Contact me

Finance · Led

Communication work that moved a credit risk number: defaults among new borrowers fell 12%.

A rural microfinance programme run under the National Bank of Ukraine read low engagement as low interest. The borrower interviews said otherwise: people weren’t uninterested, they were scared, and nobody had explained it like a human.

Measured outcome

+28%
loan programme enrolment
−12%
default rate, new borrowers
~1.4×
healthy loan book growthMore borrowers, lower default rate
3
channels rebuiltSMS, print, community briefings
Client
Confidential: rural microfinance initiative
Period
2023
Duration
About three months
Engagement
Operating model
Reading time
2 min

Key achievement

Enrolment up 28% while defaults among new borrowers came down, growth and risk moving the same way, which they usually don’t.

Role clarity

Led

Ran the borrower interviews and feedback sessions, redesigned the education materials and repayment touchpoints, built the multilingual outreach templates, produced the borrower story series.

01

Context

A microfinance programme in rural Ukraine, run under the National Bank of Ukraine, lending to small entrepreneurs. Borrower engagement was stalling and hardly anyone understood the terms.

02

Diagnosis

Low engagement doesn’t always mean low interest. In the interviews it usually meant something closer to "I don’t understand what I’m agreeing to, and nobody has explained it in words I use."

The default reading of low engagement is low demand, which sends you straight to more promotion. Here, more promotion would have made things worse.

People were facing forms, jargon, social pressure in a village where everyone knows everyone, and a rational fear of a risk they didn’t understand. Push harder on someone uncertain and it reads as pressure, and pressure in lending gets you exactly the borrowers you don’t want.

The interviews flipped the problem. The barrier was comprehension, not interest, which meant unclear communication wasn’t only holding enrolment down. It was generating defaults, because somebody who doesn’t understand a repayment schedule is more likely to miss it. Clarity was a growth lever and a risk control at once, and those two usually pull against each other.

03

Decisions

  • Started with interviews instead of campaigns: only borrowers could say what was actually in the way
  • Redesigned the education materials and repayment touchpoints in plain local language, aiming at understanding rather than persuasion
  • Built templates for SMS, print, and community briefings, the formats people already used
  • Worked through people the community already trusted instead of broadcasting
04

Results

Enrolment up 28%. Defaults among new borrowers down 12%. Together that’s roughly 1.4× growth in a healthier loan book, not a bigger riskier one.

Donor reporting got clearer too.

The thing I had to resist was promoting harder. Every standard answer to low enrolment involves more outreach, and here that would have grown the programme while quietly degrading it.

Enrolment and default rate usually move against each other. Here they moved together, because both were being held back by the same thing.