Why was I interested in interviewing Ayman? He is a leading global figure in entrepreneurship research, education, and policy. He is a professor of management and Deputy Chair at the George Washington University School of Business, and serves as President and CEO of the International Council for Small Business, the world’s oldest and largest organization dedicated to advancing small business ecosystems. His work sits at the intersection of academia and global policy, with a particular focus on “humane entrepreneurship,” innovation, and MSME development. Among his most notable achievements is his instrumental role in establishing the United Nations Micro, Small and Medium-sized Enterprises Day, now recognized globally on June 27, underscoring the central role of small businesses in economic growth and sustainable development.

What makes this interview particularly compelling is its rare ability to connect high-level policy thinking with deeply personal reflection. Rather than presenting entrepreneurship as a purely technical or economic discipline, it explores it as a human-centered practice shaped by values, relationships, and lived experience. The conversation moves fluidly between global systems—AI, finance, ESG, and development policy—and intimate insights about leadership, failure, legacy, and meaning. This dual lens gives the interview unusual depth: it is not only informative for policymakers and practitioners but also intellectually and emotionally engaging. At its core, it consistently advances a powerful idea—that sustainable economic systems are built not only on data and strategy, but on empathy, trust, and human dignity—making it both analytically rigorous and philosophically resonant.

Here’s our exchange:

Where are you originally from, and what was your childhood like there?

I consider myself a global citizen. My father is from Egypt, my mother is from Italy, and I was born in Kuwait. So I am a mix of European and Arab cultures. From kindergarten onward, I attended an American school, which added yet another cultural layer—creating a complete blend of cultures, religions, and perspectives.

My father, Zuhier ElTarabishy, was an entrepreneur, and my mother was his partner. Our home was therefore driven by entrepreneurial energy and instinct. We traveled constantly and were always discovering new cultures. That set an early pattern: home was not just a place, but a space where ideas could flourish.

What was your family dynamic, and who were the key figures in your upbringing?

My father was the central figure. He was my first teacher in both business and life, and the way he carried himself shaped how I understand work and responsibility to this day. My mother provided the steadiness that allowed everything else to function.

Our family operated on a quiet principle that has stayed with me: you owe something to those who came before you and to those who will come after you. That sense of inheritance and stewardship was never explicitly discussed—it was simply the air we breathed.

Who were the most influential people in your childhood, and what lessons did you learn from them?

My father, without question. From him, I learned that business is not separate from character. He showed me that how you treat people—especially those who can do nothing for you—reveals who you truly are.

Another important influence was a series of teachers across different schools and countries who took me seriously when I was too young to deserve it. They taught me that real education is not about transferring information; it is about asking questions that the student cannot yet answer—but cannot forget.

What is one of your earliest memories, and how do you think it shaped who you are today?

One of my earliest memories is of my father working late at his desk, with papers spread out and a cup of tea going cold beside him. I was small enough that the desk was at my eye level. I remember thinking that whatever he was doing must be important, because he was giving so much of himself to it.

That image stayed with me. I came to understand that work, when done seriously, is a form of love. I have tried to carry that into everything I do—whether editing a manuscript at midnight, preparing a class, or getting ready for a meeting at the United Nations.

Were there any cultural or family traditions from your childhood that helped define your values?

I grew up in a home shaped by multiple cultures, and at the time, it simply felt natural. We listened to Arabic, Italian, and American music, and our meals reflected that same diversity—some nights pizza, other times hummus, and sometimes a simple burger.

Looking back, that environment taught me to be comfortable with differences and to value them rather than question them. That mindset stayed with me and later influenced how I think about entrepreneurship. What I now call human-centered entrepreneurship comes directly from that early experience—the belief that people are not just inputs in a system, but individuals who deserve to be respected, understood, and valued.

What motivated you to study what you studied?

I was always drawn to math and numbers, which naturally led me toward engineering. I appreciated its structure, logic, and the precision of problem-solving. As I went deeper, I realized that engineering is not just about solving problems—it is about using mathematics to understand and address real-world challenges.

That realization pushed me to think beyond traditional engineering. I began to see that entrepreneurship operates on a similar foundation. At its core, entrepreneurship is about solving problems that matter to people. It involves measuring opportunity, evaluating risk, and making decisions under uncertainty. In that sense, it is mathematics applied to markets, people, and ideas.

That is what drew me into entrepreneurship. It allowed me to take my interest in numbers and apply it in a more dynamic and human context. It sits at the intersection of economics, psychology, art, policy, and ethics—and it is one of the few fields where you are expected to integrate all of these perspectives. That is what has kept me engaged for over thirty years.

At what age did you start working, and what did your first job involve?

I started working at a young age, as children from business families often do—helping out in ways that felt small at the time but taught me how an enterprise truly operates. My first formal job involved long hours and tasks that nobody else wanted to do. That turned out to be the most valuable training I ever received. You quickly learn that no part of the work is beneath you, and that the people doing the unglamorous tasks are often the ones holding everything together.

How would you describe your current job and its responsibilities?

I am a professor at the George Washington University School of Business, where I teach undergraduate and graduate courses in entrepreneurship, small business, and innovation & creativity. I also lead the International Council for Small Business (ICSB), a global network spanning more than 130 countries, focused on advancing micro, small, and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs).

These roles are closely connected through a shared focus on entrepreneurship and MSMEs. Through ICSB, I gain insight into how policy is shaped and implemented across different economies. At the university, I have the opportunity to test ideas, challenge assumptions, and work closely with the next generation of researchers and entrepreneurs.

My day-to-day work revolves around teaching, research, and building alliances across institutions and countries. The common thread is a simple goal: to ensure that small businesses are taken seriously by the institutions that shape the global economy.

How do you envision the role of micro, small, and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs) evolving in the next decade, especially in the face of increasing automation and AI?

MSMEs are about to become more important, not less—but the nature of their importance will change. Automation and artificial intelligence will narrow the gap between what small firms and large firms can achieve. Tools that once required an enterprise IT department are now accessible to a single individual. That represents a real democratization of capability.

The risk is that, without deliberate policy, these same technologies could concentrate power in a few platforms and push MSMEs out of the value chain. The next decade will be shaped by which of these trajectories prevails. In my view, MSMEs must be involved in shaping AI policy from the outset—not consulted after the fact.

Your work often emphasizes “humane entrepreneurship.” In your view, what are the most critical principles that make entrepreneurship humane, and how can they be institutionalized in business education and policy?

Humane entrepreneurship is built on three principles—the Three E’s: empathy, enablement, and empowerment. Empathy means recognizing that people in and around your business are full human beings, not just roles. Enablement involves actively providing them with what they need to succeed. Empowerment is about sharing authority, not just delegating tasks.

Institutionalizing these principles in business education requires rethinking case studies. Much of what students read still treats employees and communities as variables. We need cases that center human relationships and demonstrate, with evidence, that companies built this way perform better over time.

In policy, it means measuring outcomes that reflect well-being and meaningful employment—not just output.

You successfully campaigned for the United Nations to recognize an MSMEs Day. What were the biggest strategic and diplomatic challenges you faced in securing that recognition, and what lessons did you draw from that process?

The biggest challenge was making the case that MSMEs deserved their own day. The UN system is filled with important causes competing for attention, and small business can initially appear to be a domestic rather than a global issue.

We had to demonstrate that MSMEs represent over 90% of businesses worldwide, employ the majority of the global workforce, and are essential to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals.

The diplomatic effort was led by the Permanent Mission of Argentina and Ambassador Martín García Moritán. The key lesson for me was that international recognition is built through consistent, incremental engagement. There are no shortcuts—you meet, you listen, you adapt, and eventually a coalition forms.

As Editor-in-Chief of the Journal for Small Business Management, how do you balance the demands of rigorous academic research with the need for actionable insight that small business practitioners can apply?

These two demands are often framed as opposites, but I do not see them that way. Rigor is what gives actionable insight its credibility. The real risk is research that is rigorous but inaccessible to practitioners.

As editor, I encourage authors to prioritize clarity. The introduction should explain why the research matters to entrepreneurs or policymakers, and the conclusion should offer practical implications. The methodology can remain technical—but the framing should be accessible.

ICSB has partnered with the OECD on SME entrepreneurship policy. From your experience, what are the most effective levers for global policy coordination to empower MSMEs across very different economies?

Three levers stand out.

First, comparable data. Effective coordination is impossible if countries measure different indicators in different ways. The OECD’s work in harmonizing SME metrics is, in my view, one of the most important—and often overlooked—contributions to global development.

Second, regulatory benchmarking. Showing policymakers that comparable countries have achieved measurable improvements—such as significantly reducing the time required to register a business—is often more persuasive than theoretical arguments.

Third, convening. It may sound soft, but it is not. When the right people are consistently brought together, ideas and solutions move much faster than through formal channels.

Given that ICSB represents over 130 countries through knowledge hubs, how do you reconcile conflicting priorities across national SME ecosystems—for example, when some countries prioritize rapid growth while others prioritize social sustainability?

I do not try to reconcile them at the level of priorities. I focus on reconciling them at the level of principles. Different countries are at different stages and face different constraints. A country with high youth unemployment will understandably prioritize rapid growth, while a country with strong social systems may emphasize sustainability.

What ICSB offers is a shared framework—the human-centered approach—that both types of countries can apply in their own way. The framework remains constant; the priorities adapt. That is what allows a global network to function without flattening meaningful differences.

In your teaching at George Washington University, you created the first courses on social entrepreneurship, innovation, and creativity. What pedagogical innovations have you found most effective in cultivating students who can both invent and sustain socially responsible ventures?

The most effective shift I have made is moving away from the case method as the dominant approach. Cases teach students to analyze and converge on one or more solutions, but they do not always teach them how to build.

I now structure courses around what I call the “Socratic build,” where students work on real problems from real organizations. My role is to ask questions rather than provide answers.

Students who go through this experience come out fundamentally different. They learn that not knowing is not failure—it is the starting point. That mindset is essential for creating something that lasts.

Your background includes work at the World Bank’s Development Marketplace. How has that experience shaped your leadership at ICSB, particularly when advising on scalable, high-impact projects?

The Development Marketplace taught me that scale is a quality, not a quantity.

The projects that scaled were not necessarily those with the largest budgets or most ambitious targets, but those whose internal logic was simple enough to be adapted elsewhere. A person in a different country, with different resources, could understand the idea and apply it.

One example is a malaria project outlined on half a page by a mid-level World Bank manager over lunch. It showed how malaria treatments could be distributed more effectively. It was simple, innovative, and practical.

That principle guides how I evaluate ICSB’s initiatives today. If I cannot explain a project clearly and concisely to someone who was not involved in its design, it will not scale. It may succeed locally, but it will not travel.

Resilience is a recurring theme in the entrepreneurial literature, especially among MSMEs operating in volatile environments. What strategies do you consider most underutilized by small businesses when it comes to building resilience?

The most underutilized strategy is the deliberate cultivation of relationships outside one’s industry and country.

Most small businesses build networks horizontally—among peers in similar sectors and geographies. That approach works until a systemic shock affects the entire ecosystem, as we saw during COVID-19.

The businesses that endure are those whose owners have cultivated relationships across sectors and borders, often without an immediate or obvious return. Resilience is built long before it is needed—in conversations that, at the time, may seem incidental. And from that foundation, frugal innovation often emerges.

In the global MSME trends report for 2024, what trend do you believe has been underestimated by the public or policymakers — and why?

The most underestimated trend is the rise of women-led MSMEs—not as a niche, but as a distinct and growing category.

The growth rates, resilience, and community impact of women-led firms are increasingly diverging from the broader MSME population. Yet policy frameworks still tend to treat them as a special case rather than as a central economic force. That framing will soon be outdated. The 2026 MSMEs Day theme reflects this shift directly: empowering women CEOs and the next generation of MSMEs.

Gender and inclusion are critical in entrepreneurship policy. What concrete policy changes or program interventions do you believe would make the most difference for advancing women’s entrepreneurship?

Three changes would have the greatest impact.

The first is care infrastructure—childcare, eldercare, and parental leave systems. Without these, the question of who can start and run a business is effectively decided before any other policy comes into play. Care is not a women’s issue; it is a structural condition that determines whether women can lead at all.

The second is closing the credit gap, which the IFC estimates at US$1.9 trillion for women-owned MSMEs in emerging markets. Addressing this requires moving beyond targeted grants toward structural financial tools—such as guarantees, blended finance mechanisms, and gender-disaggregated lending requirements for commercial banks.

The third is reforming asset and collateral systems. In many economies, women cannot borrow on equal terms because they lack equal rights to own, inherit, or pledge assets. Property rights, inheritance laws, and collateral registries underpin every credit decision. Reforming these systems expands what is possible across the entire financial ecosystem.

None of these are soft interventions. Each represents a structural shift that governments can implement—if they choose to do so.

Many small businesses struggle with access to finance. Beyond traditional credit, what innovative financial mechanisms do you think can or should be scaled to support MSMEs, especially in emerging markets?

Four mechanisms are ready to be scaled. Blended finance, where public and concessional capital absorb first-loss risk and unlock private investment. Revenue-based financing, which ties repayment to actual cash flow rather than fixed schedules. Supply chain finance, which allows small suppliers to borrow against invoices from large, creditworthy buyers. And gender-lens investment vehicles that channel capital specifically toward women-led firms.

None of these mechanisms is theoretical. All are already working at a small scale. The challenge now is to move them from pilot to system.

The concept of “purpose-driven entrepreneurship” has gained traction. How do you define purpose-driven entrepreneurship, and how does ICSB support entrepreneurs who lean more toward mission than maximum profit?

Purpose-driven entrepreneurship is the creation of a business whose reason for existing goes beyond maximizing shareholder returns, while still remaining financially sustainable. Both elements are essential. A purpose without a viable model becomes charity; a model without purpose becomes a commodity.

ICSB supports purpose-driven entrepreneurs through its Knowledge Hubs, certificate programs, and annual events. These platforms connect founders with peers tackling similar challenges and with policymakers whose decisions shape their operating environments.

With the climate crisis and global inequality, MSMEs have a role to play in sustainable development. How can ICSB better integrate environmental and social governance (ESG) frameworks into its global strategy for small business growth?

My honest view is that ESG frameworks designed for large corporations do not translate easily to small businesses. A four-person company cannot produce the same disclosures as a multinational, and attempting to impose that standard often results in compliance theater rather than meaningful change.

What ICSB is working toward is a tiered approach, where the core principles—environmental responsibility, fair labor practices, and transparent governance—remain constant, but reporting and verification scale with firm size.

We are currently testing this through the Human-Centered Entrepreneurship Index, which integrates social and environmental dimensions into a practical, measurable framework that small businesses can actually use.

Reflecting on your journey, from policy advocacy to academia to leading a global nonprofit, what has been your greatest failure — and how did it transform your approach to leadership and entrepreneurship?

My greatest failure was assuming, early in my career, that the strength of an idea alone would carry it through institutions. I worked on a project I believed in deeply, one supported by data and understood by the right people. Yet it failed, because I had not invested in building the coalition that needed to own the idea alongside me.

People support what they help create. I had treated the political and relational dimensions as secondary. They are not. They are the work itself. Since then, I begin every initiative by asking who needs to be in the room before the idea is even discussed. That shift has fundamentally changed how I lead.

Which book, film, or piece of art has influenced how you see the world, and in what way?

My challenge has always been that everything interests me. It is difficult to point to a single work that shaped my perspective, as I am drawn to many different ideas and forms of expression. That said, I am particularly influenced by artists like Rothko and Miró, and by the music of John Coltrane. What connects them for me is not a specific message, but a way of thinking and creating—one grounded in exploration, openness, and depth. That resonates with how I approach the world.

When you look at younger generations, what gives you hope and what worries you?

What gives me hope is the seriousness with which younger generations approach questions of meaning. They are not satisfied with narrow definitions of success. They want their work to matter and are willing to step away from prestigious paths that do not align with that. That is a healthy moral instinct.

What concerns me is the erosion of attention. The ability to stay with a difficult question long enough to answer it is being diminished by the technologies people engage with most. Without that capacity, the search for meaning has nowhere to land.

If you could spend a full day with any historical figure, not for their fame but for their mind, who would it be, and what would you ask them?

Socrates. I would not ask him a question—I would let him ask me his. The essence of his method is that the value lies in the inquiry itself, not in the person being questioned.

I would be curious to see what he would notice about the world we have built, which assumptions he would challenge, and which of my own certainties would dissolve under his questioning. A day with Socrates would be a day of productive discomfort—and that is exactly what I would want.

If you had to teach a class on something completely unrelated to your career, what would you teach and why?

I would teach a class on listening. Not communication or interpersonal skills—just listening. We spend years teaching people how to express themselves, but very little time teaching them how to truly receive what others are saying. Most failures I observe—in business, policy, and relationships—are failures of listening, not speaking.

The course would involve minimal reading and extensive practice. By the end, students would understand that listening is not passive. It is one of the most demanding skills a person can develop.

If you could ensure that one value or principle is never lost in society, which would it be?

Empathy—the ability to see the world from another person’s perspective and to recognize their dignity without conditions. It is not about agreement, but about understanding.

Every functioning society depends on the ability of individuals to recognize one another as human beings with shared hopes and struggles. When that recognition disappears, division follows.

I would focus on restoring trust between people and institutions. Many of the challenges we face today—economic inequality, political instability, social fragmentation—are intensified by a growing lack of trust.

When trust erodes, even the best solutions struggle to take hold. Trust enables cooperation, long-term thinking, and collective action. Without it, everything becomes transactional and short-term, and meaningful progress slows.

What do you think humans owe each other, if anything at all?

We owe each other the assumption of full humanity. That is the foundation. Everything else—the duties of family, citizenship, and professional life—rests on that one assumption. When it erodes, nothing built on top of it can hold.

We do not owe each other agreement. We do not owe each other approval. But we do owe each other the recognition that the person in front of us has an inner life as complex, contradictory, and worthy of respect as our own. That is not a small thing. It is, in fact, almost everything.

Could you share something from 2025 that didn’t go as expected and what you learned from it?

My father, Zuhier ElTarabishy, passed away in 2025, and the loss reshaped my year in ways I could not have anticipated. The book I have spent years editing, Human-Centered Entrepreneurship, is dedicated to him, and completing it became, for me, a way of continuing a conversation with someone who is no longer here to respond.

What I learned is something I thought I already understood, but did not fully grasp. Legacy is not metaphorical. It is expressed in the way you make decisions when no one is watching.

I work differently now. The standard is no longer what is impressive—it is what would have made him nod.

What personal goals, if you feel comfortable sharing them, do you have for 2026?

Three goals. First, to publish the Human-Centered Entrepreneurship book. Second, to make MSMEs Day 2026 a moment that genuinely shifts the global conversation about women CEOs and the next generation of MSMEs—not just another commemoration. Third, to be present for my sons, Jad and Yousef, in the way my father was present for me.

The third goal is the one that will matter most in the end.

Imagine you are in the final moments of your life. What work-related news would you like to hear, and why?

I would want to hear that human-centered entrepreneurship is no longer a concept that needs explanation—that it has become embedded in how business is taught and how policy is designed, in enough places to be irreversible.

I would want to know that a small business owner in Kinshasa, Bridgetown, Cairo, or São Paulo has the same access to capital, dignity, and opportunity as a founder in Silicon Valley.

And I would want to hear that the work continues, carried forward by people I trust, with the next generation advancing it without needing to be told why it matters. That is the only kind of news that would allow me to close my eyes in peace.