Over the past decade, Ghana’s startup ecosystem has grown significantly. Innovation hubs, accelerators, entrepreneurship support organisations, venture funds, and development partners have all contributed to building a vibrant environment for startups.
This growth has created opportunities for young entrepreneurs and positioned Ghana as one of the emerging startup ecosystems in West Africa. But beneath this progress lies a pattern that many ecosystem actors quietly observe but rarely discuss openly.
Across several layers of the ecosystem; startups, innovation hubs, and donor programmes, a recurring behaviour seems to be emerging:
Replication instead of differentiation.
My observation is not meant as criticism. Many emerging ecosystems go through this phase. But if Ghana is to move toward deeper innovation and sustainable entrepreneurship, it may be time to reflect on some important trends shaping the ecosystem today.
1. What Is Happening Between Startups?
One noticeable pattern within the ecosystem is business model replication. Many startups are building variations of already familiar ideas:
• Another fintech wallet • Another delivery platform • Another digital marketplace • Another ride-hailing adaptation • Another AI-powered tool or AI wrapper around existing services
Replication is not inherently bad. Ecosystems like China and India initially built strong startup sectors by adapting proven global models to local markets. However, when too many startups pursue similar models, the ecosystem can become concentrated around a few visible ideas rather than exploring new opportunity spaces.
Meanwhile, Ghana faces enormous unsolved problems that could inspire original innovation:
• Agricultural value chain inefficiencies • Informal sector digitisation • Waste management and climate innovation • Urban mobility challenges • Youth employment creation
AI is a good example. Many founders now want to build AI startups, but often without identifying a specific local problem that genuinely requires AI.
Technology should not be the starting point. The problem should be.
2. The Rise of “Hub Hopping”
Another phenomenon increasingly observed in the ecosystem is what some practitioners informally call “hub hopping.”
Many startups move from one programme to another:
• An incubation programme at one hub • A hackathon at another organisation • A donor-funded accelerator elsewhere • Followed by another pitch competition
Participation in these programmes can be valuable. They provide mentorship, networks, and sometimes funding.
However, when startups continuously move from programme to programme without building real products or validating customers, the ecosystem begins to produce programme entrepreneurs rather than market entrepreneurs.
If a startup is genuinely solving a problem and delivering value, people will pay for it.
The real test of entrepreneurship is not how many programmes a founder attends.
It is whether customers are willing to pay for the solution being built.
In some cases, the ecosystem unintentionally risks creating grant-seeking entrepreneurs rather than problem-solving entrepreneurs, where founders become better at navigating programmes than building sustainable businesses.
Unfortunately, many startups have big ideas but wait for funding before taking the first step.
3. Causal Thinking vs Effectual Entrepreneurship
This behaviour often reflects a deeper entrepreneurial mindset.
Many founders unknowingly follow what entrepreneurship theory describes as causal thinking.
The logic usually looks like this:
1. I have a big idea 2. I need funding to build it 3. Once I get funding, I will start
This approach assumes that resources must come first before action begins.
But many successful entrepreneurs operate using a different logic known as effectuation, introduced by entrepreneurship scholar Saras Sarasvathy.
Effectual entrepreneurs ask a different question:
What can I build with the resources I already have?
Instead of waiting for perfect conditions, they start with:
• Who they are (skills and experience) • What they know (knowledge and networks) • Who they know (relationships and partners)
From there, they experiment, collaborate, and gradually build opportunities using available means.
4. A Simple Local Example of Effectuation
Imagine a young entrepreneur in Accra who wants to start a food delivery service.
Using causal thinking, the founder might say:
“I need funding to build an app, hire riders, and launch the platform.”
So they spend months applying for accelerators and pitching investors.
Using effectual thinking, the entrepreneur could start differently:
• Take orders through WhatsApp • Partner with three nearby restaurants • Work with existing motorbike riders • Promote the service through Instagram and local networks
Within weeks, the entrepreneur could begin testing demand and generating revenue.
They did not wait for funding.
They started with what they already had.
5. What Is Happening Between Hubs, ESOs and BSOs?
The replication dynamic is not limited to startups.
It also appears among innovation hubs, enterprise support organisations (ESOs), and business support organisations (BSOs).
Across the ecosystem, many organisations now offer similar programmes:
• Startup incubation programmes • Entrepreneurship training workshops • Hackathons and ideation challenges • Pitch competitions • Short-term accelerator cohorts.
While these initiatives have helped build entrepreneurial awareness, the ecosystem is now experiencing significant duplication of programmes.
Many entrepreneurs have already attended multiple training sessions across different hubs.
Some founders jokingly describe themselves as “professional trainees.”
The reality is that many founders do not necessarily need another training workshop.
What they often need is practical support and handholding to build real businesses.
6. What Is Happening Under the Donor Community?
Development partners and donor agencies have played a crucial role in building Ghana’s startup ecosystem.
Many hubs and entrepreneurship programmes would not exist without their support.
However, many donor-funded initiatives unintentionally emphasise scale rather than depth.
Success is often measured by:
• Number of entrepreneurs trained • Number of workshops organised • Number of startups supported
These numbers demonstrate activity, but they do not always translate into sustainable startup growth or job creation.
For example:
Supporting 1,000 entrepreneurs through short-term training without providing technical resources, market access, or operational support can leave many founders in a difficult position.
They gain knowledge, but lack the tools to implement it.
The reality is that many entrepreneurs in the ecosystem are already tired of repeated training programmes.
Many have already been recycled across several hubs.
What they often need now is resources, partnerships, market access, and practical support.
7. Depth Instead of Breadth
Imagine a different model.
Instead of training 1,000 entrepreneurs with limited support, a programme could identify 100 promising entrepreneurs and provide them with:
• Product development support • Technical expertise • Market access partnerships • Operational mentorship • Strategic capital
These entrepreneurs would have a much higher chance of building real companies that create jobs and economic value.
In many ecosystems around the world, a few successful startups often create more economic impact than thousands of unsupported entrepreneurs.
8. Redesigning Entrepreneurial Support Using Service Design
If the ecosystem wants better outcomes, we may need to rethink how entrepreneurial support services are designed.
This is where service design thinking becomes important.
Service design focuses on understanding the actual journey and needs of the entrepreneur.
Instead of designing programmes around institutional outputs, support services should be designed around what founders truly need at different stages of their journey.
A redesigned hub support model could look like this:
Stage 1 — Startup Diagnosis Understand the startup’s stage, sector, and real challenges.
Stage 2 — Tailored Support Plan Identify what the founder actually needs; product development, customers, partnerships, or funding readiness.
Stage 3 — Hands-On Support Provide practical assistance such as prototyping support, pilot testing, and introductions to early customers.
Stage 4 — Market Validation Support the startup in securing its first paying customers.
This approach moves away from mass training programmes toward customised entrepreneurial support.
Startups are no longer treated as programme participants.
They are treated as ventures that must grow.
Moving the Ecosystem Forward
Ghana’s startup ecosystem has made remarkable progress. But the next phase of growth may require a shift in thinking.
• Startups must move from waiting for funding to building with available resources • Hubs must move from mass training to deeper founder support • Donors must move from programme outputs to real ecosystem outcomes.
If these shifts happen, Ghana could move beyond imitation and become a truly innovative ecosystem producing globally relevant solutions.
A Few Questions for the Ecosystem
- For founders: Are we building businesses that solve real problems, or startups that simply fit accelerator applications?
- For hubs and ESOs: Should the next phase of entrepreneurial support move from mass training to deeper venture-building support?
- For donors and development partners: Would supporting 20 high-potential entrepreneurs deeply create more jobs than training 1,000 entrepreneurs lightly?
The future of Ghana’s startup ecosystem may depend on how we answer these questions.
