Author: Malema Seroba

Why does effectuation and bricolage matter in developing economies? Entrepreneurship is widely recognised as a critical lever for economic growth and job creation, particularly in developing countries where formal employment opportunities are limited. Yet for many aspiring entrepreneurs, especially young people and graduates, the reality of starting and sustaining a business is shaped by severe resource constraints: limited access to finance, weak institutional support, and fragile economic conditions.

A doctoral study conducted by The DaVinci Institute’s alumnus, Dr Jerimaya Mundondo, explored how entrepreneurs navigate these constraints and what enables some to move from intention to action, and ultimately to success. 

Rethinking entrepreneurship in resource-constrained environments

Traditional models of entrepreneurship often assume access to capital, networks, and stable markets. In contrast, entrepreneurs in contexts such as Zimbabwe and other developing economies must frequently “create something from nothing.” Dr Mundondo’s study argued that resourcefulness, rather than resource abundance, is the decisive factor.

The research focuses on two entrepreneurial approaches particularly relevant to such environments:

• Effectuation: starting with available means (who you are, what you know, and whom you know) and allowing goals to emerge over time, rather than pursuing fixed plans.
• Bricolage: creatively recombining and repurposing existing resources to solve new problems, even when those resources were not originally intended for that use.

Both approaches challenge the idea that entrepreneurship requires prior access to substantial resources.

What the study examined

Using a quantitative, cross-sectional research design, the study surveyed:

• Nascent entrepreneurs (students from two universities), representing individuals still forming entrepreneurial intentions or beginning early activities.
• Emerging entrepreneurs (members of the SME Association of Zimbabwe) represent individuals already engaged in venture creation and growth.

In total, over 900 respondents participated. The study examined how effectuation and bricolage influence:

• Entrepreneurial intentions: the desire and commitment to start a business
• Entrepreneurial behaviour: concrete actions taken to create a venture
• Perceived entrepreneurial success: entrepreneurs’ assessment of venture progress and outcomes

Advanced statistical techniques, including regression analysis and Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM), were used to test the relationships.

Key findings

The results reveal a nuanced picture of how resourceful behaviours operate at different stages of the entrepreneurial journey.

For nascent entrepreneurs:

• Both effectuation and bricolage positively influence entrepreneurial intentions.
• Bricolage also supports early entrepreneurial behaviour, helping individuals act despite limited resources.
• However, effectuation did not significantly influence behaviour at this early stage, suggesting that planning flexibility alone may not be enough to trigger action without hands-on resource improvisation.

For emerging entrepreneurs:

• Effectuation strongly influences both entrepreneurial behaviour and perceived success, indicating its importance once ventures are underway.
• Bricolage plays a more limited role at this stage, showing weaker and sometimes insignificant effects on behaviour and success.
• In short, bricolage appears especially valuable for getting started, while effectuation becomes more important for sustaining and scaling entrepreneurial activity.

Bridging the intention-action gap

One of the study’s most important contributions is its insight into the intention-behaviour gap, a well-documented challenge where many individuals express a desire to start a business but fail to act.

The findings suggest that resourceful behaviours help close this gap by:

• Reframing how entrepreneurs perceive constraints
• Reducing dependence on external funding
• Encouraging experimentation, partnerships, and incremental progress

Rather than waiting for ideal conditions, entrepreneurs who adopt effectuation and bricolage act with what is already available.

Why this matters for policy and institutions

Dr Mundondo’s study concluded that entrepreneurship support in developing economies must move beyond access-to-finance narratives. Instead, institutions, universities, and policymakers should actively cultivate resourceful entrepreneurial mindsets.

Key implications include:

• Embedding effectuation and bricolage into entrepreneurship education
• Designing incubators and accelerators that emphasise experimentation and partnerships, not only funding
• Creating policy environments that recognise informal resource mobilisation as legitimate entrepreneurial practice

A shift in how success is enabled

Entrepreneurship in resource-constrained environments is not primarily a story of shortage; it is a story of ingenuity. This research demonstrates that when entrepreneurs learn how to think and act resourcefully, they are better equipped to turn intentions into action and action into impact. In contexts where resources are scarce, how entrepreneurs think about resources may matter more than how many they have.

This doctoral study by The DaVinci Institute’s alumnus, Gabapelo Emmanuel Phillip, investigated how Knowledge Management (KM) can be leveraged to enhance competitive advantage among selected Mobile Network Operators (MNOs) in Botswana, particularly in the context of the Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR). The research responded to a critical gap: despite rapid digital transformation and the strategic importance of knowledge in telecommunications, KM practices in Botswana’s MNOs remain fragmented, ad hoc, and poorly aligned with 4IR capabilities.

Knowledge-Intensive and Technology-Driven Environment

The study is grounded in the reality that the telecommunications sector is knowledge‑intensive, data‑rich, and increasingly complex due to technologies such as artificial intelligence, big data analytics, cloud computing, and the Internet of Things. While these technologies offer immense opportunities, the research finds that Botswana’s MNOs have not fully translated them into structured KM practices that support learning, decision‑making, and sustained competitiveness.

Research Methodology

Using a qualitative, interpretivist research approach, the study collected data through semi‑structured interviews with employees from selected MNOs (notably BTCL and Mascom Wireless). The findings reveal that although elements of KM exist, such as information systems, training initiatives, and digital tools, these are often implemented in silos, without a coherent framework or governance structure. As a result, critical organisational knowledge is inconsistently captured, poorly shared, and at risk of being lost through employee turnover.

Theoretical Foundations

The research draws on and synthesises three key theoretical perspectives:

• The Knowledge‑Based View (KBV) of the firm
• Systems Theory
• The Knowledge Management Success Model

Development of the 4IR‑Aligned KM Framework

Through this synthesis, the study develops a 4IR‑aligned conceptual Knowledge Management framework tailored to the Botswana telecommunications context. The framework emphasises nine interrelated determinants of KM success, including:

• digital technology enablement,
• people‑centred KM practices,
• process alignment,
• KM system and content quality,
• leadership commitment,
• knowledge‑friendly organisational culture,
• governance and policy structures,
• integration with business strategy, and
• the application of systems thinking to manage organisational complexity.

Central Argument of the Study

A central argument of the study is that KM cannot succeed as a purely technological initiative. Instead, effective KM requires the integration of technology, people, processes, and culture, supported by leadership and aligned with organisational strategy. The study further contends that systems thinking is essential for navigating the complexity introduced by the 4IR, as it enables organisations to understand interdependence, knowledge flows, and feedback loops across the enterprise.

Contributions of the Research

Theoretical Contributions

Integration of KM, 4IR, and systems thinking into a unified conceptual framework.

Methodological Contributions

Provision of a structured, context‑sensitive approach to KM deployment in developing economies.

Practical Contributions

Actionable guidance for MNOs, policymakers, and practitioners to improve KM maturity, operational efficiency, and innovation capacity.

Societal and Policy‑Related Contributions

Support for Botswana’s national digital transformation goals under Vision 2036 and related development plans.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the study finds that without a coordinated and 4IR‑aligned KM framework, Botswana’s MNOs risk underutilising their most critical strategic asset, knowledge. The proposed framework provides a blueprint for transforming KM from a fragmented support activity into a core driver of competitive advantage, organisational learning, and long‑term sustainability in the telecommunications sector.

What are the enablers and barriers to learning transfer into the workplace? Organisations in South Africa invest heavily in employee education. Through legislated skills development frameworks, companies sponsor employees to complete formal qualifications, often through higher education institutions. In return, organisations expect improved capability, performance, and competitive advantage.

Yet, despite these investments, learning does not consistently translate into changed behaviour, improved practice, or organisational value. This gap between learning and learning transfer formed the focus of a recent qualitative study conducted among company-sponsored graduates.

The DaVinci Institute’s alumna, Meggie Siddiah W Muthee study has explored a critical question: What enables or prevents employees from transferring what they learn into their workplaces after completing a sponsored qualification?

Learning transfer is not automatic

A central finding of the study is that learning transfer is not guaranteed. While learning almost always occurs, its transfer into the workplace is often:

• Unintentional
• Inconsistent
• Informal
• Unmeasured
• Dependent on individual initiative

As a result, learning transfer is largely serendipitous rather than strategically designed or supported by organisations.

This means organisations are often not fully realising the return on their investment in employee education, even when qualifications are completed.

Enablers and barriers exist on three levels

The study identified that learning transfer is shaped by the interaction of three systems:

• The individual (the graduate)
• The organisation (the workplace)
• The qualification provider (the education institution)

Each system can either enable or inhibit transfer.

Key Enablers Include:

• Supportive line managers and peers
• Organisational cultures that value learning and experimentation
• Roles that allow space to apply new knowledge
• Relevant, practical, and applied curricula
• Opportunities to reflect, share, and experiment with learning
• Recognition and feedback when learning is applied

Key Barriers Include:

• Heavy workloads and lack of time
• Lack of organisational ownership for learning transfer
• No shared understanding of what “learning transfer” means
• Learning is seen as separate from “real work.”
• Rigid roles with no room for innovation or experimentation
• Poor alignment between what is taught and workplace realities

Interestingly, many factors were found to be dual in nature, capable of acting as either enablers or barriers depending on how they are enacted. For example, organisational culture, leadership, and performance management can either stimulate learning transfer or suppress it.

Organisations play the strongest influencing role

Although the decision to transfer learning is ultimately individual, the study found that organisations exert the strongest influence over whether transfer occurs.

Employees are more willing and able to transfer learning when:

• Learning is explicitly valued by the organisation
• Managers show interest in what employees are learning
• Space is created to apply, test, and refine new ideas
• Learning is connected to organisational goals and challenges
• Transfer is expected, discussed, and supported

When organisations fail to create these conditions, even highly motivated graduates struggle to apply what they have learned.

Graduates use their own strategies to transfer learning

In the absence of formal organisational processes, graduates often rely on personal strategies, such as:

• Actively seeking managerial buy-in
• Informally involving colleagues
• Translating theory into small practical experiments
• Being self-directed and reflective
• Sharing insights through conversations rather than formal channels

While these strategies sometimes succeed, they place the burden of learning transfer almost entirely on the individual, making transfer fragile, uneven, and dependent on personal resilience.

Learning has value even when it is not transferred

The study also highlights that learning creates value beyond immediate organisational application. Graduates reported:

• Increased confidence and professional identity
• Improved problem-solving ability
• Greater strategic and systems thinking
• Enhanced personal growth and career mobility

However, when this learning is not absorbed into the organisation, its full collective value is lost and may even benefit competitors when employees move on.

From Serendipity to Strategy

The study concludes that learning transfer should not be left to chance. Instead, it should be:

• Designed intentionally
• Supported structurally
• Aligned strategically
• Owned collectively

Recommendations

It recommends that organisations, qualification providers, and learners work together as a learning transfer system rather than as separate actors.

In practical terms, this means:

• Organisations embedding learning into the purpose of work
• Managers are being developed as learning facilitators, not just performance supervisors
• Qualifications are being designed with application and workplace relevance in mind
• Graduates are being supported as active agents of change, not passive recipients of knowledge

Conclusion

This research reframes learning transfer not as an individual responsibility alone, but as a systemic organisational capability. If organisations want education investments to deliver real value, they must move beyond compliance and completion and begin designing environments where learning can live, grow, and be used. Learning changes people. Only learning transfer changes organisations.