Why Managers Should Hire Veterans for Operational Success

Business value engineering, it's about discovering and defining the business value and benefits that are brought around through transformational change or IT implementations in that sphere.
Welcome back to the Ways of Working podcast, your weekly dose of practical tips for senior leaders who are looking for a performance edge without burning themselves or their teams out.
Today, we're joined by Regional Director, Business Value Engineering at IFS, James Harrison. James, hey. Good to see you.
And yourself, James. Really good to see you. Thanks for having me on the podcast.
Thank you for being a guest. It's always a pleasure. I want to get straight into it, and the job title was a source of inspiration for me: Business Value Engineering. Can you tell us a little bit about what that is?
Of course. Well, business value engineering. I, personally, dislike the word "engineering" because it conjures up the idea of something being manufactured or built. But the reality of business value engineering, it's about discovering and defining the business value and benefits that are brought around through transformational change or IT implementations in that sphere. So you see a lot of business value engineering coming up within big software companies, such as IFS or people like SAP, Infor, Oracle. They're all looking at how they use value engineering to determine the value brought through their products to their customers. And that's not just the IT implementation, but it's the the business outcomes component that that software enables. So when you increase the efficiency of an area of a business, what does that mean in terms of monetary value or increased productivity? How does it contribute to the bottom line of the organisation? And what's your return on investment for that transformational spend that you are are intending to undertake?
So in layman's terms, and correct me if I'm off track, in layman's terms, it's about thinking about how do we do a transformation potentially with software or not with software, and how do we maximise the ROI from that, the value that's created from that transformation project?
Absolutely. So yeah, quite simply, if I implement this change to a process or an area of my business, what will I see out of it? Value engineering is about that quantification. So if I go from a head count of 100 people down to a head count of 50, what does that mean to my bottom line and to my P&L? And obviously, there's the obvious knock-on implications in terms of salaries and and cost to the business in that regard. But there could also be other knock-on implications, such as efficiency or the requirement for people to be able to carry out tasks. So it's about balancing all of those factors to make sure that you've got a clear understanding of the business case behind actually undertaking that transformational change and quantifying that so that you can make an informed decision.
Super interesting. And the types of organisations that IFS would work with, what sort of partnerships do you create? What sort of transformations can IFS offer to organisations out there looking for that value engineering proposition?
The key from us within IFS, but also, I think, when it comes to value engineering is is about value doesn't stop at go-live in an IT implementation. When you press go and put that software onto the laptop, it doesn't necessarily bring value in and of itself. Yes, it's there. You've delivered the the product that has been purchased, but you haven't delivered the outcome that that product was intended to achieve. So that requires a level of value assurance and an end-to-end value assurance that's cyclical and ongoing throughout the life of that engagement. So it becomes less a vendor-customer relationship and more a collaborative partnership. So one of the approaches that we take within IFS is to get hand in hand with a customer to understand the the value outcomes from that initial high-level discovery piece into our value engineering approach. But then on beyond that into a more intimate engagement that allows us to support that value realisation and ensure that those benefits, those outcomes that were identified that are being enabled by the platform are being tracked and managed and delivered, and then take short-term corrections and longer-term corrections to drive that value. And so when we're engaging is we're not looking at it just from the perspective of you buy the software and thank you very much. It's you're buying the software to create an outcome. And so that moment of service that you're trying to achieve for your customer or within your organisation by levelling that leveraging that platform becomes the critical component. And that means that you need to have a trusted and long-term relationship in collaboration as a partnership, not in isolation of that vendor and supplier type relationship that you might see in some of the other industries.
I find that fascinating. It reminds me of a conversation on a previous episode with Paul Teasdale, who has he's ex-McLaren F1. And and they talk about, "What's the result that you want, and how do we find the information and the data that you need to get that result?" And it sounds like the proposition that you're sharing with your clients is again, "What's the business outcome, or what's the business result that you want, and how do we realise that for you through the transformation process? And might be your software platform might be the business support that you give to get that you give around that business platform.
Absolutely. We start off at the beginning at the very highest level of that business strategy. Where does that business intend to go in the next 3 to 5 years? You know, are they looking to grow through acquisition or is it organic growth? Are they seizing market share from their competitors? Are they driving cost or risk out of their business to be able to improve their margins on their bottom line? Are they looking at divestments or floating with an IPO? What is the direction of travel for the organisation? That becomes the sort of baseline foundation for the reason behind transformation. You're not investing money to buy software, you're investing money in software to create an outcome. So understanding that outcome that is needed gives the ability to then look at the scope of services that that software can bring to the organisation. Where are the touch points that that software can influence and can be involved in and provide value to the organisation in a way that you can then quantify it, measure it, ensure it's delivered, but actually see that return on that investment because it contributes and enables those strategic outcomes that you are aiming for. And so we do that at a high level to begin with. So we look at those the business strategy, the as-is environments of that business at a technical level. Then we look at blockers, what's stopping us achieving those strategic aims in our current as-is state? And then we start to picture a joint vision of what the future could look like, that nirvana, that wonderful single data source, real-time information, decision-making in the real time, all of those things that people talk about. But actually, what does that look like for real? And then we start to consider, well, what are the enablers that are needed to do that? That may well be the software platform, but it's a generic discussion at that stage, rather than being around the IFS platforms. It's about, what sort of thing do you want so that it helps you do your planning and your scheduling, and optimizes the resources that you are controlling? Are you looking for increased visibility within your supply chain or within your stock control? What are the what are the questions that you are trying to answer and those enabling factors that you need, but also what change, what business change might need to be undertaken? Have you had problems with transformation programs in the past, and therefore, you need better levels of executive sponsorship within your organisation to be able to drive success? All of those sort of questions become an enabler, combined with that forms through into the later discussions around delivery and implementation. If you are aware of some of the pitfalls that can come, you're much better able to plan an effective delivery program, and therefore, you're more likely to implement on time and on budget, but also realise the outcomes that you're seeking as a result of that software. The final element is, what's the business case, then? If I go from my business strategy and achieve it, and I move from my as-is state by removing those blockers, bringing in those enablers, and achieve my to-be environments, what does that mean? What's the value to me? And that can be at the strategic level, so CEO, CIO, or maybe C-suite minus one, but also at the tactical and operational level. So what does it mean to a business unit that looks after the logistics and the supply chain? What does it mean to the finance department? Are they seeing a massive reduction in using Excel spreadsheets because they've moved to an automated environment? Are you decreasing your stock control volumes because you don't no longer need to hold so many items on the shelf because you've got a much more efficient visibility of your supply chain and the demand that's coming into your business because you're forecasting your projects and programs more effectively? Those sort of things come into your business case, and that starts to become a quantified business value. And you might get some high-level figures at that stage, but you're more likely just to have sort of some generic benchmarking of the potential improvements that, yeah, we are expecting to see a 15% improvement in the supply chain performance, or somewhere in that space, or a decrease in mileage for field service agents going out in their vans. And then, at that point, we then look at how we go into to further value engineering, and that's the deep dive into process areas in terms of those inputs and outputs, the processes that are touched, and the values that are contained within there. So then you start to really quantify actually, "If I reduce my headcount in this space, this is the salary base that I'm looking at in that environment, and this is, therefore, the the figure that I could expect to see." And you start to quantify actually, what is the change that's going to occur, and what's the value that's going to come out of that? And that then piles up into a board-level business case with a report so that you can start to say, "Actually, there we go, I've got a reason for transformation. If I invest, this is what I can expect to see, and I can expect to see it in these areas of the business at a granular enough level that I can hold those business units to account to drive and effect that change once that software goes live." And that then piles up into a board-level business case with a report so that you can start to say, "Actually, there we go, I've got a reason for transformation. If I invest, this is what I can expect to see, and I can expect to see it in these areas of the business at a granular enough level that I can hold those business units to account to drive and effect that change once that software goes live." And that then feeds through into that benefits realisation and that understanding of the delivery, because you can start to scope out the features and the functions and the capabilities that are needed to drive those outcomes. You no longer buy software off the shelf and go, "Well, I just I'm just going to go for everything in the finance module, or the finance capability, because I don't need it." But also enables that you don't miss something as well, you start to really look at it and go, "Okay, that's what I need."
It's so interesting listening to you talk about all of the different parameters and steps that go through the the process and the opportunity realisation. How did you end up working in this field? Tell us a little bit about your background and how what led you to this point.
I think I've probably taken one of the most circuitous routes that you can in my career. Yeah, I I think I would determine myself as a non-standard member of the business environment. A lot of career paths are are pretty you know, sort of you move from this role to the next role because you've had experience here, and you progress along a fairly standard path of, you know, finance, or sales, or operations, or the like. I've been very lucky, I suppose, and very fortunate to have had great leadership in various roles support me and coach me and mentor me, but also, great colleagues around me lift me up and support me to move forward. And that starts off back when I was in the military. So I started my career in the the British Army, went through Sandhurst, had my time as a a young troop commander getting things wrong, and being told off by more experienced sergeants and sergeant majors, etcetera within the organisation, but learning off the back of that how to work with people, how to understand the motivations behind the actions that people undertake, and recognising that actually the number one element within a workforce is the person. It doesn't matter about software, it doesn't really matter about the tools. The the people are what drive success in an organisation. And that was instilled to me, in the military, because you put your soldiers first. You stand at the back of the queue, and they get fed first. It's about them first and foremost, you then worry about yourself. And that's been the philosophy that I've taken through my career since. So I was really fortunate when I left. I got pulled into a niche consultancy organisation by one of my previous commanding officers, who said, "Look, you're leaving. I'd like you to come work for me." And I thought, "Yeah, better the devil I know than going to an organisation that I didn't know or trust." And also that transition out of the military for me felt like it was going to be slightly more simple, less problematic, less traumatic, I should say. But that's then allowed me to jump from role to role since, because I started off doing sort of basic management consultancy within a construction environment, we're working with a lot of people that, you know, have very mixed backgrounds. And that was educationally quite similar in a way to the military, people from, you know, high-level degrees down to guys that have literally come out of school and turned their hands to a trade. So very different motivating factors therefore within those people as to why they're in the workplace, and what they want to do with their careers, what they want to do during their working day, and how they're going to see the value of the output that they're being asked to undertake, and what it means to them. I've been able to take that then into business change. So I moved from that consultancy role to an interim role on the 2012 Olympics, looking at logistics for the Games Makers coming in to the UK and helping set up one of the the entry points for those competing in the 2012 Olympics, before I was headhunted to go and work for an IT firm. Thought, "Okay, IT. I don't know anything about IT." But I actually went into business change. And it was there that I sort of started to form my foundation of the most commercial approach to business change, but again it all just comes back to, what's in it for me? Articulating why someone needs to go from where they are today to where they need to be in the future, and that can be an individual, it can be a team, it can be a business unit, it can be an organisation as a whole, but it all comes back to outcomes. What is the outcome of the transformation and the change that I undertake? And that's led me to where I am now with regards to that business value engineering, because again it's about determining and defining those outcomes in a way that can be articulated and understood by a myriad of stakeholders, and in a way that is is trusted and believed. And that's why I find that engineering piece, a challenging word, because it does conjure up that idea of it having been built. And yes, it has been built. It's been built in a manner that is trustworthy. You know, there is a foundational structure behind the approach, but actually what you're you're doing is articulating that outcome to that stakeholder in a way that they can understand what they need to do to achieve it, where that change is going to come from, and what that outcome realises, be it, a cost reduction, a risk removal, an improvement in revenue, or just simply at the very base level, being able to finish at 5:00 on Friday night and go home to your family, when a task used to take you till 7:00 or 8:00 in the evening, because it had to be done. And those are things that I I find quite interesting to work on.
I think what you share there about sort of the the bridge from the military to the consulting world, and then consulting world into working with senior leaders in organisations, and obviously, I know the people listening are are those senior leaders who are looking for an edge opportunity. And I think one of those core military skills is the ability to position a message and to share a change journey, whether it's, "Hey, we're going to go and attack this hill," or, "Hey, here's a a campaign plan for occupation, uh or, you know, freeing a new country." Those core skills of explaining a message, explaining why this is important, and explaining those people's role in it translate really well to business, don't they? And there's a lot of things that senior leaders can learn from the military briefing process that carry across to senior leadership.
I think that's one of the biggest challenges I have seen since leaving is the recognition of the workplace of those skill sets that military people can bring. I had a conversation today actually, funnily enough, our D, E, and I lead. And we were discussing the fact that we've just signed the Armed Forces Covenant, which is fantastic for the organisation. It's part of our commitments to the armed forces community and how we will support those who are veterans, who are reservists, who are cadet leaders, or even are members of the armed forces community, spouses, etcetera, with regards to the way that we work and operate as a business. But at the same time, I think the commercial world has yet to truly recognise that it's about the skill set and the adaptability of the armed forces community that brings value to their organisation. There's a lot of discussion about, "Well, let's have a look at the sorts of roles in our organisation that an armed forces person could apply for." For me, that's the wrong approach, because
I want to dig deeper into that. Can we go back one step, though?
Of course.
For those leaders who are not familiar with what the Armed Forces Covenant is, can you explain a little bit about that, and then explain how that is such a powerful edge, performance edge, for them to be able to tap into that they might not be aware of?
Certainly. So the Armed Forces Covenant is a UK-wide agreement between the commercial organisations and the British government to say that we will look at our armed forces community as being a valuable and essential part of the workforce, recognise that they bring value to our organisation and that we will support them in the manner that we have them within our organisation. So in the similar way that we do with with other sort of groupings within an organisation, we're looking at that armed forces community and recognising that some of those individuals don't necessarily have the the traditional skill set that we might expect, the degree or the the schooling and education, or even just the background of a career path that aligns to a specific role, but they bring those skills and adaptability to our organisation. But also at the same time, it's about recognising the contribution that they've given back to society during those periods of their career, and even today if they're reservists or working in the cadets environment and supporting young children or young adults through those sort of services, to say actually, "We value that you are providing contribution to our society and to our nation. So providing time for them to go and complete their training. And one of the things that IFS is is doing is looking at a leave policy that allows those individuals to go on paid leave to go and complete that training, in addition to the leave that they already have within their contract, as a reward for the service that they give, and also to recognise that they are an inherently important part of our society, and we have a responsibility as an organisation to support them. But to your point around recognising the skill sets, the other part of the armed forces community is that it brings you together with a much wider network of other similarly-minded organisations who are also doing the same thing, but also as part of the transition of those ex-forces employees as they leave the Navy or the RAF or the Army and move out into the civilian world, giving a platform for them to be able to come and experience what your organisation is about. So there are various armed forces events where they allow you to do transition workshops, hold shows and stands to talk about the opportunity to come and work within your business. And so it becomes a a big tool of highly capable, highly motivated individuals that traditionally may not consider your organisation to join, because they see it as not their standard career path in the same way as, like, reflect organisations look towards military go, "Well, they're not part of what we are." They're part of our society. And actually, there are an awful lot more of them out there than people realise, and there are people out there that just don't say that they're ex-forces because of the stigma, because they what don't want to be seen as not having that experience or that background. So but it's formed who they are in terms of that critical thinking, that ability to challenge in a way that is constructive, and to think slightly more outside of the box, and bring innovative and new thinking processes to a problem. We see it in the news all the time. The armed forces struggle with resources, and equipment, and timing, and funding, but they still have to drive the required output. They can't say, "No, I'm not going to be able to do that, because I don't have the resources." They have to find an innovative way to be able to achieve the end goal of the organisation. It works the same within business. You bring someone in from the armed forces, and you might not have the budgets to be able to achieve the outcome that you want if you took the traditional route. But you can almost guarantee that an armed forces person will take and look at it to see if there are other ways to be able to achieve the same goal within the constraints that they've been given. And they've been trained in that. They've been practiced in that. They've been tested in that, in probably more restrictive and unconventionally environments than anybody else within your workforce. They also have a very, very strong capability of understanding people. They work with diversity at every level. And, you know, you'll have people who have been educating, you know, adults who have had very poor educational backgrounds. So they understand how to get the best out of people who don't necessarily understand, you know, at an academic level, but they do understand the outcome. So they can become great mentors and coaches within your organisation to other people around them, and really bring up the the overall value of your team. So I think, you know, just signing up to something like the Armed Forces Covenant and considering how armed forces personnel can bring value to your organisation should be at the front of every single C-suite's agenda, especially when you're looking at that diversity, inclusivity, and equality component. But actually, more importantly, they bring so many skills that you will not find from someone in the traditional workplace, that your business can then use to differentiate itself and bring innovation.
I'm so strongly aligned with, obviously, as we're both ex-military operators, and I think there is this stigma with ex-military people that they have a certain way of being. They might be aggressive or very authoritarian, or there's a whole lot of preconceptions about what a military person might be. And then if they're still serving, as maybe a reservist or a skill set that might be called up by the military at some point in the future, there's a fear of, "Well, if I take them on, they might disappear off for months at a time or weeks at a time, and I'm going to lose that value that I've in- in employing them." And I think you make a really valid point that one significant factor that is er overlooked is the versatility, the problem-solving, but also right from probably 3 or 4 years in as a soldier and immediately as an officer, they have exceptional leadership training as well. You know, they're able to inspire, motivate, and communicate with people in a way that most civilians don't ever get the luxury of having that type of development or training. And and that can actually be a a false multiplier for your organisation to have ex-military people in your supervisory levels, team leader levels, junior manager level, but also in the more senior levels of your business, because they can think and operate and explain and communicate in a different way.
I think that's absolutely key. And, you know, the other factor to it is that it doesn't necessarily mean that that individual can't coach upwards, sideways, and downwards. There is lessons to be learnt of everybody in our environment around us. And whilst they may not have the IT technical backgrounds, they might not understand the programming or whatever the component is, that doesn't mean that they haven't got valuable skill set, valuable experience, and a valuable perspective that can bring a different approach, or different thinking to resolving a problem. Recognising a team becomes stronger through the sum of its parts. You don't want too many parts that are the same. If you want to build a jigsaw, every single piece is different, but you end up with the beautiful picture. The same works when it comes to that team in terms of driving that value towards your goal. If you bring in that slightly odd-shaped piece, which is the perception of military personnel, they're an odd-shaped piece, they're still equally as valuable as every other piece in that board. And without them, you can end up with an unfinished picture. So I think it's worth considering bringing those people in and saying, "Yeah, I recognise they've not done this before, but they're adaptable. They can learn fast. But they can also bring skills, knowledge, and a level of composure and understanding to a problem, you know, in high-pressure environments, complex environments, that other people won't have." And that can bring the whole team up together. And so it For me, it is don't look to the armed forces community and say, "Actually, they don't fit in a sales role, or they don't fit in operations role, because, you know, we operate in this space and they've operated in that space. You know, who knows how to to operate my business, because it's not guns, and bullets, and blankets, and trucks, and tanks." No. Consider the skill set that's required to be able to operate in a complex and challenging environment, and see how that applies to your business, because I think you'd be surprised. You know, these people will excel when you give them the opportunity to do so. And sometimes just giving them trust is enough to make them stand head and shoulders above other people around them.
I'm inspired listening to you in the way that IFS is really taking an active strategy of thinking about and supporting and bringing veterans into the business to get, essentially, to create more value as a as an organisation. For those people listening who may not be familiar with the Armed Forces Covenant or who are listening outside of the UK, and there isn't a similar scheme in in some countries, if you were to make a recommendation on two or three things that senior leaders could do that are going to make their organisations more attractive to the veteran community and more supportive to the veteran community, what would those things be?
I think, firstly, recognise that you're looking for skills and capability to drive value in your organisation when you go through your recruiting process. You're not necessarily looking for experience. Experience does not dictate future performance. You know, the fact that someone was the 1960s top footballer will not necessarily mean that they will be the top footballer on the field today if you put them on the field for Manchester United, for obvious reasons. The same applies to your recruiting process. So consider the skills and the application of those skills to your environment rather than necessarily experience. And therefore, when you're looking at the opportunity for veterans or reservists or other people to apply for your roles, consider how you bring them in, at least even for a first conversation. Give them an opportunity for a conversation with people within your organisation, because you may be surprised that you find that hidden diamond that you have never expected. They'll probably learn fast enough about your systems and your organisation, and the software you sell, or the product you sell, whatever it is. But they'll bring so much more in terms of their life experience, and that skill set, and adaptability. I think the the second piece for me is to consider it as part of your wider diversity, equality, and inclusion approach. We bring lots and lots of groups together as part of those sort of approaches within our organisations, quite rightly so, to ensure we've got equity. Apply equity to to those veterans with regards to your opportunities for people to come and join the role, but actually may even lead the way. Consider actually giving those people the opportunity for career feedback with regards to their CVs or their interview process. Maybe commit to saying, "Actually, if you have served my country," whichever organisation you are, in whichever market unit of the world, "if you've served, we will commit to give you a first interview." That's fine. They might not get the job, but give them the opportunity to have that exposure and that experience, and upskill their ability to interact in an interview environment. It might not mean that they get a job with yourself, but it could be just that little step to allowing them to get a job with someone else later down the line. And that that's a payback from you for the service that they've given to your country, and the things that that they may well have sacrificed for you, and, you know, that their families have sacrificed on on their behalf. So it is another sort of gesture that we can undertake. And, finally, I think, you know, consider the difference between leadership and management as well when it comes to that recruiting process. It's great to promote the most effective manager, because they can follow a process and drive KPIs. That doesn't necessarily make them that the most effective leader. At the same time, you may have someone who doesn't have the experience of being able to drive those KPIs, but they could be incredibly effective leaders in driving the rest of the organisation to drive those KPIs for you. And they could create a sum of value far greater than their own individual contribution if you look at them from a leadership perspective. And you're talking here about armed forces personnel who have operated in very austere and extreme environments, who have worked with massively diverse and culturally challenging individuals, both internally within their organisation, but also working externally with other nations and other environments, you know, different cultures, and building that trust and those hearts and minds with those people during their operations. So they're likely to be able to bring those skill sets to your organisation and make those teams even more effective. And if those teams are more effective, they're going to learn, they're going to be able to bring increased knowledge to how your operation works and have, you know, increased product depth, etcetera over time. But their immediate impact is going to be leadership that makes everybody else better. And if you've got 10 people who you increase by 15%, that's 150% increase in in productivity. If you promote the one member of your organisation that was managing well and achieve their targets at 100%, you've only increased by 100%. That's not You might have even decreased by 100%, because you've taken them out of that role. So, actually, consider that when it comes to those individuals in the armed forces community, and can they bring leadership to your organisation in a way that makes everybody else effect more change, more effectively, and more value?
I want to go back to that second point that you mentioned around, give them an opportunity to have that first interview. And there'll be some listeners who are thinking immediately, "Well, I don't have time for that type of charity to, even though these people may have supported my country and have offered potentially huge value to the country that I've lived in and and enjoyed freedom in, I don't have time to give them that first interview." And I think it's reframing that perspective as actually, this is not about charity, this is about opportunity, and the opportunity is for you, not for them, because you might discover somebody who you never even considered employing before just by giving them that commitment of that first interview. You might discover, as you say, that diamond in the rough that you never thought about previously.
Absolutely. I I think that that's the crucial piece is that 30-minute interview, that one hour of your time could bring so much value to your business that you never expected because of the skill set that that individual could bring to the table. But it could also be paid back. That's the other piece as well. You know, just because they didn't get the role with you doesn't mean they don't remember you afterwards. You took the time to invest in them. And if they do get a role in another organisation, it could be one of your customers at a later point down the road. And if they look back and go, "I remember that organisation. They spent the time to invest in me. I didn't get the role, but they had a very positive influence on me being able to move forward in my career, and they recognised my value as a veteran." Then actually, they may well turn around and go, "I like the way that that culture of that business works, and I want to use them as a supplier because of their culture and their fit." So it's not necessarily going to be the immediate-term return, but it could be longer-term investment that for you and for your organisation.
And growing a talent pipeline of incredibly capable, versatile people who could join the organisation at a certain level and work their way up pretty rapidly, right? That's what seems to happen in most military organisations.
Absolutely. And I think that's a a very valid point, because if you do look around at organisations like Hewlett-Packard, Google, some of the really big brands out there, when you start to look at some of those VPs, SVPs, market unit directors, etcetera, and you go back, sort of, 15, 20 years in their career, all of a sudden, you find that they had a short period of time in the armed forces in, you know, some form and capacity. Even some of those smaller, medium enterprise organisations out there, there are some very successful organisations out there that have been started and run by ex-forces individuals, and who are doing very well providing significant value to other organisations. You know, yourself, Jimmy. You know, you're providing, you know, much-added value to those customers of yours that you've worked with over the years. Not putting aside the fact that when you left the military, you also had a successful commercial career bringing value to the organisation. And neither of us would be sitting here without the opportunity given to us by our former employers. But at the same time,
Yeah, somebody gave us a break. Somebody gave us an opportunity.
Somebody gave us a break. Somebody took the time to give us that interview, because I think if I put hand on heart, without that first CEO of mine actually giving me that that first role, the chances are that my CV would have probably been thrown out the window by most organisations, because I had no commercial experience. How was I going to demonstrate that I could do the role they were asking me to do based on the experience that they wanted for that role? You look at any job description, it asks for x number of years doing this. Nothing in that job description ever aligns to a leaver's service profile. Yes, there are skills, there are, you know, those ability to learn, that adaptability, those sort of pieces, absolutely align, but you can't say that running a warehouse in the Midlands is the same as running 30 men on operations in Helmand Province. The two don't align at a paper-to-paper level, but ultimately, the skill sets to be able to manage and lead to ensure that a business outcome, and that could be a military business outcome or a commercial business outcome, is achieved. Those are the same. And actually, the conditions under which that officer, or that sergeant, or NCO, or whoever it was, was under in that environment is probably far more challenging, and yet they still achieved the aims and the goals of the organisation. So would you like someone who can do that?
I think it's key. It's the types of problems that they are capable of solving. And actually, what we look for in in a good manager and a strong leader is the skills that they have to solve more and more complex problems. And actually, organisations are led by people who can solve very complex problems, that where they don't necessarily have all the information, all the resources, or the clarity, and they can still solve the problems.
It's about those people. It's about that ability to recognise the talent in the people around them. They To your point, they don't necessarily have the answers themselves, and they recognise that. But the skill that they bring to the table is being able to identify the individuals who can answer parts of the question within the room, and then get them to be able to bring that solution together. And once they've got that solution, then help them, guide them, lead them to delivering that outcome, and effecting that change, and solving that problem. That's where their skill set comes in. It's not necessarily their own level of expertise. I don't think there's anybody on the planet that that's ever served in a military environment, when they've been on operations in the ground, would go, "Well, I know this place really, really well, because I've been here, you know, time and time again, and I know exactly what's round the corner and what enemy are round the corner, because we went round there last week, and they're all in exactly the same place." It doesn't happen. But what they do do is assess the situation, look at all of the the variables, look at the resources they've got available, identify the outcome that needs to be achieved, and then come up with a cohesive plan, but also a cohesive plan that can be adapted as things change, so they can still get to the end goal, but they can react to a changing dynamic as it occurs. Now that's absolutely key to business. You don't want a fixed drive in one direction when your business is continually changing. Your customers are doing different things. Your competitors are doing different things. You want someone who can think about those factors and make sure that they are taking minute adjustments at every possible opportunity that brings value, and making sure things aren't going wrong. And when they are going wrong, stopping them going wrong as quickly as possible. But also keeping you on that path to the to the destination. But also, if that destination changes, recognising how they're going to move towards the new destination as agilely and as quickly as possible.
Fascinating conversation. James, thank you so much for joining us, and just sharing a little bit not only about business value engineering, but also the incredible value that can be created by veterans in organisations if they're given the opportunity to show what they can do. If people want to get in touch with you, learn more, how can they find you?
So I'm on LinkedIn. People can find me on LinkedIn, and provide your team with the the link to be able to share alongside the the podcast. Reach out to me over that, and just drop me a message. Quite happy to connect with anybody anywhere around the world and and discuss any of these topics. It's a passion very close to my heart, both in terms of those business outcomes, but also the value that veterans can bring to our commercial world.
Amazing. Thank you so much again for joining us. And if you enjoyed this episode of the Ways of Working podcast, please make sure that you leave us a review or a comment on whichever platform you listened on. It helps us to connect with new listeners and also to know what you think. We genuinely appreciate any comments or feedback as well, and it helps us to improve the messages that we share. If you'd like to reach out to James, his details will be in the show notes. Enjoy the rest of your day, and see you on the next episode of the Ways of Working podcast.
That's a wrap for this episode of the Ways of Working podcast. If you enjoyed the episode, make sure to hit the subscribe or follow button on your podcast platform so you don't miss our upcoming episodes. And if you have a moment, please leave us a review with your thoughts on Apple Podcasts or your favourite podcast app. Your feedback helps us improve and grow our community of senior leaders seeking a performance edge. Thanks for listening, and we'll see you on the next episode.