Category: Auto Guid

Corruption is often described as a cancer that eats away at the very fabric of society.

From inflated procurement contracts to money laundering and the misuse of public resources, white-collar crime continues to undermine development, weaken trust in institutions, and deepen inequality.

As technology reshapes every aspect of our lives, one innovation-blockchain-is emerging as a potential weapon in this long-standing fight.

At its simplest, blockchain is a digital ledger technology that records transactions in a secure, immutable, and transparent manner. Once information is entered, it cannot be altered without leaving a trace.

This unique feature can make blockchain technology particularly attractive to governments, law enforcement and regulatory agencies that want to tighten controls against fraud, bribery and illicit financial flows.

For instance, public procurement systems powered by blockchain could make every contract, bid and payment visible to the public and auditors alike. Land registries, another common source of corruption, could be digitised on blockchain platforms, preventing manipulation of ownership records or multiple claims on the same property.

Such applications would close loopholes that corrupt actors exploit and strengthen public confidence in government institutions.

But blockchain’s potential does not guarantee success. Its effectiveness depends heavily on transcending factors-such as digital infrastructure, robust legal frameworks and political commitment-that lie beyond the technology itself.

As highlighted in U4 Issue 2020:7, technology alone cannot root out corruption; it must be embedded in a system that values transparency, accountability and strong oversight.

Unlike traditional systems that place trust in individuals or institutions, blockchain shifts the balance of trust to data and code. In practice, this means that citizens no longer have to rely solely on officials to safeguard records; instead, they can trust the transparency and immutability of the blockchain itself.

This paradigm shift could be revolutionary in societies where institutional trust has been eroded due to corruption and political interference.

The transition is not without challenges. Implementing blockchain in governance touches fundamental societal values: identity, privacy, transparency and accountability. Striking the right balance is critical.

One of blockchain’s most powerful features is its transparency. Every transaction is traceable, every record verifiable. Yet this strength can also become a weakness when it collides with individual rights, such as the right to privacy.

Blockchain, by design, makes deletion impossible.

This tension raises important legal and ethical questions: How do we balance the need to protect privacy with the need to harness transparency in the fight against corruption? Policymakers must confront these dilemmas head-on, crafting frameworks that maximise accountability without eroding fundamental freedoms.

Another critical concern arises when blockchain is used to manage registries of physical assets, such as land or vehicles. While the digital record may be incorruptible, it is only as accurate as the information entered at the outset.

Trusted gatekeepers are therefore essential to ensure that the physical reality matches the digital record. Otherwise, corruption could shift from digital manipulation to fraudulent inputs, thus undermining the entire system.

Several African countries are already ahead of the curve.

Nigeria has established clear regulations for cryptocurrency exchanges, South Africa has moved forward with comprehensive guidelines for digital assets and Mauritius has positioned itself as a blockchain-friendly hub with dedicated regulatory sandboxes.

Kenya, on the other hand, is still in the process of finalising its regulatory framework, currently at the Third Reading stage in Parliament.

This makes commendable progress; however, timely implementation would be important to ensure that gaps are not left open for potential misuse in the rapidly evolving digital finance landscape.

For many developing countries, adopting blockchain faces significant hurdles. Digital infrastructure remains weak, with limited internet access in some areas. Digital literacy is uneven, meaning that even if systems are built, citizens and officials may struggle to use them effectively.

These challenges underscore the need for a comprehensive approach: building infrastructure, enhancing capacity-especially for law enforcement officers to be able to trace and recover stolen assets-and modernizing laws alongside technological adoption.

A nuanced understanding of the technology is crucial before deciding whether-and how-to integrate it into governance systems.

Yet hesitation also carries risks. With global adoption accelerating, countries that delay may find themselves struggling to catch up in a world where corruption has already migrated to new digital platforms.

The balance for policymakers is delicate: act too slowly, and the window of opportunity closes; act without foresight, and unintended consequences could erode rights or waste resources. Its success will depend not on the technology alone, but on the legal, political and social ecosystems into which it is introduced.

Blockchain is not a magic cure for corruption, but it offers unprecedented opportunities to enhance transparency, strengthen accountability, and rebuild trust in public institutions. For policymakers and regulatory experts, the choice is clear.

The future of governance will increasingly be digital. Investing today in the right frameworks, infrastructure, and skills could position nations to harness blockchain not only to fight cryptocurrency-enabled crime and white-collar fraud, but also to redefine the integrity of public service for generations to come.

If corruption is the disease, blockchain could be part of the cure-provided leaders have the courage and foresight to use it wisely. Writer is an enthusiast blockchain and crypto investigator.

A widow has secured a temporary reprieve after the High Court barred Equity Bank from auctioning her property in Nairobi over a disputed Sh377 million loan guarantee she claims was forged using her title deed.

In the case highlighting growing concerns over fraudulent land transactions and banks’ due diligence in verifying guarantors, the court halted the sale of Rosemele Anyango’s property pending the determination of a lawsuit where she accuses the bank, her brother, and a company linked to him of conspiring to fraudulently use her land as collateral.

Ms Anyango, the registered owner of the property, insists she never guaranteed any loans for Tembo Tamu Limited nor signed documents charging her land to Equity Bank.

She alleges her brother held her title deed since 2018 following the deaths of her husband and son.

Her shock came in May 2024 when Equity Bank issued a redemption notice demanding Sh377.6 million, threatening to sell her property over Tembo Tamu’s loan defaults.

Forensic analysis later revealed that her signatures on the loan documents had been forged.

She claims that any charge or security instrument created over the property in question was done fraudulently and without her knowledge or consent, and in conspiracy with the respondents (the bank, the company and her brother).

She contends that she is neither a director nor a shareholder of the company and thus not privy to its activities.

Ms Anyango further contends that she did not issue any power of attorney to the advocates involved in the deal to enter into transactions and sign documents pertaining to the property. Her signature is not on the offer letter dated July 3, 2020.

Additionally, she says she never appeared before the advocate named in the court papers to execute a personal guarantee and indemnity, maintaining that her signature is a forgery.

The bank, however, maintains Ms Anyango willingly guaranteed loans totalling Sh290 million advanced to Tembo Tamu between July and October 2020.

Through its legal manager, Equity Bank argued she executed a personal guarantee and deposited her title deed as security.

Statutory notices under the Land Act were served, and valuers assessed the property before the planned auction. The bank dismissed her forgery claims, insisting she participated knowingly and willingly.

However, the court found Ms Anyango had established a strong case against Equity, warranting court intervention. The court ruled she had demonstrated the likelihood of suffering irreparable harm.

The court emphasised that allegations of forgery – backed by a forensic report – raised serious questions that required full scrutiny at trial.

‘If proven, the charge would be void ab initio,’ the court stated, noting that allowing the sale would risk ‘sanctioning an illegality’ and irreparably violating Ms Anyango’s constitutional right to property under Article 40.

The dispute centres on whether Ms Anyango indeed executed the charge documents and guarantee, or whether they were forged and fraudulently procured.

‘That question goes to the root of ownership rights and the validity of the securities sought to be enforced by the bank,’ said the court.

The court ruled that the balance of convenience favoured Ms Anyango because, if the property were sold and forgery later proven, she would suffer a permanent deprivation of property in violation of her constitutional rights.

Conversely, the bank could still recover debts from Tembo Tamu without selling her land. The company and Ms Anyango’s brother did not participate in the proceedings. The injunction remains in force until the suit is determined.

Similar disputes have surged in the recent past, with courts increasingly scrutinising lenders’ processes amid claims of forged documents and identity theft.

The rapid pace of technological development exceeds organisations’ ability to establish effective governance systems.

The workplace experienced a similar phenomenon in the last decade when staff members brought Dropbox, Google Docs and Slack into their work environments before organisational approval. Workers adopted these tools because they needed solutions that official systems failed to provide. The official tools were too slow, clunky, or nonexistent, so workers found their own.

The current situation with shadow AI mirrors the previous case of shadow IT. Shadow AI is the unsanctioned use of AI tools or applications by employees without approval or oversight of the employer.

There are several reasons why employees turn to shadow AI.

The underlying factors are similar to previous situations, which are activated when employees encounter performance deficiencies, including productivity pressure, where a marketing associate uses AI to generate campaign ideas within a short time frame and complexity gaps, where a financial analyst uses AI to verify formulas instead of waiting for their peers to review them.

These examples demonstrate that staff members use AI tools to address genuine operational challenges rather than seeking new technology for its own sake.

However, the challenge arises when employees are using AI tools without proper oversight. There are several hidden risks, and shadow AI creates three distinct risk categories that organisations must address.

One, data exposure represents the first risk factor because sensitive information and client data become vulnerable to unauthorised disclosure when fed into unprotected AI systems.

The implementation of AI systems leads to two major problems – biased results and non-compliance with regulations. AI systems generate biased or inaccurate results, which can lead to legal exposure when organisations use them for hiring or decision-making processes.

Leaders who are at the centre of organisations need to first validate employee needs by understanding that shadow AI demonstrates their desire to enhance their work efficiency and create specific rules which define authorised tools and data handling procedures and prohibited usage practices.

The organisation needs to deliver training sessions about proper AI usage, which should include lessons about bias detection and privacy protection and system security and should also purchase enterprise-grade AI solutions which provide secure platforms for employees to work with, instead of forcing them to hide their tools.

Executives who view shadow AI as a threat alone will overlook the substantial business potential it presents. Organisations that recognise shadow AI as a strategic indicator will convert potential risks into business advantages.

Organisations face a straightforward decision between letting shadow AI control their operations or using it to establish purposeful leadership.

Further, the organisation needs to develop a system for periodic assessments which will monitor AI usage for safety and compliance with business objectives.

Additionally, when staff members start to conceal productivity tools from their superiors, it leads to a breakdown in employee trust which damages organizational culture.

Government entities must maintain close observation of these developments. The AI Act has partially taken effect throughout Europe, it demands organisations to maintain records about their AI system utilization and implement proper governance systems.

Organisations that fail to monitor shadow AI usage today will face difficulties when regulatory bodies start enforcing new rules in the future.

History shows the right path. Organisations progressed from banning cloud services to creating structured systems for cloud adoption after their employees started using shadow IT. The same approach needs to be applied to AI systems.

Leaders who are at the centre of organisations need to first validate employee needs by understanding that shadow AI demonstrates their desire to enhance their work efficiency and create specific rules which define authorised tools and data handling procedures and prohibited usage practices.

The organisation needs to deliver training sessions about proper AI usage which should include lessons about bias detection and privacy protection and system security and should also purchase enterprise-grade AI solutions which provide secure platforms for employees to work with instead of forcing them to hide their tools.

Further, the organisation needs to develop a system for periodic assessments which will monitor AI usage for safety and compliance with business objectives.

Shadow AI functions as an indicator rather than an act of defiance against authority. The current situation demonstrates that employees want to adopt new work approaches although their leaders have not adopted these changes.

Executives who view shadow AI as a threat alone will overlook the substantial business potential it presents.

Organisations that recognise shadow AI as a strategic indicator will convert potential risks into business advantages through the development of organisations that excel at AI operations.

Organisations face a straightforward decision between letting shadow AI control their operations or using it to establish purposeful leadership.

KCB Group, one of Kenya’s largest banks, is acquiring a minority stake in digital payments provider Pesapal, strengthening its position in the fintech industry.

The bank has announced its intentions to acquire an undisclosed minority stake in the Kenyan fintech, subject to regulatory approvals, including the Competition Authority of Kenya, and the Central Bank of Kenya (CBK).

This marks its second acquisition of a fintech this year, after acquiring Riverbank Solutions Limited, a fintech firm associated with Nick Mwendwa, former president of the Football Kenya Federation, earlier this year.

‘The investment sets the stage for development of innovative payment and other related solutions for Kenya’s small and micro enterprises enhancing value for shareholders of both Pesapal and KCB,’ the lender said in a notice signed by company secretary Bonnie Okumu.

Founded in 2009 by entrepreneur Agosta Liko, Pesapal processes payments for thousands of businesses across Kenya, Uganda, and Tanzania, operating under a payment service provider licence from the CBK.

The platform enables merchants to accept both card and mobile money payments-online and in-store-with integrations for Visa, Mastercard, American Express and M-Pesa.

Often described as a backbone of e-commerce and service payments in East Africa, Pesapal supports a wide range of industries including hospitality, education and transport.

KCB, which already runs one of Kenya’s largest agent and merchant networks, expects that its partnership with Pesapal will cement its foothold in the merchant acquiring and SME payments sector.

The move aligns with KCB’s broader shift towards fintech-driven growth, following strong 2024 results. The bank’s profit after tax rose 64.9 percent to Sh61.8 billion, buoyed by solid revenue growth across all segments.

Non-interest income increased by 16.5 percent Sh67.5 billion, driven largely by gains in foreign exchange trading.

The government has set up two steering committees to spearhead a two-year drive to revive coffee farming, in the latest official effort to arrest declining production and reverse years of shrinking acreage in traditional highland zones.

According to a latest gazette notice by Cooperatives Cabinet Secretary Wycliffe Oparanya, the committees, a national and a county one, will design strategies to expand the crop beyond the core coffee belt, and specifically introduce the crop in emerging and non-traditional regions.

This, the notice indicates, will be effected through the cooperative movement as the State seeks to broaden production capacity and rebuild volumes lost to land conversions and crop shifts.

‘The County Steering Committee shall have similar functions to the National Steering Committee at the county level and shall report on progress and outcomes to the National Steering Committee,’ said Mr Oparanya in the gazette notice.

Most of Kenya’s long-established coffee areas have been shrinking as farmers in counties like Murang’a, Kiambu and Nyeri convert land to avocado, macadamia and real estate due to poor returns over the years, with Kiambu losing chunks of farmland to residential blocks and gated developments.

The push into new zones comes at a time when counties like Laikipia, Taita Taveta, Elgeyo Marakwet, Siaya and Baringo have recently recorded rapid expansion in acreage under coffee, pointing to visible early tests of diversification that the State now intends to formalise and scale more deliberately.

The committees will also coordinate various public agencies and key sector institutions to anchor the revival strategy within cooperatives, which remain the core mobilisation vehicle for smallholder farmers who produce the bulk of Kenya’s coffee output.

The State is banking on cooperatives to provide the aggregation scale required to make coffee viable in new regions where the crop has never been traditionally grown and where individual farmers would otherwise lack commercial leverage and market discipline.

The move adds to the ongoing reform track where the government has since February 2023 restructured regulation, including bringing the Nairobi Coffee Exchange under the Capital Markets Authority, and licensed brokers in place of marketing agents.

Recent official trade data showed an improvement in export performance and a lift in both volume and value of unroasted coffee shipped out of Kenya in the first half of this year, with exports nearly doubling to Sh35.4 billion, signalling renewed farmer attention and improved incentives.

Kenya’s airline operators have joined other tourism stakeholders in opposing the new park fee payment system introduced by the Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS).

Under the new system, only M-Pesa and Visa card payments are accepted, with the KWS scrapping the bank transfer option that many tour operators relied on for group payments. What has further unsettled the industry is the introduction of an 8.5 percent processing fee for all card payments, a rate KTF says is high compared to other government platforms.

The KWS has also been faulted for using an inflated exchange rate of Sh135 per US dollar, which is higher than the Central Bank of Kenya’s current rate of around Sh129.50.

Stakeholders say the discrepancy has pushed up park entry costs, making Kenya’s destinations less competitive regionally and globally.

Alex Avedi, CEO of Safarilink Aviation, says the new system has triggered booking cancellations and uncertainty among tour agents who are the main clients for local airlines flying tourists to parks and conservancies.

‘We are at the end of the chain; we only fly on behalf of agents. When agents face cancellations, it hits us directly. We make investment and operational plans based on projected passenger numbers, and once you commit to acquiring an aircraft, it’s a long-term engagement. It’s not something you can easily walk away from,’ he said.

Mr Avedi said the abrupt changes, including the withdrawal of bank transfers and the introduction of an 8.5 percent card processing fee, have led to a drop in air traffic to key tourist destinations.

He added that the uncertainty caused by frequent policy shifts is undermining investor confidence and hurting the country’s image in key source markets.

‘In regions like the EU, once a safari quote is given, it cannot be changed. When additional costs are introduced suddenly, the travel agents have to absorb the loss and that risks pushing them out of business,’ said Mr Avedi.

Kenya Tourism Federation Chairman Fred Odek said the sector is already under immense pressure and that the abrupt rollout of the new system has worsened the crisis.

According to a regulatory impact statement from the Ministry of Tourism and Wildlife, park fee revenues are projected to rise from Sh7.41 billion in 2024 to Sh16.58 billion by 2028.

However, KTF estimates that industry players risk to lose almost Sh370 million annually in the unbudgeted costs under the current system.

Mr Odek said the federation wants the government to restore the previous eCitizen-based payment system to allow multiple and flexible payment options for both local and international visitors.

It also wants the suspension of the 5 per cent gateway fee pending stakeholder consultations and review, and the full compliance with existing court orders to uphold the rule of law in managing the system.

‘Digital progress should not translate into economic hardship for legitimate businesses. We remain open to collaboration with KWS and the Ministry, but urgent corrective action is needed,’ he said.

Kenya has broken ground on what it says will be the world’s first geothermal-powered fertiliser project in a bid to lower the cost of key farm input and boost food security plans.

State-run Kenya Electricity Generating Company (KenGen) and China’s Kaishan Group on Monday entered into a joint venture to build a plant with a capacity to produce between 200,000 and 300,000 tonnes of ammonia-based fertiliser every year.

Kaishan’s local unit, Kaishan Terra Green Ammonia Ltd, will construct and operate the facility, while KenGen will supply 165 megawatts of geothermal energy to power the production of green ammonia and fertiliser for the project for 30 years.

The facility is expected to stabilise local fertiliser prices by reducing dollar-denominated import exposure, KenGen said in a statement, projecting to generate an estimated $13 million (about Sh1.68 billion) in annual net profit from the plant on completion.

‘[This is] a milestone in clean industrialisation,’ KenGen managing director Peter Njenga said in a statement, adding that geothermal power is the ‘bridge between Africa’s green energy potential and its manufacturing future’.

Kenya largely depends on fertiliser for farming, and its pricing remains the single biggest variable driving output of staple maize.

The country spends tens of billions of shillings to ship between 800,000 and 900,000 metric tonnes of fertiliser every year from countries such as Russia and Saudi Arabia, according to official figures.

President William Ruto’s administration has been subsidising fertiliser prices since taking power in September 2022 through the National Cereals and Produce Board to reduce the cost burden for farmers and bolster production.

Speaking at the groundbreaking ceremony, Dr Ruto said the plant would help boost food security, lower import bills, and create jobs.

‘This project shows that Kenya is not just a leading producer and consumer of clean energy; we are now going further to add value and generate prosperity from it,’ he said.

‘By harnessing our geothermal wealth, we are lowering fertiliser costs, supporting our farmers, and contributing to global climate goals.’

The launch of the project has come at a time when the latest official numbers have shown that Kenya has cut fertiliser imports for the second straight year, signalling a cooling of the government’s subsidy programme that drove record shipments in 2023 and stood at the heart of President Dr Ruto’s food security agenda.

Fertiliser imports between January and June 2025 stood at 443,701 tonnes, valued at nearly Sh25.63 billion, down from 445,857 tonnes worth Sh27.71 billion in the same period of 2024, data collated by the Kenya National Bureau of Statistics indicate.

The latest half-year numbers extend the decline from the 2023 peak of 629,566 tonnes worth Sh44.8 billion, representing a 29.52 percent fall in volume and 42.83 percent decline in value over two years.

‘Our agriculture is highly dependent on fertiliser prices, with high prices leading to a decline in maize output nationally. As we know, maize is the staple crop that feeds millions of Kenyans. That is why domestic, competitively priced fertiliser matters not just for commerce, but for food security for our people.’

The facility is forecast to create more than 2,000 direct and indirect jobs across construction, operations, maintenance, logistics and supply chains.

Job openings from the project include those for plant operators, process engineers, laboratory technicians, electricians and small businesses plugged into the value chain.

Kenya currently imports nearly all fertiliser consumed domestically, exposing farmers to currency swings, Red Sea freight volatility and commodity price shocks linked to global gas markets – because about 98 percent of world ammonia is made using natural gas.

A green-ammonia plant will help Kenya realise import substitution and climate competitiveness. The project is forecast to avoid more than 600,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions each year.

Recently, the announcement of the “Women in Film Entrepreneurship Hub” residency by KFC (Kenya Film Commission) and GIZ (The Deutsche Gesellschaft fr Internationale Zusammenarbeit ), stirred a debate in my head.

On one hand, the residency is a great, much-needed opportunity that promises vital funding and mentorship to dynamic female filmmakers, a goal we can widely applaud and one that I fully support.

On the other hand, the programme’s sole criterion, exclusively based on gender, raises serious questions about creative segregation, meritocracy, and the core mandate of national institutions in an already struggling creative sector.

The fundamental flaw is that it puts identity over competence and skill. Let’s put ourselves in the shoes of a young, passionate filmmaker.

He puts his head down, aggressively pursues the necessary education, and networks tirelessly to the point of offering his services for free to hone his craft. He has the drive, the skills, and great ideas, and is prepared to join an industry he knows is unstable.

Now imagine that person systematically locked out of critical lifeline opportunities, not because his portfolio is weak, but purely because of his gender.

In a discipline as creatively intensive as filmmaking, where the final work is ultimately judged on talent and vision, prioritising an external, immutable factor like gender over skill is negative. It sends a message that a national commission is willing to overlook potential and ignore those whose work could genuinely elevate the industry simply because they happen to be men.

This leads directly to the core institutional contradiction. KFC is explicitly mandated to be an inclusive public entity, meant to serve and support and stabilise the entirety of the national film industry, not just one demographic.

By approving and championing a programme that deliberately segregates opportunity based on gender, the KFC seems to embrace a form of identity politics that undermines its universal charter.

To highlight the injustice, imagine the outrage if this residency were exclusively for men. The silence regarding the exclusion of male filmmakers, rationalised by the perceived nobility of the cause, exposes a profound double standard regarding equal access to resources.

While the intent to uplift female voices is noble, the mechanism chosen is shortsighted. Sustainable growth for the African creative space will not come from deliberate segregation.

The better, more equitable approach would be for KFC to use its energy and resources to invest in system stabilisation, universal funding of essential infrastructure, creating lucrative distribution channels, and ensuring stability and transparency within the industry.

It is in strengthening this overall economic foundation of filmmaking that the industry will organically attract and retain talent from all demographics and make the mechanics of selling filmmaking as a viable career path from the grassroots up, irrespective of gender, that much easier.

The emphasis needs to shift from creating niche, gender-specific pipelines to fostering universal support and demonstrable excellence for all.

I walked away from my favourite burger joint over two paid squirts of ketchup. In most eateries, whether standing in a chips-and-chicken shop in the middle of the night, or seated at a fancy restaurant, tomato sauce comes with fries, by the bottle! Their small savings turned a loyal customer into an ex-customer. It is a trivial example, but businesses often make penny-wise choices that erode their treasured customers’ experience, loyalty and quietly drain revenue.

Even though the statistics on the impact of Customer Experience (CX) on competitiveness are eye-catching, it is hard for most leaders to articulate what needs to be done to make their companies more customer-centric. Companies that are leaders in CX achieve growth rates 3.4 times those of CX laggards, and leaders in CX can charge more than 16 percent more than their competitors. This is news that should make every leader sit up. Here is a simple four-step framework that teams can use to evaluate whether they are being customer-centric.

The HELO framework is an approach based on service design and design thinking. These methods give tools and guidance on deeply understanding your customer using empathy and isolating the challenges that the customer has to align the solution offering to solve the real problem.

The first step, H, for Human, is to assess whether your company is using qualitative tools to uncover its customers’ needs, challenges and aspirations.

Having your executives walking the floors and meeting customers is an absolute first step, but an intentional user research exercise will uncover the “why” behind customer preferences and choices. What you end up with is personas that explain motivation, context, and emotions. Having a practice of preparing well-defined personas is an essential part of a customer-centric organisation.

Now that personas are defined, map the Experience (the ‘E’) to find the key moments to enhance. It is important to distinguish between the user journey or the customer steps in a digital application, and the customer’s actions, thoughts and feelings throughout their journey, which is the customer experience journey.

The latter is viewed through the customer’s eyes, charting the complete path to and through your product, mapping every touchpoint from awareness to usage and retention. Some of the most cost-effective interventions and opportunities occur before and after the usage of the product.

The next step is to zoom into the point of the journey that needs improvement, which we refer to as Links (the L), or the touchpoint. These touchpoints connect to form the overall experience, like links in a chain. At this point, you have a clear view of where, along the customer journey, the biggest opportunities to make a difference lie.

Often, companies want to jump directly to fixing touchpoints, but without the insights of the previous stages, it is often based on blindly copying competitors and ending up with an undifferentiated offering that lacks any inspiration from your customers. It is no wonder we are surrounded by me-too products.

The O in our framework is for Organisation and is often the most difficult. However, it gets to the heart of the changes that the organisation needs to make to become more customer-centric.

A powerful tool to use here is the Service Blueprint. The blueprint is a map of the backstage processes that helps to break down both operational silos and siloed thinking.

For example, shouldn’t it be an easy win for my bank, where I have personal accounts and business accounts, to offer me a prequalified credit card or a car loan? It isn’t today because each product is run as its own business. This is often where innovators leap ahead; by creating efficiencies and agility that is aligned directly to customer needs and value, and this may be why your company is struggling to execute on a customer-centric strategy.

The HELO framework is a CX field guide with unmistakable guideposts to customer obsession. Run it as an assessment: how would your company fare? If the answer stings, it may be time to meet your customer again, and this time say “HELO”

Kenya’s $223 billion infrastructure dream is slipping away. With rising debt, fuel levy securitisation, and weak project execution, the country must rethink how it funds and manages development.

According to the Global Infrastructure Outlook developed by the Global Infrastructure Hub and Oxford Economics, Kenya will need about $223 billion in infrastructure investment between 2016 and 2040 to sustain economic growth, urbanisation, and social transformation (Global Infrastructure Hub, 2023).

Spread over 25 years, this amounts to roughly $8.9 billion annually, covering transport, energy, water, and communications. Nearly a decade into this timeline, Kenya’s investment path reveals the country is significantly behind target.

Government expenditure records since 2016 show that development spending has remained far below what the economy requires.

Treasury’s 2024 data show annual development budgets have averaged between Sh600 billion and Sh740 billion, equivalent to $4.4 billion to $5.5 billion.

Yet, only around 60 percent of this typically goes into physical infrastructure such as roads, energy, and water works, according to the Parliamentary Budget Office (in 2023). This translates to about Sh350-Sh450 billion or $2.6 billion to 3.3 billion a year dedicated to infrastructure.

The problem is compounded by low absorption rates. Treasury data show that ministries and agencies frequently spend less than what is allocated, largely due to delayed procurement, financing bottlenecks, and weak project management, according to the Treasury Quarterly Budget Review of 2024.

In the 2023-24 fiscal year, only Sh434 billion of the Sh587 billion allocated for development was spent-an absorption rate of just 74 percent. As a result, even the modest allocations are underutilised, undermining project delivery.

On aggregate, infrastructure investment between 2016 and 2024 is estimated at $23 billion to $25 billion, or roughly 11 percent of the projected requirement (Oxford Economics, 2023).

Even after factoring in donor and private participation, the cumulative figure likely does not exceed $28 billion, leaving a $195 billion gap over the remaining 16 years. To meet the 2040 target, Kenya must therefore invest around $12.4 billion annually from 2025 to 2040-almost four times the current rate.

Achieving this would require infrastructure investment to grow by eight percent annually, or by 13 percent to close the gap within a decade.

This ambition faces a stiff fiscal headwind. Kenya’s public debt has ballooned from 42 percent of gross domestic product in 2013 to over 70 percent in 2024, according to the Central Bank of Kenya. Debt service obligations are projected to hit Sh1.9 trillion in the 2025-26 fiscal year, consuming more than half of total government revenue (National Treasury Budget Policy Statement, 2025).

This leaves little fiscal space for new capital spending and forces the government to rely heavily on off-balance-sheet financing mechanisms.

One such mechanism is the securitisation of the fuel levy, through which the Kenya Roads Board (KRB) has pledged future road maintenance revenues to raise infrastructure capital.

The government has already securitised Sh175 billion by diverting Sh7 out of every Sh25 per litre from the Road Maintenance Levy Fund to a special purpose vehicle.

As of mid-2025, about Sh60 billion has been raised and disbursed to contractors, helping to revive over 580 stalled road projects. Financial institutions, including the United Bank for Africa, have collectively invested over Sh16.38 billion in the scheme.

While the programme is structured to avoid direct government guarantees, it effectively shifts borrowing off the national balance sheet by mortgaging future fuel revenues.

Other off-balance-sheet strategies include public-private partnerships (PPPs).

Since Kenya adopted the PPP framework in 2013, about Sh140.7 billion in private capital has been mobilised into infrastructure, including flagship projects such as the Sh88 billion Nairobi Expressway and the Kenyatta University Teaching, Referral and Research Hospital.

However, PPP inflows have sharply declined: private investment plunged from Sh80.6 billion in 2022 to Sh4.3 billion in 2024. The Treasury reports that 39 PPP projects worth a combined $13 billion (Sh1.69 trillion) have been approved, but progress has been slow due to regulatory delays, financing uncertainty, and risk allocation concerns.

For fiscal 2025-26, the Treasury targets Sh70 billion worth of PPP projects in the energy, housing, health, and transport sectors.

The most promising financing frontier lies in mobilising domestic long-term capital.

Kenya’s pension funds now hold more than Sh1.6 trillion in assets, yet less than two percent is invested in infrastructure (Retirement Benefits Authority, 2024). Channelling even 10 percent of these funds could significantly close the investment gap. Additionally, implementing the Kenya Sovereign Infrastructure Fund would provide patient capital for strategic projects while easing reliance on commercial borrowing.

Still, Kenya’s challenge is not merely one of financing-it is also about efficiency. The Office of the Auditor-General has repeatedly flagged inflated project costs, delays, and incomplete works. Without addressing governance weaknesses, even increased funding will yield poor outcomes.

Transparent project appraisal, stronger monitoring frameworks, and prioritisation of high-return investments are critical for value creation. The focus must move from the volume of spending to the quality and sustainability of investment.

Infrastructure is the backbone of Kenya’s economic future. Roads, ports, water systems, and energy networks shape productivity, lower logistics costs, and attract investment. Yet, with less than one-eighth of the 2040 target achieved in nine years, the gap threatens to undermine Vision 2030’s goals.

To meet the $223 billion target, Kenya needs fiscal discipline and innovation. Securitisation, PPPs, pension mobilisation, and sovereign funds all have roles-but they must be guided by clear governance and risk frameworks. Otherwise, off-balance-sheet financing will simply shift debt burdens into the future without improving real infrastructure outcomes.

Kenya’s infrastructure journey is at a crossroads. Unless the country realigns its priorities and expands domestic financing while tightening governance, the 2040 horizon will arrive with unfulfilled promises, congested highways, and the same power and water deficits that have constrained growth for decades.

Edmands not only more money but smarter management of what is already in hand.