Rolling Applications and the Real Barriers to Women's Entrepreneurship
Poise examines the extended deadline for the Tony Elumelu Foundation's female entrepreneurship program as a symptom of deeper structural friction, not simply women's hesitation. The writer proposes a rolling application model as a more adaptive alternative to fixed cycles.
For many years, the Tony Elumelu Foundation (TEF) Entrepreneurship Program has been supporting Africa’s entrepreneurs with financing and mentoring. This year, there is a special edition dedicated to female entrepreneurs. The application deadline has been extended a couple of times, which may be a sign that they have not received many applications.
To some, this may be a sign that women tend not to show up even when they have been accorded special privileges. Still, we must acknowledge that women in general and women entrepreneurs in particular often face unique challenges that require tailored support and accommodation.
Some of the challenges are not unique to women entrepreneurs. To address these challenges and create a more inclusive program, we propose adopting a human-centered design approach, starting with accepting applications on a rolling basis.
A rolling basis format allows entrepreneurs to apply for the program at any time throughout the year, rather than within a fixed timeframe. This approach recognizes that deadlines do not bind entrepreneurship and that the need for support and guidance can arise at any moment.
By embracing a rolling basis format, the TEF Entrepreneurship Programme can better accommodate the diverse needs and circumstances of participants. Entrepreneurs, particularly women, will have the flexibility to access support when they are ready, without being constrained by arbitrary deadlines.
A lot can change for a business within one month. An entrepreneur may become eligible after the deadline, and by the time the next application opens up, they may no longer be eligible because their business did not receive the support it needed.
This proposal warrants a complete redesign of the back end of the program, which we are not knowledgeable about. It may be something impossible to do, but it is definitely something to consider.
The piece sits in a moment of growing institutional attention to women entrepreneurs across Africa, with programs like TEF's offering direct support. Yet implementation often lags behind intention, leaving gaps between policy design and the lived reality of people building businesses under unstable conditions.
The argument moves beyond surface-level interpretation (low applications = low interest) to structural critique: that entrepreneurship itself does not follow bureaucratic calendars, and that women—managing compounded economic and social constraints—need programs that match that reality. This remains relevant as development finance continues to wrestle with how to translate good intentions into genuinely usable design.