Lately I have fallen into the habit of reading manufacturer details on consumables I buy, mostly to find out who made a product and from what country. I was doing this recently with a pack of teabags that I purchased and discovered that the company that packed the bags, Kenya Tea Packers Association (KETEPA) Limited was 70 years old and owned by 450,000 small scale farmers. That last statistic was most intriguing – a company this old, with this quality of a product and 450,000 small-holder shareholders! I had the opportunity to (literally) travel across Kenya just this last week and I could not get over the number of matatus (public transportation vehicles) I saw emblazoned with this or that SACCO (Savings and Cooperative Society). It appeared almost every last one of them, especially as we got into Nakuru and Nairobi, were 5^th generation Toyota HiAce vans – in my country the vast majority of these are owned and used by government and/or blue-chip commercial enterprises as corporate vans! These SACCOs appeared to have significantly increased the ability of their members to acquire and operate top class vehicles in a business where typical models used have been old and dated, with artificially extended lifespans. These observations compelled me to document some of the thoughts I have had recently about the power of partnership in expanding the scope and influence of a business enterprise.

In my country we have this tradition of friends and family coming together in a fundraiser for marriage celebration ceremonies. A bride and groom will hold wedding meetings to which friends and family are invited, and put on a most creative effort to raise funds for the celebration – surprise gift auctions, creatively styled fines for certain conduct during the meeting and fees charged for any service requested of the chairman, auctioneer, or other guest at the meetings. It can be so much fun to attend! The extent of zeal attached to these has an accompanying tinge of fear; if one does not attend or support these events for his family, work colleagues or friends, s/he may struggle to mobilize this support for their own function, or that of their children. Applying varying levels of the concept, we also contribute readily to the building of places of worship and, particularly in the corporate space, various charity initiatives like caring for widows and orphans, improving school and health infrastructure, and supporting road safety initiatives (often by painting zebra crossings). We are very involved in pooling funds to support the beginning of a new family and other bespoke interests of community, much less so when it comes to launching or expanding economic activities. I have never heard of a wedding meeting type approach by one family to soliciting support for a business project – new or running.  We do SACCOs as well; in fact, they have been a core pillar in the roll-out of the prosperity for all government program that was launched in 2005. However, the vast majority of these were formed with the primary of objective of pooling resources to offer credit to their members to pursue their individual income generating projects rather than have projects initiated and run as the SACCO itself for the benefits of its members (benefits that could include access to affordable credit, but not as the primary product). The largest asset on their financial statements is loans and advances rather than shares/ investments held in member ventures, plant and machinery, land & buildings. From the literature review I have conducted on them, it seems the majority of SACCOs in Uganda are initiated as ‘micro-banks’, whose core purpose is to fill the gap in access to credit between commercial banks and borrowers that do not have standard acceptable collateral for bank loans. While this is a commendable raison d’etre and has yielded benefits in some areas, it is hardly the height of experience of the impact of partnership on a business enterprise.

The opportunities partnership offers businesses for growth are immense – just look at the KETEPA example. In the area where I live alone I can count no less than 50 carpentry practices on my drive home. There are also a number of tailors, hairdressers, bakers, hardware vendors, name it. On average, they will individually employ 3-5 people, mostly retain their single retail outlet for at least 5-10 years without seriously considering expanding it or diversifying their participation in the value chain of their enterprise beyond their current engagement (with the statistics on average age of micro and small businesses in Uganda, more than half of these might be closed before their 5^th birthday). But what if, say, all the carpenters decided to associate and begin to build a mega-carpentry practice in the area? What if they decided to jointly purchase and own industry level door making, wood carving, engraving machines? How would this affect their product quality and its demand? What if the tailors in the area associated and pooled resources to purchase industry cutting edge sewing machines? What if these partnerships then resolved to begin producing their own raw material – planting trees and cotton (or other material) rather than depend on middlemen to supply them? What if they got into the transportation business to ensure they can always move their product to their customers at the most affordable rates? How about if they chose to open subsidiary enterprises to create technology that would enable them forecast trends in customer tastes or possibilities coming from increasingly strong concerns like preserving the environment or simply do call-center and support for their customers? If they applied themselves to do this, what would they look like in 50 years? How many countries might they expand to; how many people might they employ; how much money might they actually make? It is a reasonably safe bet that by then they shall be courted by the oldest and most prestigious commercial banks in the WORLD. Take that for financial inclusion! It is quite telling the number of high value companies that could not have existed today at their scale, spread and influence without partnerships:  William Hewlett and Dave Packard (HP); Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak (Apple); Bill Gates and Paul Allen (Microsoft); Thomas Edison, JP Morgan, Elihu Thomson, Edwin J. Houston, Charles A. Coffin (General Electric); Kevin Systrom and Mike Krieger (Instagram), Jan Koum and Brian Acton (WhatsApp); Larry Page and Sergey Brin (Alphabet – which owns Google); Mark Zuckerberg, Andrew McCollum, Eduardo Saverin, Dustin Moskovitz, Chris Hughes (Facebook); Warren Buffet and Charles Munger (Berkshire Hathaway); Travis Kalanick and Garrett Camp (Uber), William Durant, Frederic Smith, Charles Mott (General Motors), and on it goes.

Let me bring this home for the enterprise builder that has taken the opportunity to visit with me today and read through this: Partnership is worth exploration if you wish to significantly expand your enterprise. Through this you get access to knowledge, networks and funding that you cannot ordinarily reach on your own or (for funds) acquire on patient, friendly terms aligned to where you mean to go with your business anyway. Not all partners have to be on the business payroll to partner with you. Some may even take the form of what you could later formalize into a board of directors – advisers with whom you can brainstorm strategy, product technicalities, marketing/ positioning, funding strategies, markets, etc. on a consistent basis. However, it will be important for you to be explicit with them that you would like to invite them to collaborate with you in building your enterprise. In looking to identify partners, I would recommend you consider people that share your values and vision for your business, have skills, knowledge or expertise that complement your own, practice good business ethics that you admire and would be keen to adopt. If one or all of your partners also happen to have resources – financial as well as relational (read networks), it would be a significant added advantage.

A man considered one of the wisest that has ever lived recorded his thoughts on partnership for our reference today: “Two are better than one; because they have a good reward for their labor. For if they fall, the one will lift up his fellow: but woe to him who is alone when he falleth, for he hat not another to help him up. Again, if two lie together, then they have heat: but how can one be warm alone? And if one prevail against him, two shall withstand him; and a threefold cord is not quickly broken” (This commentary is preserved in paragraphs 9, 10, 11 and 12 of the biblical record of Ecclesiastes – the 4th Chapter). If he thought it such a good idea, and in our contemporary times we have the example of those that have applied it and we’ve seen its fruit, it would do you hardly any hurt at all to avail yourself of it.