A divestment leaves the old support structure behind
Group and business-unit responsibilities still serve a business that no longer exists.
A better structure must change how the work gets done.
We help CEOs, COOs and functional leaders redesign responsibilities, capabilities and interfaces when the organisation no longer fits the business.
When needed
An acquisition closes but duplicate teams remain
Integration has not resolved ownership, service levels or overlapping capabilities.
A reorganisation changes reporting lines but not decisions
Approvals still cross the same interfaces and escalation remains routine.
A footprint decision reaches implementation
Work must move between sites, shared services or suppliers without losing critical capability.
Our approach
Four steps take the work from framing the question to executing the agreed changes, with service-specific activities and a decision gate at the end of each step. We agree the scope, evidence requirements and owners for each phase before work starts.
Duration: 1–2 weeks
Step 1: Frame
Map roles, decisions, activities, service levels and interfaces alongside the people and cost baseline.
Gate 1
HR and finance reconcile roles and costs to their source systems; disputed ownership is recorded.
Duration: 8–12 weeks
Step 2: Diagnose
Compare central, local, shared and external delivery models against service and capability needs.
Gate 2
Sponsor selects a model only after decision rights, service impacts and transition risks are reviewed.
Duration: 4–6 weeks
Step 3: Validate
Translate the design into role mapping, interfaces, service agreements and implementation waves.
Gate 3
Line owners accept the transition plan; people, service and regulatory dependencies have named owners before launch.
Duration: 6–18 months
Step 4: Execute
Implement the new roles, interfaces and service model in waves, working alongside line leaders to build capability and maintain service continuity.
Gate 4
Each wave requires readiness sign-off; line owners accept service performance, decision rights and the handover.
Deliverables
Step 1: Frame
Design mandate and service requirements
Agreed organisational scope, design principles, service requirements and decision owners. Set the measures for cost, capacity, accountability and service continuity before evaluating structures.
Step 2: Diagnose
Activity-cost baseline and operating-model options
A reconciled map of roles, activities, decisions and costs, with central, local and shared-service options. Quantify recurring cost implications, capacity changes and transition costs alongside service risks.
Step 3: Validate
Target operating model and transition business case
Validated decision rights, role maps and service agreements, with implementation waves and readiness gates. Confirm net recurring savings, one-off costs and payback with finance and line owners.
Step 4: Execute
Transition control book and benefits tracker
An owned migration plan, readiness checks and service-performance dashboard. Track actual cost, capacity and service levels against the baseline, distinguishing released capacity from realised savings.
Each phase leaves a working asset with an owner, source references and an update process. Economic estimates distinguish potential value from approved commitments and realised results.
Illustrative example
Operating architecture and decision rights
Map responsibilities across the group, business units and shared services, with an accountable owner for each key decision.
Sample data, not a client deliverable. The format is tailored to the engagement.
View full-size example ↗
Team & Duration
You get direct access to partner judgement, a team working inside your business and a shared focus on economic impact. We work through the difficult questions with you and stay close as decisions become action.
A senior team, working with you
- Partner judgement at the problem-solving table
- 1 accountable partner. Works directly on your hardest questions: shaping hypotheses, examining the evidence and developing recommendations with your team. Regular joint working sessions and partner-led decision gates bring senior judgement into the work throughout the engagement.
- Day-to-day momentum, inside your business
- 1 Engagement manager. Works side by side with your people, including from your offices. Connects the analysis to operational reality, resolves blockers and turns decisions into owned actions.
- Analytical depth focused on value
- 2–3 consultants. Combine rigorous analysis with our proprietary AI harness to test opportunities, quantify the economics and build practical working assets with your team. You gain a stronger fact base and tools your people can keep using.
- Expertise that makes recommendations practical
- 1 expert. Brings relevant industry or service experience to test assumptions, challenge feasibility and identify the constraints that matter before you commit resources.
Duration & Fees
- A clear path from question to impact
- Duration of each step: Frame: 1–2 weeks. Diagnose: 8–12 weeks. Validate: 4–6 weeks. Execute: 6–18 months. We agree the scope, owners and decision gates before work starts.
- Continuity from insight to execution
- The partner and engagement manager are planned to stay from Frame through Execute, carrying the context and accountability into implementation. Any change to the core team is discussed and agreed with you.
- Fee certainty upfront. Alignment on results.
- Steps 1–3 (Frame, Diagnose and Validate) are fixed-fee, with scope and deliverables agreed for each step. Execute can include performance-based fees linked to agreed outcomes, baselines and measurement rules.
- You control the next commitment
- At each decision gate, choose to proceed, adjust the scope or take the working assets forward with your own team. Each further commitment follows an explicit decision, with ownership and handover built into the work.
Cases
Selected anonymised engagements. Many span several services; each case shows the relevant areas of work alongside its outcome.
Construction & Real Estate · Operating Model · Cost Out
Organisational efficiency
European construction group
9 → 6Organisational layers
Read case →
Telecom & Technology · Operating Model · Cost Out
Organisational design and headcount reduction
Telecom operator
~2,500Positions removed in three phases
Read case →
Consumer & Retail · Technology & AI · Operating Model · Cost Out
AI in finance
European aftermarket group
~20%Targeted effort reduction
Read case →Baselines, timeframes and evidence
European construction group
- Starting position
- Duplicated construction support functions; up to nine organisational layers and average span of control of 4.2.
- Timeframe
- Design and transition engagement; elapsed duration is not recorded in the case.
- Recorded facts and outcomes
- Layers reduced from up to nine to six, and average span increased from 4.2 to approximately 6.5; approximately 450 positions were consolidated into shared functions.
- Judgement, targets and limits
- The case supports an organisation-design outcome. It does not provide a time-windowed savings result, so none is claimed.
Telecom operator
- Starting position
- Telecom operator with approximately 20,000 employees and support-function spans averaging below four.
- Timeframe
- Three implementation phases; elapsed calendar duration is not recorded.
- Recorded facts and outcomes
- Approximately 2,500 positions were removed across the three phases—about 12% of the workforce—with network and frontline capabilities ring-fenced.
- Judgement, targets and limits
- The case records headcount change and capability protection, not a quantified service-performance or financial outcome.
Figures are approximate. EUR conversions are documented in the full cases. These engagements illustrate experience, not forecasts for a new assignment.
Other services
The main task is to turn an agreed cost target into P&L savings
Cost Out →The strategic choices that the organisation must support remain open
Strategic Decisions →When to do it yourselves
If the issue is a single unclear interface and the accountable leaders can agree ownership directly, resolve it locally rather than launching an organisation-wide redesign.