Consulting

After spending three decades in the aerospace industry, I’ve seen firsthand how crucial it is for different sectors to learn from each other. We no longer can afford to stay stuck in our own bubbles. Take the aerospace industry, for example. They’ve been looking at how car manufacturers automate their factories to improve their own processes. And those racing teams? Their ability to prototype quickly and develop at a breakneck pace is something we can all learn from to speed up our product development. It’s all about breaking down those silos and embracing new ideas from wherever we can find them. When I was leading the Scorpion Jet program, our rapid development – less than two years to develop a new aircraft – caught the attention of a company known for razors and electric shavers. They reached out to us, intrigued by our ability to iterate so quickly, telling me "you developed a new jet faster than we can develop new razors..." They wanted to learn how we managed to streamline our processes. It was quite an unexpected and fascinating experience that underscored the value of looking beyond one’s own industry can lead to significant improvements and efficiencies, even in fields as seemingly unrelated as aerospace and consumer electronics. In today’s fast-paced world, it’s more important than ever for industries to break out of their silos and look to other sectors for fresh ideas and processes. This kind of cross-industry learning not only fosters innovation but also helps stay competitive in a rapidly changing market. For instance, the aerospace industry has been taking cues from car manufacturers to improve factory automation. And the automotive companies are adopting aerospace processes for systems engineering. Meanwhile, both sectors are picking up tips from tech giants like Apple and Google to boost their electronics and software development. And at Siemens, we partner with racing teams. Why? Because their knack for rapid prototyping and fast-paced development is something we can all learn from to speed up our product development cycles. This cross-pollination of ideas is crucial as industries evolve and integrate more advanced technologies. By exploring best practices from other industries, companies can find innovative new ways to improve their processes and products. After all, how can someone think outside the box, if they are only looking in the box? If you are interested in learning more, I suggest checking out this article by my colleagues Todd Tuthill and Nand Kochhar where they take a closer look at how cross-industry learning are key to developing advanced air mobility solutions. https://lnkd.in/dK3U6pJf

🌍 We Can’t Afford to Get Climate Policy Wrong—A Look at the Data Behind What Really Works 🌍 In the race against time to combat climate change, bold promises are everywhere. But here’s the critical question: Are the policies being implemented actually reducing emissions at the scale we need? A groundbreaking study published in Science, cuts through the noise and delivers the insights we desperately need. Evaluating 1,500 climate policies from around the world, the research identifies the 63 most effective ones—policies that have delivered tangible, significant reductions in emissions. What’s striking is that the most successful strategies often involve combinations of policies, rather than single initiatives. Think of it as the ultimate teamwork: when policies like carbon pricing, renewable energy mandates, and efficiency standards are combined thoughtfully, the impact is far greater than any one policy could achieve on its own. It’s a powerful reminder that for climate solutions the whole is indeed greater than the sum of its parts. Moreover, the study’s use of counterfactual emissions pathways is a game changer. By showing what would have happened without these policies, it provides a clear, quantifiable measure of their effectiveness. This is exactly the kind of rigorous evaluation we need to ensure that every policy counts, especially when we’re working against the clock. If we’re serious about meeting the Paris Agreement’s targets, we need to focus on what works—and this research offers a clear roadmap. Let’s champion policies that have proven to make a difference, because we don’t have time to waste on anything less. 🔗 Full study in the comments #ClimateAction #Sustainability #PolicyEffectiveness #ParisAgreement #NetZero #ClimateScience

The silent productivity killer you've never heard of... Attention Residue (and 3 strategies to fight back): The concept of "attention residue" was first identified by University of Washington business professor Dr. Sophie Leroy in 2009. The idea is quite simple: There is a cognitive cost to shifting your attention from one task to another. When our attention is shifted, there is a "residue" that remains in the brain and impairs our cognitive performance on the new task. Put differently, you may think your attention has fully shifted to the next task, but your brain has a lag—it thinks otherwise! It's relatively easy to find examples of this effect in your own life: • You get on a call but are still thinking about the prior call. • An email pops up during meeting and derails your focus. • You check your phone during a lecture and can't refocus afterwards. There are two key points worth noting here: 1. The research indicates it doesn't seem to matter whether the task switch is "macro" (i.e. moving from one major task to the next) or "micro" (i.e. pausing one major task for a quick check on some minor task). 2. The challenge is even more pronounced in a remote/hybrid world, where we're free to roam the internet, have our chat apps open, and check our phones all while appearing to be focused in a Zoom meeting. With apologies to any self-proclaimed proficient multitaskers, the research is very clear: Every single time you call upon your brain to move away from one task and toward another, you are hurting its performance—your work quality and efficiency suffer. Author Cal Newport puts it well: "If, like most, you rarely go more than 10–15 minutes without a just check, you have effectively put yourself in a persistent state of self-imposed cognitive handicap." Here are three strategies to manage attention residue and fight back: 1. Focus Work Blocks: Block time on your calendar for sprints of focused energy. Set a timer for a 45-90 minute window, close everything except the task at hand, and focus on one thing. It works wonders. 2. Take a Breather: Whenever possible, create open windows of 5-15 minutes between higher value tasks. Schedule 25-minute calls. Block those windows on your calendar. During them, take a walk or close your eyes and breathe. 3. Batch Processing: You still have to reply to messages and emails. Pick a few windows during the day when you will deeply focus on the task of processing and replying to these. Your response quality will go up from this batching, and they won't bleed into the rest of your day. Attention residue is a silent killer of your work quality and efficiency. Understanding it—and taking the steps to fight back—will have an immediate positive impact on your work and life. If you enjoyed this or learned something, share it with others and follow me Sahil Bloom for more in future! The beautiful visualization is by Roberto Ferraro.

🚫 How to Run UX Research Without Access To Users. With practical techniques to avoid guesswork and gather insights if you can’t talk directly to users. Attached cheatsheet (with and without access to users) by Nielsen Norman Group. 🚫 Ask for reasons for no access to users: there might be none. ✅ First, study job openings to map existing workflows/tasks. ✅ Make friends with sales, customer success, support, QA. ✅ Find colleagues who are the closest to your customers. ✅ Convey your questions indirectly via your colleagues. ✅ If you can’t get users to come to you, go where they are. ✅ Ask to observe or shadow customers at their workplace. ✅ Listen in to customer calls and interview call centre staff. ✅ Request access to analytics, CRM reports, call centre logs. ✅ Use Google Trends to find product-related search queries. ✅ Gather insights from search logs, Jira backlog, support tickets. ✅ Explore past/ongoing NPS and Voice-of-Customer programs. ✅ Study reviews, discussions, comments for your product/competitors. ✅ Map key themes and user sentiment on TrustPilot, AppStore etc. ✅ Recruit users via UserTesting, Wynter (B2B), Maze, UserInterviews. ✅ Ask for small but steady commitments: 5 users × 30 mins, 1× month. 🚫 Avoid ad-hoc research: set up regular check-ins and timelines. As H Locke noted, if we shed the light strongly enough from many sources, we might end up getting a glimpse of the truth. Ironically, the stakeholders who can’t give you time or resources to talk to users often are the first to demand evidence to support your initiatives. Sometimes the reason why companies are reluctant to grant access to users is simply the lack of trust. They don’t want to disturb relationships with big clients which is carefully maintained by the customer success team. They might feel that research is merely a technical detail that clients shouldn’t be bothered with. Show that you deeply care about that relationship and that you don’t want to disturb it any way. What you do want though is to reduce costs and risk — the risk of drawing wide-reaching conclusions from very little research, or none at all. Your best shot is to explain research as a powerful risk mitigation tool. And: search for people whose priorities align with yours — people who value and see the impact of UX in their units. They would absolutely love to support your work because it also supports their work — and they will put up a good word for you if they only had known that you existed. ✤ Useful resources: UX Research Cheat Sheet, by Susan Farrell from NN/g (attached) https://lnkd.in/eUTHKWvF What Can You Do When You Have No Access To Users?, by H Locke https://lnkd.in/ewHEKhBS UX Research When You Can’t Talk To Users, by Chris Myhill https://lnkd.in/ez5-b6zf #ux #research

When I was a first-year lawyer, my partner explained that sometimes clients will come to you with a problem but without a clear scope or task. In those situations, we'd prepare a "reverse brief" to help them define the scope of work, desired outcomes, and next steps. If you need to prepare a “reverse brief” and aren’t sure where to start, here’s an example (and things to include): 1️⃣ Restate the Issues Summarize your understanding of the client’s issues. This shows you’ve listened and ensures you’re on the same page. 2️⃣ Clarify the Task Describe the work you believe you’ve been engaged to do. Be clear on the actions and deliverables (e.g. a formal report, an email advice etc). 3️⃣ Confirm the Outcomes Specify what the client’s goals are / what results you will achieve for the client. 4️⃣ Information / documents to be reviewed Set out the information / documents that you have been provided and will review. When there is a high volume of documents, it may be helpful to list them out, categorize them, and align with the client on what needs to be reviewed in detail. 5️⃣ Outline Next Steps Set out what will happen next and any required actions from the client. Where possible, set out the proposed timelines. 6️⃣ Seek confirmation Ask the client to confirm the brief, or otherwise provide comments on what needs to be changed in the brief. Anything else you would add / change when you’re preparing a reverse brief? ------ If you’re a junior lawyer looking for practical career advice - check out the free how-to guides on my website. You can also stay updated by sending a connection / follow. #lawyers #lawyer #lawstudents #legalprofession

70% of change initiatives fail. (And it's rarely because the idea was bad.) Here's what actually kills transformation: You picked the wrong change model for the job. It's like performing surgery with a hammer. Sure, you're using a tool. But it's the wrong one. I've watched brilliant CEOs tank their companies this way: Using individual coaching (ADKAR) for company-wide transformation. Result: 200 people change. 2,000 don't. Running a massive 8-step program for a simple process fix. Result: 6 months wasted. Team exhausted. Nothing changes. Forcing top-down mandates when they needed subtle nudges. Result: Rebellion. Resentment. Resignation letters. Here's what nobody tells you about change: The size of your change determines your approach. Real examples from the field: 💡 Startup pivoting product: → Used Lewin's 3-stage (unfreeze old way, change, refreeze) → 3 months. Clean transition. Team aligned. 💡 Enterprise going digital: → Used Kotter's 8-step process → Created urgency first. Built coalition. Enabled action. → 18 months later: $50M in new revenue. 💡 Sales team adopting new CRM: → Used Nudge Theory → Made old system harder to access → Put new system as browser homepage → 95% adoption in 2 weeks. Zero complaints. The expensive truth: Wrong model = wasted months + burned budgets + broken trust Right model = faster adoption + sustained results + energized teams Warning signs you're using the wrong model: • High activity, low progress • People comply but don't commit • Changes revert within weeks • Energy drops as you push harder • "This too shall pass" becomes the motto Match your medicine to your ailment: Small behavior change? Nudge it. Individual performance? ADKAR it. Cultural shift? Influence it. Full transformation? Kotter it. Enterprise overhaul? BCG it. Stop treating every change like a nail. Start choosing the right tool for the job. Your next change initiative depends on it. Your team's trust demands it. Your company's future requires it. Save this. Share it with your leadership team. Because the next time someone says "people resist change," you'll know the truth: People don't resist change. They resist the wrong approach to change. P.S. Want a PDF of my Change Management cheat sheet? Get it free: https://lnkd.in/dv7biXUs ♻️ Repost to help a leader in your network. Follow Eric Partaker for more operational insights. — 📢 Want to lead like a world-class CEO? Join my FREE TRAINING: "The 8 Qualities That Separate World-Class CEOs From Everyone Else" Thu Jul 3rd, 12 noon Eastern / 5pm UK time https://lnkd.in/dy-6w_rx 📌 The CEO Accelerator starts July 23rd. 20+ Founders & CEOs have already enrolled. Learn more and apply: https://lnkd.in/dwndXMAk

Basics of Cybersecurity: What Every Tech Professional Must Know Today In our world, cybersecurity knowledge isn't optional anymore. Let me share some actual numbers and practical insights that matter to every Tech professional: The Big Three Threats You Need to Know: 1. Phishing attacks cause 90% of all data breaches. These aren't just spam emails - they're sophisticated scams that can fool even experienced users. The fix? Strong email filters and two-factor authentication are your best defense. 2. Ransomware isn't just about paying ransom - companies lose millions in downtime alone. Regular backups and solid recovery plans are essential, not optional. 3. DDoS attacks can shut down your entire business in minutes. Cloud-based protection and load balancing aren't fancy extras - they're basic necessities. What has really worked in 2024: - End-to-end encryption for all sensitive data - Regular security training for all staff (not just IT) - Automated threat detection tools - Continuous system monitoring The Truth: Most successful attacks exploit basic security gaps. Good security isn't about complex solutions - it's about getting the fundamentals right every single day.

This isn't just another corporate restructuring. It's different this time: → These aren't juniors - they're cutting SENIOR roles → Many have 5+ years of experience → This is happening during peak consulting season Why?: → AI does in minutes what took analysts weeks → Clients now have their own data teams → SaaS platforms replaced implementation work → Premium fees are compressing as analysis gets commoditized The future of consulting: → Small, elite teams replace massive pyramids → On-demand talent replaces fixed benches → Only truly strategic work survives For the Big 4 firms holding onto the old model? EY just showed us their future. The question isn't whether consulting will change. It's whether they can change fast enough.

I started my career as a designer. Sometimes, it was frustrating when a client kept changing directions. Or adding one change after another. I know that feeling wasn't one-sided. It affected us both. The pressure is real when you're responsible for deliverables. It's tough to recognise the challenges others face. It's rarely just one party's fault—it's a shared issue. At the core, it's about communication. Here’s how we solve it now: - Define the scope clearly - Conduct a kick-off meeting for alignment - Establish communication channels and frequency - Educate clients about the process and expectations - Focus on desired outcomes and goals, not just tasks - Use project management tools for effective planning - Involve clients at every step for their insights - Communicate often and seek feedback early - Use prototyping tools to facilitate collaboration - Set limits on revisions and changes upfront - Clarify the effort needed for extra requests Ultimately, design is neither for the designer nor the client. It's crafted for the audience. It must resonate deeply, driving the audience's actions and fulfilling strategic marketing objectives. Designers, have you been in a tough situation recently? Would love to hear some stories. 🔁 Repost this to support designers.

Retail enter karna hai bhai, kya karu? 🤔 Franchise store (FOFO) ya company owned (COCO) ya shop in shop (SIS)? Which is better? I wish there was a simple answer, but here is how we are thinking about the offline expansion business model at The Pant Project. Company owned company operated (COCO) stores should be first port of entry: As a brand, you own the assets, you put in the capital expenditure to fit out the store as you would like. You pay monthly rent. And you hire sales staff to operate the store. This is the highest control model for a brand, and in my opinion, given you can meet the capital requirements, it is the preferred way for a brand to enter into retail, as it offers max scope to give elite customer experience, and also provides maximum feedback loop to accelerate learning. At The Pant Project we want to open 25+ COCO stores in the next 2-3 years. Franchise owned franchise operated (FOFO) stores should be done once you have an established business offline model and store economics. Only then can you ensure that your franchisees make their required return on investment (ROI). Franchise operated with strict brand guidelines is also hard to pull off, as standardisation of customer experience across franchisees is often missing, with some franchisees operating stores at or above COCO levels, and others failing to make the required investments into staff & training etc. That said, if you can crack franchise at scale, it's a powerful way to scale fast with requiring much less capital. Specially if you can successfully engage with master franchisees who own 10+ FOFO stores each, like Lenskart.com does! Shop in Shop (SIS) should be the last port of entry: While many think it should be the first port of entry as it is a low cost way to pilot offline retail, my personal opinion is that it is hard to build a brand with limited space in a multi brand outlet (MBO) or large format store (LFS). And while SIS is lower on capex, it is high on inventory requirements as well as blocks working capital as you typically see longer payment reconciliation cycles. Once your brand is built, it is easier to get the best locations within a LFS, and easier to negotiate reasonable channel margins. It is also easier to be discovered within an MBO when you already have some level of brand recall in a customers mind. So while one day at TPP we certainly do hope to be present in the Shoppers Stop's of this world, for now, we are willing to be patient in our timing of channel expansion and sequence our moves in what we think is the right logical order. Further, there are mixed vegetable khichdi models like FOCO (franchise owned company operated) and COFO (company owned franchise operated) too, but we'll save that discussion for another day 🙃 We are at stage #1, COCO expansion right now.