By: Andrew Maren, Founder and CEO of ProfitShare Partners
In recent months, global conversations around trade, climate policy and economic cooperation have taken on renewed urgency. The ongoing conflict in the Middle East is a clear example. What began as a regional geopolitical crisis has already started to disrupt major trade corridors, drive energy price volatility, and place pressure on global supply chains.
Oil price shocks, constrained shipping routes, and rising input costs are no longer isolated events. They feed directly into manufacturing costs, transport pricing, and ultimately the cost of doing business across multiple sectors.
In practical terms, this means a supplier in Johannesburg importing components, a contractor procuring materials, or a distributor managing inventory is now indirectly exposed to geopolitical risk thousands of kilometres away.
That is the reality of a more interconnected global economy. Global systems are becoming more integrated. The financial structures supporting smaller businesses have not kept up.
Large corporates have access to structured finance, diversified supply chains, and balance sheets that allow them to absorb volatility. Smaller businesses operate differently. They operate on timing, win contracts, and are committed to delivery. And then they fund the gap between execution and payment.
That gap is where global pressure translates into local strain.
When energy prices rise, input costs increase. When shipping routes are disrupted, lead times extend. When uncertainty grows, payment cycles often stretch. The result is not just margin pressure but pressure on working capital.
For many SMEs, the question is not whether there is demand, but whether they can deliver without overextending their business. In a volatile trade environment, growth cannot rely on cash reserves alone. Businesses need to structure capital into their delivery model from the outset. That means understanding the funding requirements of each contract, securing capital aligned to execution timelines, and reducing exposure to delayed payments before they occur.
There is growing emphasis in national discussions on inclusive growth, localisation, and supply chain resilience. These are necessary objectives. But they are often framed at a level that assumes participation will follow naturally once opportunity is created.
In practice, participation depends on whether businesses have the capital to perform.
If an SME secures a contract but cannot fund the inputs required to deliver, that opportunity does not translate into economic inclusion. It becomes another example of structural exclusion.
This is particularly relevant in sectors linked to infrastructure, energy, and industrial supply chains, where upfront costs are high, and delivery timelines are tight. The conversation, therefore, needs to shift.
It is not enough to ask how capital can be deployed at scale. We also need to ask how capital can move with precision.
Transaction-level funding is becoming essential in this environment. Aligning capital directly to verified contracts and delivery milestones allows businesses to execute without absorbing the full burden of global volatility on their balance sheet.
Instead of asking whether a business qualifies for funding in general terms, the question becomes whether a specific piece of work can be delivered if capital is structured correctly.
Global trade dynamics are unlikely to become simpler in the near term. Supply chains will continue to face pressure from geopolitical tension, climate-related disruptions, and shifting economic alliances. The ripple effects will continue to reach businesses far beyond their origin.
The current system still expects SMEs to absorb global volatility without giving them the financial structure to do so. For South Africa, this presents both risks and opportunities.
The risk is that smaller businesses remain constrained by capital structures that do not keep pace with the pace and complexity of global trade.
The opportunity is to build financial models that enable participation rather than limit it. If we want SMEs to play a meaningful role in supply chains shaped by global decisions, we need to ensure they are equipped to deliver in a world where timing, cost, and certainty are constantly shifting.
If global cooperation is to deliver real economic impact, it must extend beyond policy alignment to execution enablement. Otherwise, the businesses expected to drive growth will remain constrained by the very systems designed to support them.
That is the gap that now needs to be addressed.