate. But they are not the end goal.
The real value lies in what entrepreneurs do with the knowledge, networks, and insights gained.
- Do we apply what we learn?
- Do we test ideas in the market?
- Do we build, iterate, and improve?
Because without application, even the best program becomes just an experience, not a transformation.
Bringing in a Service Design Perspective
If we look at incubation programs through a service design lens, it becomes clear that experience alone is not enough.
Good service design is not just about delivering workshops or mentorship sessions. It is about designing for outcomes, continuity, and real user impact.
In this case, the “user” is the entrepreneur.
So the question becomes:
Are programs designed to create lasting behavioural change or just temporary engagement?
Measuring What Truly Matters: The Role of Story and Impact
On a previous project, a partner (SNV) introduced us to the concept of the Most Significant Change (MSC) Story.
Unlike traditional reporting that focuses on numbers such as participants, sessions, and outputs, MSC focuses on real transformation.
It asks:
“What is the most significant change that occurred as a result of this program?”
For example, instead of only reporting “50 entrepreneurs trained,” an MSC story might capture how one founder moved from idea to first paying customer, and what changed in their decision-making along the way.
This approach captures:
- Shifts in mindset
- Key decisions made
- Business progress achieved
- Turning points in an entrepreneur’s journey
Because not all impact can be measured in numbers, but it can be understood through meaningful stories.
The Missing Link: Tracking Progress Beyond Participation
If we truly care about impact, then progress tracking must go beyond attendance.
We need to understand:
- What changes during the program
- What continues after the program ends
Impact should be tracked across time, not just within cohorts. Because in reality, the real work begins after the program.
Rethinking Roles Across the Ecosystem
Creating meaningful outcomes is a shared responsibility:
Entrepreneurs must focus on applying, not just absorbing. Hubs, Incubators and ESOs must design for execution, not just engagement. Donors and Funders must incentivise impact, not just activity.
Practical Recommendations
To move from participation to impact, here are a few practical shifts:
For Entrepreneurs
- Treat every program as a launchpad for action, not just learning. Example: After a customer discovery session, speak to 5 real users within the same week, not later
- Set 2–3 clear outcome goals Example: Instead of “learn marketing,” aim for “get 3 paying customers before the program ends”
- Focus on execution between sessions. Example: Use the time between weekly workshops to test, build, or sell, not just prepare for the next session
For Hubs, Incubators and ESOs
- Integrate execution sprints into program design Example: A 2-week sprint where founders must launch a basic version of their product and get real user feedback
- Track participant progress consistently Example: Weekly check-ins that track metrics like customer conversations, sales, or product iterations, not just attendance
- Build structured post-program support Example: 3–6 month follow-up support with milestone tracking, mentor check-ins, or peer accountability groups
- Redefine success metrics Your success is not measured by the number of entrepreneurs trained, but by the number of entrepreneurs transformed through your interventions. The success of the entrepreneurs you support should be your success.
For Donors and Funders
- Shift from output-based to outcome-based metrics Example: Instead of reporting “100 entrepreneurs trained,” track “how many generated revenue or validated their idea”
- Support long-term impact tracking Example: Follow up with founders 6–12 months after the program to assess growth, survival, or scale
- Fund depth, not just reach Example: Invest in fewer programs with stronger support systems rather than many short-term, high-volume interventions
Final Reflection
Programs are powerful. They open doors, challenge thinking, and expand possibilities.
I know this firsthand from my own journey. But over time, I have also seen that the difference is not access to programs. It is how we use them.
The goal is not just to go through programs. It is to grow through them.
