Ziwani’s podcast series Big Change: How Ordinary Christians Change Their World explores how Christians can drive significant change in society. Jonathan Wilson and David Harlley are co-founders at ThirdWay Capital, a venture holding company investing in and scaling small-to-medium businesses in sub-Saharan Africa. This summary was written by Lise-Marie Keyser, and you can listen to the full episode here.
In this seventh article of the Big Change series, host Jonathan Wilson and fellow investor David Harlley explore the role venture capital can play in contributing to meaningful, long-term social transformation in Africa.
What is venture capital?
Suggesting that they start with the basics so listeners are clear on the assumptions behind their discussion, Jonathan asks David to share his understanding of what a healthy purpose of business would be. “Simply put, business is about people,” David replies. “It’s about people expressing their passions and abilities in different ways, and being sustainably compensated for that expression. So a healthy marketplace would be one that allows businesses to continue growing and operating profitably, while people continue earning a living wage doing what they want to do.”
When asked what venture capital is and how it differs from private equity, David gives a clear breakdown. “Strictly speaking, venture capital is defined as a subset in the world of private equity,” he says, referring to investments in privately owned companies. But he notes that in practice, the terms have come to mean quite different things.
Private equity typically involves investing in more mature companies (often using significant amounts of debt as leverage) where the goal is to improve efficiency and then sell at a profit. “There is some value created there,” he comments, “but there really isn’t much room for any blue sky thinking.”
Venture capital, however, focuses more on early-stage companies – on brand-new ideas entering the marketplace. These investments are much riskier and don’t fit traditional models, so the category of venture (think ‘adventure’) capital was created. “It requires a risk-oriented investor that applies a different lens to assessing risk-versus-opportunity,” David comments. “The expectation is that if this new idea is successful, the outsized returns will compensate for the increased risk.”
Jonathan agrees that venture capital is rooted in a sense of adventure. “The whole point of venture capital is that it creates the space where larger-scale problem-solving can take place,” he says. “Whether it’s by backing a company that has products or services that can be exported worldwide, or by formalising an industry that was previously informal so it can scale and grow more robust, or by contributing to the green economy and climate resilience – the possibilities are endless.”
Venture capital in Africa
Their discussion then shifts to the role of capital in a world still marked by broken and unequal relationships – particularly within the African context.
Jonathan raises the question of whether colonial dynamics have truly ended, even decades after independence, noting that although “it’s very trendy to talk about decolonisation, the agendas of well-intentioned people seeking to do good in the global South are generally shaped by global North assumptions about what is good or what is important.” He shares an example from a recent impact investing conference where, despite being led by African organisers, the messaging closely mirrored Western norms and priorities – revealing, he suggests, a strategic effort to attract foreign capital by speaking the language Western investors expect to hear.
David acknowledges the complexity of this issue, saying, “The history is painful on both sides, and I think we’re still grappling with that.” He cites research by economist Jason Hickel to underscore the global imbalance in capital flows – while $2 trillion flows from North to South annually, more than $5 trillion moves in the opposite direction. “That should immediately cause us to at least start to ask the question, are things as we think they are?” David says, challenging the common narrative of the South as dependent and aid-reliant.
Jonathan adds that these imbalances aren’t just financial – they’re also ideological. “We’ve seen this not only in the flow of capital, but also in the assumptions about how it needs to be deployed.” African startups often succeed by fitting into Western investment playbooks, catering to Western customers or buyers. “If that’s the only thing that we’re doing,” he warns, “then in the end, we’re contributing to the resource drain from the global South to the global North.”
David draws a historical parallel, arguing that global capitalism is ironically beginning to resemble the feudal system it sought to overthrow. “Feudalism is essentially a system of high power versus low power, where the majority of society was obliged to labour on farms, but everything was owned by the nobility. And we’ve now returned to a system where 80% of the world effectively works for the other 20%.”
He’s particularly concerned about how Christian investors are responding to these systemic challenges. Too often, he says, their role is limited to charity, “as a Band-Aid to the wounds of those that are suffering,” rather than engaging as transformative agents within larger systems. “Yet we’re supposed to act as ‘yeast’ and ‘salt’ – to influence systems and move society in a particular direction,” he says.
The importance of interdependence
Reflecting on how Scripture and economic systems intersect (especially when it comes to mutual responsibility, capital flow, and justice) Jonathan mentions the apostle Paul’s second letter to the Corinthian church.
In this letter, Paul encourages them to give generously to fellow Christians in Judea who were going through famine at the time. “Last year you were the first not only to give but also to have the desire to do so. Now finish the work… according to your means. For if the willingness is there, the gift is acceptable according to what one has, not according to what one does not have. Our desire is not that others might be relieved while you are hard pressed, but that there might be equality. At the present time your plenty will supply what they need, so that in turn their plenty will supply what you need” (2 Corinthians 8:10–14).
“It is not about giving out of guilt or command, but out of love and shared responsibility,” Jonathan elaborates. “This is not about the more powerful actor being kind to the weaker actor. This is about everybody being part of the same wider community.” He sees Paul’s call to generosity as an invitation to “a rich dynamic of continuous interdependence” – one where sharing resources is reciprocal, as and when they are needed. Applying this to the modern investment context, Jonathan suggests that capital deployment (especially from investors in the global North into African ventures) should follow the same positive pattern of mutuality.
David builds on this idea with an abstract but powerful image borrowed from G.K. Chesterton. Instead of picturing economic relationships as towers (concentrated structures that risk collapse) Chesterton offers the Roman arch as a better metaphor. “Each stone is relying on the one next to it,” David explains. “Trust is built into the structure – I’m going to push on you and you’re going to push on me, and that’s how the arch is held up.”
By contrast, he argues, our current global economic system more closely resembles the Tower of Babel – towering structures of wealth that appear strong but are inherently unstable. “The fact is, we have highly concentrated wealth and that wealth comes with risk, but we won’t admit it. We pretend that we have a free market, but ultimately we have a society where the common man pays when we have a financial crisis and millions of tax dollars are extracted to bail out banks and large industry.” The problem isn’t just inequality, he adds – it’s the risks that come with “the way our societies are currently organised. If we’re ever going to live with each other, it just does not work to have the levels of wealth inequality that we have now.”
The importance of proximity
This inequality can also be seen in patterns of investment, where large companies often dominate the spotlight – absorbing most of the resources available at the cost of small and medium businesses. Jonathan points out, however, that “healthy small businesses are the bedrock of a given economy, because they are tied to their local settings” where real, grounded impact happens. These businesses solve local problems and remain accountable to their communities, often hiring locally.
He therefore urges Western investors to move beyond surface-level understanding of African markets. “If you’re deploying capital, and you’re from the West, you need to really understand the African context, but from within as opposed to from without,” he says, inviting David to speak on the role of proximity.
David responds by referencing Bryan Stevenson of the Equal Justice Initiative, who describes proximity as “a willingness to actually get down in the dirt with those whom we seek to support.” He explains that proximity isn’t just about empathy or observation – it’s about cultivating a deep understanding of people’s daily struggles. Unfortunately, David notes, this kind of closeness is rare. Too often, investors operate “from miles away doing desktop analysis,” disconnected from the lived realities of entrepreneurs.
This distance leads to control-oriented behaviours, even among well-meaning Christian investors. “They’ve got to retain control of the thing… whether the company or the capital,” David says. But where trust is lacking, genuine partnership and the virtuous cycle of trust and success can’t begin. Jonathan agrees, observing that many investors “unconsciously assume the power associated with the possession of capital,” without realising that their success depends on the success of the founders.
David acknowledges a common objection – that mutual dependence can feel too subjective or idealistic. But he argues it can be structured into the relationship, for example by intentionally avoiding majority control in portfolio companies. “You may have the best intentions, but it leads to temptation when there is a crisis,” he warns. Taking a minority stake forces investors to work with the founder to come up with solutions. “The thing is, the founder is not trying to fail, she’s trying to succeed. And if we put ourselves in the position of having to work together, well, that will be transformative in the long run.”
The importance of timelines
And, according to Jonathan and David, investing for the long run is what is needed in Africa. All forms of capital investment presume certain expectations around timelines and returns, but David suggests a unique approach. “Identify the scale of change you hope to see, and then work backwards from there. Ask yourself, well, what does that look like in the short term?” For this reason, ThirdWay Capital has a mid-term horizon of around 10 years, and a long-term horizon of around 40 years – which is much longer than the typical venture capital timelines. “I think that’s reflective of reality,” he comments. “Real, lasting change takes time, and the research backs that up.”
A 40-year timeline, David points out, means many of the current investors may not even be around to see the full fruits of their labour. “That again forces us to get away from ourselves. If your outcomes are longer time-scaled, it forces you into a posture of humility.” He likens their approach to “building tracks as well as the train,” describing it as systems investing – a method focused not just on individual company growth but on shaping the markets they operate in.
In contrast to traditional Western venture capital firms which often assume an established market, David explains, “with systems investing, you’re looking at a market that itself is growing.” Kenya, for instance, is already growing at 6% annually, with expectations for double-digit growth in the coming decades. So while their portfolio companies are expected to grow, they do so “against the backdrop of a growing market,” which naturally demands longer timelines.
To match this reality, David explains they use two investment vehicles – one for permanent capital and another for patient capital. The permanent capital approach allows them to walk with companies indefinitely, potentially realising value through dividends rather than quick exits. The patient capital vehicle, on the other hand, does aim for returns within a defined timeframe – but even those timelines stretch longer than usual. “Whereas the norm in venture capital is 7 to 10 years, we’re working with investors towards timelines more in the 12 to 15-year range,” he says.
Jonathan affirms the point, emphasising that these longer timeframes aren’t a sign of weakness. “We’re not saying that these businesses are taking a long time to get to scale in terms of returns because they’re weak, but because the market is growing.” He adds, “We’re participating in a systems change, not simply the growth of an individual company.” Rather than chasing the next trend in consumer goods, they’re helping build “the nuts and bolts of the future of a country.”
A new vision for venture capital
Ultimately, Jonathan and David offer a compelling vision of venture capital that is deeply relational, profoundly patient, and courageously systemic.
Rather than treating capital as a tool for control or short-term gain, they challenge conventional models by rooting investment in humility, mutual trust, and long-term commitment to local transformation. In doing so, they invite Christian investors to reimagine their role – not as distant benefactors or dominant stakeholders, but as proximate partners in the redemptive work of economic renewal across Africa.
