Strategy that gets deployed,
not filed away.

The challenge

• 18% → 7%EBITDA margin over four years
• 11 weeksexpansion decision left on hold
• 6–8 weeksaverage decision cycle

A second-generation family business with 200+ employees had watched its EBITDA margin fall from 18% to 7% over four years. Every senior leader pointed to slow decision-making as the root cause. But the actual cause was structural: no separation between ownership and management, no defined authority below founder level, and three family members in senior roles with overlapping mandates and zero formal accountability. A regional expansion proposal had sat unanswered for eleven weeks ​ not because anyone objected, but because there was no forum with the mandate to decide it.

The solution

Designed and implemented a family governance charter that separated ownership rights from executive authority for the first time in the company’s history. Constituted a four-seat independent board — two external industry voices, two family representatives — with a defined decision mandate and operating cadence. Built a 23-metric operating dashboard that made performance legible at every level without requiring founder interpretation. Clarified role boundaries across all family-held executive positions.

The impact

EBITDA margin recovered from 7% to 16% across three consecutive quarters. The expansion proposal that had sat for eleven weeks was approved at the first independent board meeting — it took 40 minutes. Average decision cycle: down from 6–8 weeks to 5 days. Regional entry was underway within 60 days of board formation.

The challenge

• +28%revenue growth a year
• 11 daysto approve a mid-tier decision
• 3top executives resigned in 18 months

A services group growing at 28% per year had outgrown its operating model — but not its org chart. The founder was still approving mid-tier decisions: hiring a manager, signing a vendor, pricing a proposal. Eleven days, average turnaround. The company had capable executives. Three of the best resigned within eighteen months. All three cited the same reason: senior vice presidents in title, no real authority in practice. The bottleneck was not ambition — it was the complete absence of a framework defining who owned what decisions, at what level, with what consequence for delay.

The solution

Designed and ran a 16-week leadership programme for the top 12 executives — not conventional training, but live problem-solving with real operational stakes. Each participant was assigned an active business challenge with a board-level consequence attached. Four of their recommendations were adopted directly by the board. The more important output: a formal decision-rights framework — the first in the company’s history — permanently specifying which decisions sat at which level, and what escalation looked like when it was genuinely necessary.

The impact

Four programme graduates promoted within six months. Time to approve a decision fell from 11 days to 3. Two of the three roles vacated by prior resignations were filled from within the programme cohort. The founder formally stepped back from all operational approvals, codified in a governance note signed by the board.

The challenge

• 22% → 11%EBITDA margin over three years
• 6 of 34accounts loss-making
• 19%of revenue at negative contribution margin

Top-line revenue was growing at 18% per year. EBITDA margin had fallen from 22% to 11% over three years. No one in the organisation knew what it cost to deliver any single contract. Revenue was tracked monthly; cost of delivery was a blended overhead rate last updated in 2019. Pricing decisions were based on competitor benchmarking and gut feel. When the first unit economics model was built across all 34 active accounts, six were loss-making. One — valued at 19% of total revenue — was running at negative contribution margin. That client was on the key accounts list.

The solution

Rebuilt cost-to-serve from first principles for all 34 accounts using actual delivery data: headcount allocation, logistics, SLA compliance costs, and hidden rework. Presented the six loss-making accounts to the board with the supporting analysis. Renegotiated three accounts within eight weeks — on data the counterparties could not reasonably dispute. Exited two after the economics made the decision self-evident. Designed a pricing architecture and mandatory contract review cadence for all future commercial proposals.

The impact

Gross margin up 11 percentage points across two quarters. The two client exits resulted in zero revenue consequence — the margin freed was redeployed immediately. New pipeline is now evaluated at a 2.4× margin standard versus the previous benchmark. Advisory ROI: 9×.

The challenge

• 3.2×CAC versus what unit economics allow
• 10×competitors’ marketing budget
• 0%B2B revenue in the launch plan

A premium mobility business was preparing to launch into a market dominated by two well-capitalised platform incumbents and a legacy operator with three decades of brand recognition. The founders had capital and a credible service proposition. What they had modelled was a B2C acquisition play — competing on visibility and price against companies with ten times the marketing budget. On that model, consumer CAC was 3.2× what the unit economics could sustain. The business was structurally designed to lose money acquiring the wrong customers in the wrong segment.

The solution

Redesigned the go-to-market architecture around the segment the incumbents had systematically underserved: corporate and institutional clients with predictable volume requirements and zero tolerance for consumer-grade service variability. Built a B2B pricing model as a structurally distinct value proposition — not a discount from consumer rates — with SLA commitments the platform operators could not match operationally. Designed the launch sequence to open entirely with anchor corporate accounts before any public-facing presence. Wrote the commercial terms for the first signed contracts.

The impact

Launched with 6 signed B2B accounts before a single consumer booking was accepted. B2B share of Q1 revenue went from 0% in the original consumer plan to 58%. B2B acquisition cost: 3.2× lower than the projected consumer equivalent. The business entered its market as a viable competitor rather than a well-funded experiment in the wrong segment.

The challenge

• 14channel partners screened
• 2carrying compliance exposure
• 18 monthslicensing delay if the wrong regulator goes first

A GCC-based distributor with a proven regional playbook was planning entry into Iraq. The demand case was sound. The complexity was the channel: fourteen partner candidates had been identified, and almost none were what they presented as. Two had the right relationships but compliance histories that created legal exposure. Three had clean profiles but operated in the wrong provinces. The remainder were intermediaries with limited infrastructure and margin expectations that broke the model. Beneath all of this: a regulatory environment with overlapping jurisdictions, sector-specific licensing requirements, and approval timelines that could stretch 18 months if the wrong agency was engaged first.

The solution

Conducted stakeholder mapping across five cities. Assessed all 14 candidates across commercial capability, compliance risk, infrastructure, and geographic reach. Recommended a two-anchor partner model — one for the southern commercial corridor, one for the northern retail network — with risk-sharing provisions tied to performance milestones rather than fixed retainers. Designed a phased entry starting in the south: cleaner channel, faster transaction cycle, more legible regulatory pathway. Mapped the licensing sequence to avoid jurisdictional conflict.

The impact

First transactions completed within six months of engagement. Year-one performance reached 140% of the original 18-month target. The entry model and partner architecture have since been replicated for two additional GCC-to-Iraq market expansions.

The challenge

• −11%revenue a year, four years running
• 23% → 5%EBITDA margin
• 58% / 31%fixed costs vs. revenue of the core line

A dominant national services organisation with a 40-year market position was four years into an unbroken revenue decline of 11% per year. EBITDA margin had fallen from 23% to 5%. The board held a restructuring mandate; the organisation was contesting the diagnosis. The internal narrative blamed market forces. The actual problem: 58% of fixed costs were allocated to a service line generating 31% of revenue — a line on a trajectory toward zero within 36 months. The harder dilemma was institutional: the declining line was the organisation’s core identity. The restructuring required not just a financial decision, but an institutional one.

The solution

Conducted a full operational diagnostic across cost allocation, revenue quality by segment, and organisational design. Confirmed that the core declining line had no viable path to profitability at the required scale. Designed a three-workstream restructuring: cost rationalisation targeting the fixed-cost base and its exposure to the declining line; a new commercial model built around three identified adjacencies with confirmed demand; and an organisational redesign that preserved existing capability while removing structural overhead. Sequenced the transition to protect cash flow during the shift.

The impact

Cost base reduced 22% within two operating cycles. Two new revenue lines launched within 10 months; a third entered pilot ahead of schedule. New lines represent 29% of total revenue in year one. The organisation is on track for 50% of revenue from new lines within 18 months — repositioned from a declining institution into a platform for multiple growth businesses.