Original Research

Enhancing public-sector entrepreneurship: Evidence from Zimbabwean parastatals

Leslie Ncube, Ntandoyenkosi Sibindi

Received: 07 Mar. 2025; Accepted: 10 July 2025; Published: 30 Sept. 2025

Copyright: © 2025. The Author(s). Licensee: AOSIS.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Background: Public-sector entrepreneurship is increasingly recognised as a key driver of innovation and performance in state-owned enterprises (SOEs). However, many SOEs face challenges such as bureaucratic inertia, financial constraints, and regulatory rigidity, limiting their ability to implement entrepreneurial strategies effectively.

Aim: This study develops a conceptual model of public-sector entrepreneurship, grounded in empirical evidence from Zimbabwean parastatals, to examine how entrepreneurial strategies can enhance organisational performance.

Setting: The research focuses on two Zimbabwean parastatals, the National Railways of Zimbabwe (NRZ) and the Traffic Safety Council of Zimbabwe (TSCZ), both of which are strategically important and engaged in ongoing reform efforts to improve efficiency and service delivery

Methods: A qualitative multiple-case study approach was employed, using semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders. The study identified five core dimensions of public-sector entrepreneurship: policy innovation, corporate innovation, risk-taking, opportunity-seeking, and strategic renewal.

Results: The findings indicate that entrepreneurial strategies can improve efficiency, service delivery, and financial sustainability in parastatals. However, challenges such as bureaucratic inertia, financial constraints, and regulatory rigidity can constrain full implementation.

Conclusion: Public-sector entrepreneurship plays a crucial role in enhancing the performance of SOEs, but structural and regulatory barriers must be addressed. Policy reforms, leadership development initiatives, and innovation-driven frameworks are essential for embedding entrepreneurship in Zimbabwe’s public sector.

Contribution: This study contributes to the literature by proposing a conceptual model of public-sector entrepreneurship tailored to resource-constrained environments. The model serves as a strategic guide for policymakers and SOE leaders to foster resilience and sustainability.

Keywords: public-sector entrepreneurship; State-Owned Enterprises; innovation; strategic renewal; policy reform; Zimbabwean parastatals; qualitative research.

Introduction

State-owned enterprises (SOEs) face unique challenges, including inefficiencies, resource constraints and bureaucratic inertia. Chiuriri and Arshad (eds. 2023) report that SOEs are often characterised by insufficient internal controls, wasteful expenditure, inconsistent accounting processes, tax non-compliance, and inefficient board governance. This requires that leaders rethink their approach to public-sector management and adopt entrepreneurial practices that drive organisational success. In resource-constrained environments such as Zimbabwe, public-sector entrepreneurship (PSE) offers a pathway to address these challenges through innovation, strategic risk-taking, and adaptive governance (Audretsch 2012). Public-sector entrepreneurship also emphasises the importance of creative and pragmatic leadership that can drive change and inspire innovation within typically restrictive organisational systems. Policies that foster entrepreneurial practices, such as accountability mechanisms, innovation incentives, and strategic risk management frameworks, are essential for enhancing organisational resilience and growth. According to Chamba and Chazireni (2023), adopting entrepreneurial strategies such as diversification of revenue streams, modernising services, and forming collaborations within the private sector enables parastatals to address the challenges they face. This transition requires a change in attitude from relying on government subsidies to a more business-oriented approach. Public-sector entrepreneurship provides a comprehensive strategy for improving the performance of SOEs, especially in resource-constrained environments where traditional public administration models have proven ineffective.

Public-sector entrepreneurship continues to gain scholarly attention because of its utility in improving public services and boosting economic growth (Patrick & Link 2015). Entrepreneurship practices enable public entities to anticipate and address issues before they escalate, rather than merely reacting to crises. Similarly, the emphasis on innovation enables organisations to develop novel solutions to complex problems, leveraging limited resources more effectively and improving service delivery. Implementing PSE in parastatals fosters proactivity, innovation, and risk-taking, leading to positive change and renewal. This leads to the development of strong and adaptable organisations and effective utilisation of opportunities for public benefit (Vivona et al. 2024). Studies have found a correlation between PSE and organisational performance (Banda & Kazonga 2018; Karnsomdee & Phongkaew 2023; Moon et al. 2020), and the intersection between entrepreneurial orientation and organisational performance (Ahmed & Ndagi 2024). Although the theoretical underpinnings of PSE have been addressed in extant research (Klein et al. 2010; Liddle & McElwee 2019; Zerbinati & Souitarism 2005), there is a paucity of empirical studies on its operationalisation in developing economies, especially in African parastatals. This article presents a conceptual model developed after an empirical analysis of Zimbabwean parastatals. The model synthesises leadership, innovation and policy dimensions to enhance SOE performance, offering a roadmap for fostering entrepreneurial practices in public organisations.

While existing studies address PSE’s theoretical foundations, there is limited empirical evidence on its operationalisation in developing economies, particularly within African parastatals. This article addresses this gap by constructing a validated module for enhancing PSE. This study bridges the gap between theoretical concepts of PSE and their practical application in public organisations, with the view to driving organisational success and growth (Bhebhe 2024; Chiguvi & Magwada 2017). In their study, Silver, Garud and Woolle (2022) sought to understand entrepreneurial action in the public sector, in light of the theories of practice and found that the link between theories of practice and entrepreneurship in the public sector consists of entrepreneurial action. Shockley, Frank and Stough (2006) argue that existing theories of PSE do not capture the entrepreneurial discovery that is inherent in human behaviour. Rather, they focus on rational decision-making within the public sector context; thus, these theories fall short in explaining the entrepreneurial actions observed in political and bureaucratic environments that are characteristic of public-sector organisations in developing countries. Liddle and McElwee (2019) made a significant contribution to theoretical developments in PSE. The scholars emphasised that PSE research must move beyond traditional frameworks to explore novel approaches that explain innovation and enterprise practices. This is because extant literature on PSE has overlooked potential transformation opportunities and the key actors driving change. Ojugbele (2021) also developed a framework suggesting that to enhance its processes in a continuous and innovative manner, any new challenge or opportunity that can be seized should prompt efforts to address the fundamental issues raised in their framework to facilitate the integration of the tenets of PSE into such an entity over time. While extant literature has addressed the theoretical perspectives and frameworks for PSE, this study goes further by developing a practical module that can serve as a blueprint for the integration of PSE practices in organisations and how this can be pursued to enhance organisational growth.

Using a multiphase approach grounded in literature review, theoretical frameworks and empirical findings, a model for PSE is constructed. Grounded in Schumpeter’s Innovation Theory and Covin & Slevin’s Corporate Entrepreneurship Model, the study defines five key components – policy innovation, corporate innovation, risk-taking, opportunity-seeking and strategic renewal – as critical drivers of entrepreneurial success in the public sector. Using a qualitative multiple-case study approach focused on the National Railways of Zimbabwe (NRZ) and the Traffic Safety Council of Zimbabwe (TSCZ), the research gathers empirical data through in-depth interviews, which are analysed thematically to reveal patterns of innovation and organisational challenges. These findings are then synthesised into a Public-Sector Entrepreneurship Model, demonstrating how entrepreneurial strategies can improve service delivery, financial sustainability and institutional growth. Designed for adaptability beyond the case study institutions, the model serves as a strategic guide for policymakers and public-sector managers seeking to embed entrepreneurial principles in SOEs.

Public-sector entrepreneurship

Public-sector Entrepreneurship is among the most debated areas of entrepreneurial research; thus, there are varied scholarly perceptions on what constitutes PSE (Olumeko 2022). Kearney et al. (2009) have defined the concept as innovative, risk-taking and proactive practices within public organisations aimed at improving efficiency and service delivery. It is the promotion of collaboration, innovation and learning in the public sector to address complex challenges and create public value (Vivona et al. 2024). Hyter et al. (2018:676) conceptualise PSE based on: actions that are innovative, that transform a status quo, social and economic environment, and that are characterised by uncertainty. Dhliwayo (2017), however, proposed three dimensions of PSE, namely, economic facilitation and regulation, the civil-political service agent and commercial market participation. Ojubele et al. (2022) found that PSE is essentially about adopting an entrepreneurial mindset within the public sector. This involves actively innovating to identify and capitalise on new opportunities and improving existing or developing new public services. The PSE is defined by organisational innovativeness, risk-taking, proactiveness, autonomy, competitive aggressiveness, and public service motivation (Ahmed et al. 2024). It also requires a supportive policy environment, entrepreneurial leadership and adaptive organisational structures (Kearney et al. 2009). Results from a study conducted by Olumekor (2022) confirmed that PSE is characterised by innovation, entrepreneurship, sustainability and entrepreneurial orientation. These aspects are essential in enhancing organisational performance, where they are applied diligently in public institutions. As the public sector has often been characterised by bureaucratic inertia, inefficiencies and organisational redundancies, collating best practices from the private sector and applying them in the public sector has become a viable strategy for positive organisational transformation (Funko, Vlačić & Dabić 2023). Entrepreneurial agents in the public sector, as proposed by Zerbinati and Souitaris (2005:1), include a professional politician, spin-off creator, business entrepreneur in politics, career-driven public officer, and politically ambitious public officer. The agents, therefore, serve as a vital conduit through which organisational transformation for entrepreneurial practice can be realised in public institutions, guaranteeing competitiveness, growth and sustainability.

The adoption of PSE by managers in the public sector positively influences the ability to both achieve organisational goals and enact a democratic culture where employees are consulted and involved in open decision-making (Vivona 2023). Kearney and Maynhardt (2016) concur that PSE offers promising benefits for organisations, communities and stakeholders. By applying successful PSE practices in the public sector, managers can transform their organisations and enhance societal function. However, the transformative effect of entrepreneurial behaviour, characterised by risk-taking, innovativeness and proactiveness, is affected by the nature of the organisation and intra-organisational barriers (Kim 2010; Tremml 2020). This signals a need for adjusting organisational structures and strategies to drive entrepreneurial activities and culture through opportunity-driven management (Kim 2010). Ahmed et al. (2024) recommended that public institutions should adopt PSE practices as a strategy to alleviate developmental challenges, as PSE results in the provision of a clear vision through efficient resource management, recruitment of qualified personnel and maximum utilisation of resources. The adoption of PSE strategies in parastatals has the potential to drive organisational innovation performance, which results in overall positive institutional growth (Khirfan & Al Khasawneh 2023). This is consistent with findings from a study conducted by Iliashenko et al. (2023), which established a correlation between innovativeness and the entrepreneurial determinants of self-awareness, knowledge-enabling and entrepreneurial orientation. The incorporation of key PSE tenets such as opportunity seeking, corporate innovation, risk-taking, strategic renewal and policy innovation radically revolutionises organisational performance in the public sector.

Public-sector entrepreneurship is considered as an alternative strategy for addressing governance challenges in public institutions, especially in developing countries (Gaber & Fahim 2018). The scholars found a positive correlation between entrepreneurial activities and organisational performance. Both PSE and entrepreneurial leadership have a direct correlational effect on organisational performance, and therefore, these strategies can serve as a panacea for the myriad of challenges faced by the public sector (Karnsomdae 2023; Moon et al. 2020; Vivona et al. 2024). With a focus on the health sector, Banda and Kazonga (2018) found that the key dimensions of PSE, namely innovation, proactiveness and risk-taking, are positively associated with organisations’ performance, and this relationship is moderated by internal organisational factors such as a supportive organisational structure and resource availability. Moghaddam, Khorakian and Maharati (2015) identified an association between two variables: entrepreneurial behaviour and entrepreneurial management, and the performance of public-sector institutions. Thus, adopting PSE entrepreneurial practices helps prompt organisational success in the public sector, although this is mediated by factors such as organisational structure and resource availability. Ultimately, there is a consensus among scholars that PSE improves organisational performance, leading to public satisfaction (Alyammahi 2024; Mwakio et al. 2022).

Models of public-sector entrepreneurship

Public-sector entrepreneurship has gained traction as a strategy to revitalise bureaucratic institutions and enhance public value. Numerous models have attempted to capture the dynamics of entrepreneurship within the public domain; however, many are either theoretical extrapolations from private-sector frameworks or insufficiently contextualised for developing countries. Most notably, Kearney, Hisrich and Roche (2008) and Covin and Slevin (1991) offer foundational models that emphasise innovativeness, risk-taking and proactiveness. While these contributions are valuable, they assume organisational stability, strong institutional capacity, and resource abundance—conditions often lacking in fragile or under-resourced African SOEs.

Schumpeter’s (1934) innovation theory positions entrepreneurship as a catalyst for creative destruction, yet in public institutions plagued by inertia and patronage systems, the pathways to transformation are less linear. As such, transplanting these models wholesale into contexts such as Zimbabwe leads to theoretical and practical misalignment. Even more contemporary contributions, such as those by Zerbinati and Souitaris (2005) and Liddle and McElwee (2019), tend to under-theorise the impact of governance fragility, regulatory incoherence, and elite capture.

Critically, frameworks such as these often treat innovation and risk-taking as internally driven, neglecting the external dependencies that define many African parastatals – donor funding, political mandates and public distrust. The UNDP’s Africa Governance Report (2022) identifies policy inconsistency, siloed bureaucracies and weak accountability structures as central barriers to institutional innovation across the continent. Likewise, the OECD’s Fostering Innovation in the Public Sector (2021) Report emphasises the need for adaptive, participatory and mission-oriented innovation frameworks – factors that remain underexplored in dominant PSE models.

Frameworks developed for private-sector settings are also often incompatible with public objectives. Whereas private firms prioritise profit maximisation, PSE is driven by public value creation, political accountability and multistakeholder engagement (Osborne 2006). This distinction necessitates frameworks tailored to bureaucratic environments, where constraints are not merely market-driven but deeply institutional and political.

Models or frameworks are therefore critical for operationalising PSE in real-world contexts, particularly in African settings where bureaucratic rigidity, limited fiscal space and capacity deficits prevail. Ojugbele, Ogunlela and Tengeh (2022) rightly notes that while entrepreneurial thinking can be transformative, frameworks designed for public institutions must be adapted to their specific constraints. Kearney et al. (2008) advocate for tailored models that address the organisational-level complexities of PSE, recognising that effectiveness stems from structural, not just individual, capabilities.

Building on this, Lorenz et al. (2024) propose integrated public–private frameworks that offer a shared language while respecting divergent goals and stakeholder values. Yeazdanshenas (2014) presents a more comprehensive framework for organisational entrepreneurship that underscores the role of top management in initiating innovation-oriented processes. However, this model also acknowledges the mediating role of both internal (culture, capacity) and external (policy, funding) influences on implementation.

Syam et al. (2021) add that entrepreneurial effectiveness in the public sector hinges on empowering change agents – public managers capable of adaptation, learning and collaborative governance. This idea is echoed in Dunleavy et al.’s (2011) work, which stresses the non-linear nature of innovation in public organisations. Innovations often emerge from experimentation, iteration and co-creation, rather than through rigid planning cycles. Therefore, frameworks must accommodate ambiguity, policy failure and emergent strategies.

This study contributes to this evolving discourse by offering a context-sensitive conceptual model rooted in empirical data from Zimbabwean parastatals. Unlike most extant models, the proposed framework captures the intersection of policy reform, corporate innovation, risk-taking, opportunity-seeking, and strategic renewal, each mapped to the constraints and affordances of African SOEs. It shifts the focus from theoretical abstraction to contextual operationalisation, bridging the gap between normative ideals and implementation realities in the Global South.

Research methods and design

This study adopts a qualitative multiple-case study approach to examine the impact of PSE on the performance of Zimbabwean parastatals, focusing on the National Railways of Zimbabwe (NRZ) and the Traffic Safety Council of Zimbabwe (TSCZ). The sample consisted of executives, middle managers, policymakers and industry experts.

Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders, supplemented by document analysis of policy reports and organisational records. Thematic analysis followed Braun and Clarke’s (2006) six-phase approach: familiarisation, coding, theme development, theme review, theme definition and reporting. After transcribing the interviews verbatim, the researcher reviewed transcripts multiple times to gain deep familiarity. Initial codes were generated inductively from the data using ATLAS.ti, focusing on recurrent ideas related to innovation, leadership, opportunity-seeking and performance.

Coding was conducted in three cycles:

1. Open coding to identify basic concepts and repeated patterns.

2. Axial coding to cluster related codes into sub-themes (e.g. ‘strategic renewal’ under ‘organisational adaptability’).

3. Selective coding to consolidate overarching themes aligned with the PSE framework.

To enhance trustworthiness, peer debriefing with two external researchers helped to refine themes (Table 3) and check for bias. Member checking was also conducted with six participants (Table 2) to validate interpretations and ensure the credibility of the findings. A codebook with definitions and sample quotations was developed to maintain consistency throughout the process.

The final themes were not only theory-driven (e.g. based on Schumpeter’s innovation theory and Covin & Slevin’s model) but also grounded in the lived experiences of participants, thereby strengthening the empirical basis of the proposed conceptual model.

Ethical considerations

Ethical clearance to conduct this study was obtained from the University of the Western Cape Humanities and Social Science Research Ethics Committee (No. HS23/10/47).

Results

The findings that culminated in the construction of the Public-Sector Entrepreneurship Model highlight key entrepreneurial strategies that enhance in Figure 1 organisational performance in Zimbabwean parastatals. The thematic analysis identified six core elements as the foundation of the model: policy innovation, corporate innovation, risk-taking, opportunity-seeking and strategic renewal and cross-cutting enablers (see Table 4). Empirical evidence from the NRZ and the TSCZ demonstrated a strong correlation between these entrepreneurial approaches and improved efficiency, service delivery and financial sustainability.

FIGURE 1: Public-sector entrepreneurship model.

Policy innovation

Policy innovation plays a critical role in shaping the entrepreneurial landscape within public-sector institutions by fostering regulatory frameworks that support efficiency and adaptability. The study finds that policy entrepreneurs significantly influence legislative and executive decision-making, ensuring that public institutions remain responsive to emerging challenges. However, it notes that public-sector innovation policies are still underdeveloped compared to those in the private sector, where incentives and resource allocation are more structured. The NRZ and the TSCZ have utilised policy action plans to structure their strategic renewal initiatives, ensuring that infrastructural development, operational efficiency and customer service enhancements are prioritised. One participant from NRZ noted, ‘Our strategic renewal is governed by a comprehensive action plan that includes infrastructure development, operational efficiency, and customer service improvements’ – a view echoed by several senior managers and validated in internal strategy documents. This sentiment aligns with the policy innovation theme identified in the coding process.

Corporate innovation

Corporate innovation refers to the internal efforts within public institutions to develop new products, processes or business models that enhance service delivery and efficiency. The study reveals that both NRZ and TSCZ have embraced corporate innovation through administrative process automation, strategic collaborations and expansion into new service areas. However, bureaucratic inertia has often hindered the pace of innovation, necessitating streamlined decision-making processes. A notable example is the establishment of innovation hubs aimed at fostering continuous improvement. While these hubs carry risks such as resource misallocation and project failures, their successful initiatives have led to process optimisations and enhanced service delivery. As one middle manager at TSCZ observed:

‘Innovation hubs have been established as a strategic risk aimed at fostering continuous improvement. While there are risks of resource wastage and project failures, successful innovations from these hubs have led to process optimizations and service enhancements.’ (Participant 4)

This quote reflects a broader view expressed by 10 of 23 participants and was linked to the corporate innovation code in the thematic framework.

Risk-taking

Risk-taking is an essential component of PSE, allowing institutions to embrace uncertainty in pursuit of improved performance. The study finds that both NRZ and TSCZ have taken strategic risks by exploring new markets and adopting innovative business models. One of the most notable risks has been the adoption of public–private partnerships (PPPs), which, despite initial challenges, have led to service delivery improvements. Furthermore, risk-taking has extended to direct engagement with customers, allowing organisations to tailor their services more effectively. A frontline officer from TSCZ shared, ‘Engaging with customers to understand their needs and preferences has been a strategic risk … but the increased customer satisfaction validated this approach’. This sentiment, echoed by eight respondents, emerged consistently in the ‘strategic risk-taking’ theme, underscoring a shift in institutional culture towards responsiveness.

Opportunity-seeking

Opportunity-seeking behaviour is crucial for public-sector organisations striving to improve efficiency and expand service delivery. The study highlights that NRZ has capitalised on alternative revenue streams, including tourism-themed trains, which provide additional income while promoting the country’s cultural heritage. Similarly, TSCZ has introduced smart traffic monitoring systems aimed at enhancing road safety through data-driven enforcement strategies. In addition, collaborations with international bodies have been instrumental in identifying new growth opportunities. One participant from NRZ remarked, ‘We’ve been exploring partnerships with global rail bodies to modernize our infrastructure and improve efficiency’. This was reinforced by interview data from both executives and middle managers, with 9 of 23 participants citing international collaboration as a growth opportunity within the ‘opportunity-seeking’ code.

Strategic renewal

Strategic renewal is the process through which organisations continuously evolve their strategies, structures and capabilities to remain competitive in changing environments. The study finds that both NRZ and TSCZ have implemented monitoring and evaluation (M&E) frameworks to track the effectiveness of their strategic initiatives. This ensures that adjustments are made in response to performance metrics, leading to a more adaptive approach to management. One of the key strategies employed is the cascading of high-level strategic plans into department-specific objectives, ensuring alignment across various levels of the organisation. A TSCZ manager stated, ‘The strategic plan is broken down into actionable tasks for each department, ensuring alignment between top-level goals and operational execution’. This operationalisation of strategic renewal was also cited in M&E reports reviewed during document analysis and was raised by seven participants during interviews.

The findings of the study emphasise that policy innovation, corporate innovation, risk-taking, opportunity-seeking, and strategic renewal are critical components of PSE that can significantly enhance the performance of Zimbabwean parastatals. By adopting these entrepreneurial approaches, NRZ and TSCZ can overcome existing challenges and improve efficiency, service delivery and financial sustainability.

Presenting the public-sector entrepreneurship model

The Public-Sector Entrepreneurship Model developed in this study demonstrates how entrepreneurial strategies drive organisational growth, enhance service delivery and improve operational efficiency within Zimbabwean parastatals. The model was conceptualised based on empirical findings from the National Railways of Zimbabwe (NRZ) and the Traffic Safety Council of Zimbabwe (TSCZ) and is grounded in both literature and theoretical frameworks. While originally designed for these two cases, the model is adaptable for broader application across other SOEs.

Core components of the model

The model integrates five key entrepreneurial dimensions, each of which plays a crucial role in improving public-sector performance:

Policy innovation

Policy innovation is central to the proposed Public-Sector Entrepreneurship Model, as it focuses on adapting regulatory and operational frameworks to better suit evolving circumstances. The thesis emphasises that policy innovation enables institutions such as the NRZ and the TSCZ to overcome bureaucratic hurdles and implement strategic changes more swiftly. By aligning policies with organisational goals, these parastatals have been able to navigate regulatory complexities that often impede progress. For instance, policy reforms that encourage digital transformation and infrastructural investment have provided NRZ with the flexibility needed to modernise its operations and meet current market demands. This pillar highlights the importance of a dynamic policy environment that supports experimentation and learning, thereby fostering an entrepreneurial culture within the public sector.

Corporate innovation

Corporate innovation within the model is concerned with leveraging internal capabilities to create new products, services or processes that enhance operational efficiency and service quality. The study finds that NRZ and TSCZ have made significant strides through corporate innovation, such as adopting digital solutions and forging strategic collaborations that expand their operational capacity. For example, the deployment of administrative process automation and the creation of innovation hubs have enabled these parastatals to streamline workflows and introduce customer-centric services more effectively. However, the thesis also notes that bureaucratic inertia remains a considerable barrier, often stalling innovative initiatives. Thus, fostering a more agile corporate culture is deemed essential for these entities to fully embrace innovative practices and drive meaningful change.

Risk-taking

Risk-taking is portrayed as a vital element of the entrepreneurship model, allowing parastatals to pursue opportunities despite uncertainties. The research indicates that NRZ and TSCZ have gradually adopted a more calculated approach to risk, particularly through PPPs that diversify their service offerings and reduce dependency on government funding. For instance, NRZ has engaged in partnerships to rejuvenate its rail infrastructure, while TSCZ has implemented customer feedback mechanisms to align its services with public expectations. This shift towards embracing calculated risks reflects a growing recognition of the need to innovate in response to a competitive and rapidly changing environment. However, overcoming a traditional aversion to risk, ingrained through years of conservative governance, remains a challenge that these institutions must continue to address.

Opportunity-seeking

Opportunity-seeking within this model revolves around actively identifying and exploiting new avenues for growth and development. Both NRZ and TSCZ have demonstrated a growing capability to recognise and act upon emerging opportunities, whether by exploring alternative revenue streams or adopting advanced technologies to improve service delivery. For instance, NRZ’s initiative to introduce tourism-themed trains has not only diversified its income but also promoted Zimbabwe’s cultural heritage. TSCZ’s adoption of smart traffic monitoring systems illustrates a strategic pivot towards leveraging technology to enhance road safety outcomes. This pillar underscores the significance of fostering an outward-looking perspective where collaboration with international bodies and local stakeholders becomes a critical strategy for uncovering and leveraging new possibilities.

Strategic renewal

Strategic renewal is essential for ensuring that these parastatals remain responsive to changes in their operational environments. The model advocates for continuous reassessment and realignment of strategies to maintain relevance and competitiveness. By employing M&E frameworks, NRZ and TSCZ have been able to gauge the effectiveness of their strategic initiatives and make informed adjustments. This approach has helped embed a culture of continuous improvement, allowing for a more responsive and adaptive management style. Furthermore, the cascading of strategic goals into actionable departmental objectives ensures that all levels of the organisation are aligned and working cohesively towards shared goals. This pillar highlights the importance of strategic agility in navigating the complex challenges faced by public-sector entities in Zimbabwe.

Practical implications and implementation guidance

The conceptual model developed in this study has significant practical implications for SOEs in Zimbabwe and comparable developing contexts. To operationalise the five pillars of PSE—policy innovation, corporate innovation, risk-taking, opportunity-seeking and strategic renewal—SOEs require a structured implementation approach. This includes the development of diagnostic tools to assess institutional readiness, leadership development programmes focused on entrepreneurial and adaptive management, and innovation scorecards that guide performance measurement at departmental levels. Policymakers can support these efforts through enabling frameworks such as policy sandboxes, performance-based funding linked to entrepreneurial metrics, and the alignment of innovation indicators with national development strategies. Furthermore, partnerships between public institutions, academia, and the private sector can facilitate experimentation, digital transformation, and knowledge exchange. Establishing innovation hubs and peer-learning networks will foster continuous improvement, while donor support can be mobilised to fund pilot initiatives. Finally, integrated monitoring and evaluation systems – featuring both qualitative and quantitative metrics—are critical for tracking progress and enabling strategic renewal. These strategies together offer a roadmap for embedding entrepreneurial practices within the operational DNA of African public-sector institutions.

Discussion

The Public-Sector Entrepreneurship Model developed in this article is grounded in established theoretical frameworks and supported by empirical findings. Drawing from Schumpeter’s (1934) Innovation Theory and Easton’s (1965) Political System Theory, the model offers a structured pathway for enhancing SOE performance through entrepreneurial strategies adapted to the African context.

Policy innovation emerges as a key pillar of the model. Traditional approaches often regard policy as a fixed constraint; however, this study aligns with Easton’s notion of public institutions as dynamic systems. In contexts such as Zimbabwe, the effectiveness of SOEs depends not just on internal efficiency but also on adaptive policy frameworks that can respond to environmental feedback. The study highlights how reforms enabling digital transformation, performance-based management and decentralised governance can open up space for innovation, especially in bureaucratically rigid institutions.

This perspective aligns with Mazzucato and Kattel (2020), who argue that governments must actively shape innovation ecosystems. Osborne and Brown (2013) similarly advocate for policy entrepreneurship as a mechanism for addressing complex public-sector challenges. This model reinforces these ideas by integrating policy tools such as sandboxes and innovation incentives as enablers of systemic transformation.

Incorporating corporate innovation into the model draws on Schumpeter’s insight that innovation drives organisational change. Yet, public-sector contexts require adaptation. Rather than individual entrepreneurs, change agents in SOEs often work through institutional reforms and strategic collaboration. This model reframes corporate innovation as a collective capacity enhanced through innovation hubs, digital automation and internal process renewal. Moore’s (1995) concept of public value reinforces the importance of balancing innovation with responsiveness to public needs. Thus, the model positions innovation not merely as a tool for efficiency but as a mechanism for social and institutional legitimacy.

Risk-taking, while central in entrepreneurship theory, is traditionally constrained in public institutions by concerns over accountability and political repercussions. Rather than rejecting risk, this model advocates for structured risk-taking mechanisms – e.g. risk registers, public–private partnerships and adaptive policy review. This aligns with Guo and Jian’s (2020) framework, which promotes risk-managed innovation. The Zimbabwean case studies show that calculated risks – like shifting to digital monitoring or introducing customer feedback loops—can yield transformative gains if supported by governance safeguards.

Opportunity-seeking behaviour in this model is conceptualised not merely as reactive but strategic. Unlike private firms, SOEs pursue public value, yet face similar imperatives to adapt and grow. This study finds that Zimbabwean parastatals actively explore partnerships, secondary revenue streams and international collaborations, aligning with the strategic entrepreneurship perspective (Hitt et al. 2001). These practices illustrate how even constrained institutions can exhibit agility when opportunity-seeking is embedded within strategic planning.

Strategic renewal rounds out the model by addressing the need for long-term adaptability. Drawing from Teece’s (2018) dynamic capabilities framework, this study underscores the importance of organisational learning, feedback loops and cascading strategic plans. Strategic renewal ensures that innovation and entrepreneurship are sustained over time, not isolated interventions. In practice, NRZ and TSCZ employed M&E systems and departmental scorecards to continuously align operations with performance goals – tactics that exemplify the embedded nature of entrepreneurial renewal.

What distinguishes this model from earlier frameworks such as those of Kearney et al. (2009) or Zerbinati and Souitaris (2005) is its empirical grounding in resource-constrained, politically complex environments. Whereas existing models often presume institutional stability and ample resources, this framework integrates the systemic challenges of African SOEs into its design. It shifts from abstract theorising to implementation-focused architecture.

In summary, the model contributes a new, context-sensitive synthesis of entrepreneurial strategies tailored to African public administration. It bridges classical theory with contemporary governance challenges, offering a pragmatic and adaptable approach to driving innovation, resilience and growth in the public sector.

The conceptual model developed in this study advances PSE theory by adapting and extending established frameworks to the realities of under-resourced African SOEs. Table 1 summarises the theoretical contribution of the study.

Conclusion

This study demonstrates that integrating entrepreneurial strategies into Zimbabwean parastatals can enhance efficiency, service delivery and financial sustainability. By embedding policy innovation, corporate innovation, risk-taking, opportunity-seeking and strategic renewal within SOEs, these organisations can overcome persistent challenges such as bureaucratic inertia, financial constraints and regulatory barriers. However, achieving sustainable transformation requires leadership commitment, regulatory reforms and strategic partnerships. Implementing entrepreneurial frameworks can reposition parastatals as key drivers of economic growth, fostering innovation and operational excellence in Zimbabwe’s public sector.

To achieve sustainable transformation, Zimbabwean parastatals must embrace regulatory reforms, streamline bureaucratic procedures, and foster public–private partnerships to enhance investment and efficiency. Leadership development should be prioritised, equipping managers with entrepreneurial skills to drive proactive decision-making and risk-taking. Institutional flexibility, adaptive governance models and strategic diversification should be promoted to ensure resilience and financial sustainability. Capacity-building initiatives, stakeholder engagement with academia and industry experts, and the establishment of innovation hubs will facilitate continuous learning and experimentation. Furthermore, robust monitoring and evaluation frameworks should be implemented to assess the impact of entrepreneurial initiatives. By adopting these measures, Zimbabwean parastatals can become more competitive, financially viable and innovative, ultimately driving national economic growth and improved public service delivery.

Acknowledgements

This article is partially based on the author’s thesis titled ‘The nexus between public-sector entrepreneurship and the performance of Zimbabwean parastatals: A case study of the Ministry of Transport parastatals in Zimbabwe’ towards the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Management) in the Management and Entrepreneurship Department, University of the Western Cape, South Africa on 11 September, 2025, with supervisor Dr. Ntandoyenkosi Sibindi.

The authors declare that they have no financial or personal relationships that may have inappropriately influenced them in writing this article.

L.N was responsible for the conceptualisation of the study, conducting the investigation, and preparing the initial draft of the manuscript. N.S contributed through data curation, the development of the research methodology, data analysis, and supervision, as well as refining and finalising the manuscript.

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

The data that supports the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, N.S., upon reasonable request.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and are the product of professional research. They do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any affiliated institution, funder, agency or that of the publisher. The authors are responsible for this article’s results, findings and content.

References