All Posts

Restructuring an organisation often begins with a familiar question: should the organisation start again from the ground up, or should it build on the structure and capability already in place? There is no universal answer. The right approach depends on why the organisation is restructuring, what it needs to achieve and whether the existing organisation provides a sound foundation for the future. A restructure should not be an exercise in moving boxes on an organisation chart

It is a simple question, but one that can create considerable confusion in project governance. In some organisations, the project start date is recorded when an idea first emerges. In others, it is when business case development begins. Some organisations only regard the project as having started once funding has been approved and delivery is authorised. These distinctions matter. The date a project is deemed to have started affects reporting, accountability, resource alloca

Leadership is often incorrectly judged by visible measures. The size of a budget, the number of direct reports or the breadth of a portfolio can all create the impression of influence and success. Yet these are poor indicators of leadership effectiveness. The most successful leaders are not those who oversee the largest departments. They are those who build capable teams, deliver consistent outcomes and leave their organisations stronger than they found them. One of the most

The establishment of No. 10 North marks a significant development in English devolution. While the announcement has understandably generated political debate, its greatest significance lies in what it could mean for the future relationship between central and local government. For combined authorities, councils and public sector leaders, this is more than a symbolic move. It has the potential to reshape the narrative across England. For decades, local government has argued th

Most local authorities should now be preparing for their mid year point reviews. Budgets have been agreed, transformation programmes are in full swing, and service demand continues to evolve. It is also the point where many organisations begin to see whether the ambitions set in April are translating into measurable outcomes. A mid-year review should never be viewed as simply a financial health check or an exercise in reporting progress. It is an opportunity to pause, reflect

Organisational change rarely fails because the strategy is wrong. More often, it fails because the foundations are not established early enough. The first 100 days of any transformation programme set the tone for everything that follows. During this period, leaders have a unique opportunity to build confidence, create momentum and establish the governance needed to deliver sustainable change. Whether your organisation is embarking on restructuring, implementing a new operatin

Culture is often described as "the way we do things around here". It shapes behaviour, decision making, customer experience, employee engagement and ultimately organisational performance. Yet many transformation programmes focus heavily on structures, systems and processes while overlooking the cultural shifts needed to sustain change. New operating models can be implemented in months. Changing culture can take years. The organisations that succeed understand that culture cha

As England's devolution agenda continues to gather pace, Strategic Authorities and Combined Authorities are taking on greater responsibility for economic growth, transport, housing, regeneration, skills, and public service reform. Much of the discussion surrounding these new organisations focuses on governance frameworks, assurance processes, constitutions, and delegated powers. While these are all important, ensuring the right behaviours and values seems to have taken a back

The establishment of new Mayoral Strategic Authorities and Combined Authorities represents one of the most significant developments in English devolution. While much attention is often focused on geography, powers, funding, and political leadership, governance arrangements will ultimately determine whether the new organisation is able to make decisions efficiently and deliver meaningful outcomes for residents. Good governance should enable delivery, not become a barrier to it

Organisations are often under pressure to act quickly. Leaders face demands to improve performance, reduce costs, modernise services, or respond to changing customer expectations. In many cases, the desire to move fast leads teams to focus immediately on identifying solutions. New systems are procured, organisational structures are redesigned, and programmes are launched before there is a clear understanding of the problem that needs to be solved. I have seen this time and ti

Controls play an important role in the day to day running of any organisation. They help maintain consistency, manage risk, protect finances, ensure compliance, and support operational performance. Without effective controls, businesses can quickly experience confusion, duplication, financial loss, poor customer outcomes, and inconsistent decision making. But controls can stifle progress if used in the wrong way. However, while controls are necessary, there is a fine balance

In transformation programmes, organisations often fall into one of two traps. They either spend too much time developing strategy without meaningful action, or they move rapidly into delivery without a clear direction. Both approaches create risk, confusion, and ultimately reduce the likelihood of successful change. Strategy and delivery should never be viewed as separate activities. A strong strategy provides clarity, purpose, and direction. Delivery turns that ambition into

The pace of transformation shapes delivery, governance, leadership, and staff engagement. Explore slow motion, sprinted, negotiated, and hijacked transformation with practical strategies for successful organisational change.

Transformation is often used as a catch all term, but in practice it covers several distinct types of change. Each has its own purpose, pace, risks, and leadership requirements. Treating all transformation as the same is one of the most common reasons organisations struggle to deliver meaningful outcomes. At its core, transformation is about shifting how an organisation operates to achieve a step change in performance. The nature of that shift depends on the type of transform

In periods of organisational change, the narrative often swings between two extremes: protect and retain existing talent, or bring in fresh blood to drive transformation. In reality, neither approach is inherently right or wrong. External hiring can be a powerful catalyst for change, just as internal progression can strengthen continuity and engagement. The risk is not the choice itself, it is born from how poorly these decisions are often executed. It is essential that the r

Local government reform (LGR) is rarely short on ambition. Structural change, the formation of Mayoral Combined Authorities, and the consolidation of services all point toward a more strategic, regionally aligned future. Yet the reality on the ground is often more complex. LGR programmes do not fail because of intent. They falter when clarity, pace, and alignment begin to drift. At the centre of any successful transition sits a clearly defined Target Operating Model (TOM). Th

A Target Operating Model is often referenced in transformation programmes, yet rarely understood in practical terms. Too many organisations treat it as a static document, when in reality it is a strategic blueprint that defines how a business delivers value. At its core, a Target Operating Model translates ambition into execution. It connects vision to the day to day realities of delivery, ensuring that transformation is not just conceptual but operational. The purpose of a T

Organisations invest heavily in transformation, yet one question continues to surface in boardrooms: is it actually working? Measuring transformation success and change management ROI, (return on investment), remains one of the most overlooked disciplines in modern business, leaving many organisations unable to demonstrate whether change is delivering real value or simply creating the appearance of progress. Too often, success is declared because a programme has been delivere

Large scale transformation rarely fails because of strategy. It fails in the spaces between people. When leadership is not visibly aligned or when key stakeholders are engaged too late, even the most robust plans begin to fracture. In complex organisations, change is not delivered through a single function but through a coalition of influence, authority and credibility. The question is not simply who is involved, but who must be engaged early, consistently and with intent. At

Transformation programmes rarely fail because of poor strategy. More often, they stall in the complex space between ambition and execution, where organisations underestimate the human, structural and cultural barriers that quietly erode progress. As explored in previous discussions on effective communication and stakeholder journeys, the challenge is rarely defining change but sustaining clarity and belief as it unfolds across the organisation. One of the most common barriers