Fullstendig transkripsjon av Fewer Priorities, More Value: The Discipline of Executive Focus

really important disciplines to apply to an even bigger canvas and landscape of countries and cities. 00:05:46.319 --> 00:06:12.560 Um and so working with the team, I mean, the first question that I asked, apart from listening to colleagues and listening to clients about where we were doing well and where we could improve, um, the first question I asked was, well, you know, if there are a hundred countries on the map in these territories and we're in 22 delivering services into 84, then where should we be? 00:06:12.720 --> 00:06:16.240 Um right places? 00:06:16.480 --> 00:06:39.279 Um and so actually the team and I worked with an economist to build uh an attractiveness, market attractiveness index, if you like, um, which was really important because um it helped us to identify that in fact we were, you know, 90% of the countries we were in were exactly the right countries to be in. 00:06:39.519 --> 00:06:45.519 Um and then that led to the observation of well, what cities are we in? 00:06:45.600 --> 00:06:47.360 And are we in the right cities? 00:06:47.519 --> 00:06:56.079 Um and that what that uncovered was there was enormous potential to expand from the existing bases in those 22 countries. 00:06:56.160 --> 00:07:06.720 Um, and as a result, over the next four years, we entered 32 new high greath cities and four new countries, but um, that was really important. 00:07:06.959 --> 00:07:12.480 Um, and that was called out as a really important portfolio priority, Louise. 00:07:12.639 --> 00:07:29.759 Um but to the heart of your question, beyond that, we were able to simplify the strategy down to five big country bets and three big solutions bets um or or or business line bets. 00:07:30.000 --> 00:07:37.120 And that was where we were going to direct time, effort, and capital over the course of the next three years. 00:07:37.360 --> 00:07:46.639 And all colleagues could resonate with that, all colleagues could get behind that, and all colleagues could contribute to that in some way. 00:07:47.279 --> 00:07:54.720 And so one of the key drivers in terms of evidence to pick those big bets for the organization was that economic model. 00:07:54.879 --> 00:08:01.839 Were there other factors that you considered outside the economic model that you you built, the attractiveness model? 00:08:02.399 --> 00:08:03.120 Absolutely. 00:08:03.519 --> 00:08:20.319 I think the portfolio momentum is one of the most um underestimated indicators of where a business has permission, if you like, to um do well in a market or in a part of a market. 00:08:20.399 --> 00:08:29.759 And so factoring in the portfolio momentum along with uh what we learned working with the economists was really important. 00:08:30.240 --> 00:08:46.559 Um, and that told us that if you only have an incremental dollar to invest, um if you invest that dollar uh in the right place, then you're going to get a much better return than if you try and spread that dollar over many different places. 00:08:46.720 --> 00:09:03.200 Um, and so it it allowed us to build a really disciplined financial management system so that we were putting those extra dollars into the opportunities that were going to be most um advantageous. 00:09:03.679 --> 00:09:15.840 And with with that, obviously come some of those tougher decisions on what do you need to stop doing or where do you need to stop investing or defer investment to make room for those big bets. 00:09:16.080 --> 00:09:25.120 Um how did you go about tackling that and probably explaining it to leaders that maybe weren't getting the investment that they might have hoped for? 00:09:26.399 --> 00:09:27.519 Yeah, great question. 00:09:27.679 --> 00:09:31.120 Well, a couple of ways I think that come to mind. 00:09:31.360 --> 00:09:49.759 Firstly, I think in any large organization, it's it's easy for the annual budgeting process to really drive a set of outcomes that don't allow you to invest in the things that you need to invest in or want to invest in. 00:09:50.000 --> 00:10:11.440 Um, and so what I did working with the team was encouraged us to identify where were we going to invest for faster growth and faster value creation in the future first before we then go down to how do we roll forward our expense base um into the next the next year? 00:10:11.600 --> 00:10:21.200 Um, should should investing for faster growth and value creation come after you try and do everything else for for everyone else? 00:10:21.279 --> 00:10:22.720 Uh I don't think so. 00:10:22.879 --> 00:10:28.159 Um so reversing that process was actually really instructive. 00:10:28.399 --> 00:10:47.200 And then making sure that um we had some sort of really memorable, easy to understand way for leaders out in the field to determine if they're hitting the required hurdle for performance improvement. 00:10:47.360 --> 00:10:58.000 And we had a really simple way of doing that, and that was really making sure that there was at least 100 basis points worth of revenue growth faster than expense growth. 00:10:58.080 --> 00:11:07.600 Um, and with that, you know, all things being equal, you should be generating 10% earnings growth or profit growth from that equation. 00:11:07.840 --> 00:11:20.480 So um that was really easy for people to uh use in an empowering and an accountability sense, um, right down into 57 cities and three lines of business. 00:11:20.559 --> 00:11:24.480 So I guess we're up to about you know 170 leaders, if you like. 00:11:25.360 --> 00:11:34.720 I think it's I think it brings that level of transparency, doesn't it, around clear expectations, people know, and then they can be accountable for that. 00:11:34.879 --> 00:11:38.799 Um, they know what's required of them to get that um investment. 00:11:39.039 --> 00:11:46.960 So when you think about practical, I don't think I'm working with any execs at the moment that aren't in um a resource-constrained environment. 00:11:47.039 --> 00:11:59.840 So we're looking to drive obviously top line

growth, but there's um constraints around money, investment, people, and attention, just what the organization has the capacity to land. 00:12:00.159 --> 00:12:04.159 Have you got any practical tips for leaders that are grappling with that? 00:12:04.320 --> 00:12:12.960 Because I think that would be fair to say it's most that they could really sort of take away to help them navigate that more simply. 00:12:14.159 --> 00:12:19.759 Yeah, I I don't pretend to have a silver bullet for all of these things, let me assure you. 00:12:19.919 --> 00:12:26.799 Um, but I can share what I've learnt over you know my 39 years working in corporate life. 00:12:26.960 --> 00:12:29.600 Um two two things stand out. 00:12:29.840 --> 00:12:54.879 One is um, you know, uh, and I was reminded of this by a colleague of mine at the time, um we were running a business that had an expense base of something like 1.6 billion um US dollars, and he reminded me that we were about to invest in the next year another$1.6 billion. 00:12:55.200 --> 00:13:04.480 So if you stood back from that and you made the assessment of um, are you are you putting it in the right places? 00:13:04.639 --> 00:13:11.919 Um, because you're not you're not financially constrained, you're about to invest$1.6 billion, which is a lot of money. 00:13:12.399 --> 00:13:21.039 Um so maybe it's not financial constraint, maybe it's the way in which you're deploying um the investment that you have. 00:13:21.279 --> 00:13:32.480 Um and the and the second area really is um learning to say yeah, yes or maybe, but not now. 00:13:32.639 --> 00:13:44.720 Um and so that is that's really about the time sequencing of initiatives or the time sequencing of investments that people w want to propose. 00:13:44.879 --> 00:14:08.960 Um and when you work in corporate life for a long time, you get the sense that the the year is you know constructed of 12 months and four quarters, and you know that the world moves in unison with um the financial year that you have with an organization when in fact, you know, in life and in the world of world at large, that's not how things work. 00:14:09.840 --> 00:14:24.480 Um and so we found really creative ways to time sequence um investments um so that they weren't happening at the start of the year or the middle of the year, but some were happening sort of in the last month or the last quarter of a year. 00:14:24.639 --> 00:14:30.080 Um or perhaps some was were were starting the first month of the next financial year. 00:14:30.240 --> 00:14:35.519 So thinking about time more laterally um and expansively helped. 00:14:35.679 --> 00:14:41.039 And um yeah, so they would they were two things that worked really effectively. 00:14:41.759 --> 00:14:42.480 No, absolutely. 00:14:42.639 --> 00:14:46.080 I think the two together would have been really um impactful. 00:14:46.480 --> 00:15:06.480 When you think about when you've made the key choices and you've picked your big bets, um, aligning the executive

team behind them, when you think about getting laser focused on the things that will drive greatest value, what changed in the way the executive team ran the business, do you think, as a result of those choices? 00:15:07.679 --> 00:15:34.960 In all of my leadership roles, uh through you know, more than 25 years of experience, um the big turning point for an executive team is I've uncovered is when leaders come to leadership meetings to contribute to the success of the whole of the enterprise. 00:15:35.200 --> 00:15:47.840 Yes, as opposed to you know being some nominated representative for their part of the business or their part of the world and contributing to a broader group. 00:15:48.080 --> 00:16:12.320 And the key role, I think, for a CEO and for a leader of any team, whether it's across geographies or across markets or across businesses, is to get a team to the point where they're all working on the whole of the enterprise, not just on their part of the enterprise. 00:16:12.559 --> 00:16:23.360 Um and uh the one one way I found that to come about is really to declare it and and to in some ways require it. 00:16:23.519 --> 00:16:31.919 I don't like the word require because it sounds a bit rules-based, but just to agree that it's one of our norms. 00:16:32.080 --> 00:16:35.279 It's how we roll when we're together as a team. 00:16:35.440 --> 00:16:50.639 They know, we think about the direction of the enterprise, we think about the colleagues of the enterprise, we think about the stakeholder interests, we think about what clients need, and we think about the whole before we think about our part. 00:16:51.120 --> 00:17:08.000 Um and so on my last few leadership teams that I've led, I've I've asked people to have two caps and to wear their enterprise cap first and to only put on their business or their function cap when they really need to. 00:17:08.799 --> 00:17:10.720 Yeah, I think that's a really interesting one. 00:17:10.880 --> 00:17:14.559 I think it's the ambition of lots of leaders that we work with. 00:17:14.640 --> 00:17:18.160 Um we support lots of organizations going through transformation. 00:17:18.319 --> 00:17:30.319 And one of the big things that we keep coming back to in terms of where we see value leakage is the misalignment of what the executive team are trying to deliver. 00:17:30.640 --> 00:17:37.680 And as soon as you get that, there are always downstream impacts we find around value leakage along the way. 00:17:37.759 --> 00:17:40.079 So getting that right is is critical. 00:17:40.319 --> 00:17:44.559 And it really is behavioral change for some leadership teams. 00:17:44.640 --> 00:17:49.839 It's a big shift in maybe the way that they have been used to working previously. 00:17:50.079 --> 00:18:07.519 Is there anything that you did to know really with the team was just acting differently and measuring that as opposed to just agreeing on the surface level with you around the two caps, starting with your enterprise um cap? 00:18:08.799 --> 00:18:13.279 Well, you can tell, like particularly if you're in an enterprise-wide role. 00:18:13.359 --> 00:18:36.799 So if you're a CEO or a CFO or a chief people officer or chief operating officer, you can tell based on the content and the body language in the room, um whether whether the whole organization is being put first uh or whether parts of the organization are being put first. 00:18:37.119 --> 00:18:41.279 You can also tell when it's um being feigned. 00:18:41.440 --> 00:18:57.920 Uh and and I think the most important thing to come from that is how do you how do you coach and encourage individuals as well as the collective to put the enterprise first? 00:18:58.160 --> 00:19:01.599 Um a CEO can do that overtly. 00:19:02.160 --> 00:19:20.880 Um a CEO can also, in the one-on-ones with their direct reports, spend some time talking about enterprise-wide priorities and engaging, engaging individual executives to think about things outside of their area of responsibility. 00:19:20.960 --> 00:19:38.400 Um, and sometimes, in my in my experience, sometimes the more creative solutions to a challenge come from, you know, an executive outside the area of responsibility spending some time thinking about what alternatives might be. 00:19:38.720 --> 00:19:40.480 Yeah, it's an interesting point. 00:19:40.880 --> 00:19:49.599 Because we all have different ways of thinking, we all have different skills to bring to an equation, we all have different experiences to leverage and draw on. 00:19:50.160 --> 00:19:57.599 And a CEO's job is to get the absolute very best out of each individual but also the collective. 00:19:57.920 --> 00:20:03.519 So um I found that to be a really helpful, helpful thing. 00:20:03.680 --> 00:20:28.400 Um, I also was really upfront with the team about it because um if you're if you're running uh finance, for example, and you find out the the chief people officer has been asked to think about the numbers of the business in a different way, talking to the CEO, then that can that can be a bit unnerving unless everyone agrees that's actually how we part of how we roll around here. 00:20:28.720 --> 00:20:29.119 Yeah. 00:20:29.359 --> 00:20:33.200 And it's so difficult for CEOs, I think, to get right. 00:20:33.359 --> 00:20:39.039 I think when I've worked with exec teams where they are aligned, the energy in the room is palpable. 00:20:39.119 --> 00:20:43.599 They're so brought into the vision and the purpose and what the enterprise is trying to achieve. 00:20:43.759 --> 00:20:51.039 Like it's you you can just see that those organizations and team are going to accelerate beyond others. 00:20:51.200 --> 00:21:00.240 Um, any examples where leaders um maybe their own business priorities conflicted with the wider organization objectives? 00:21:00.400 --> 00:21:05.119 How did you resolve that where you had that conflict with your leaders? 00:21:06.799 --> 00:21:20.000 Um, I can't think of too many situations where a leader's

business priorities conflicted dramatically with the organization's priorities. 00:21:20.160 --> 00:21:24.640 Um I think it was the situations I can recall. 00:21:24.880 --> 00:21:41.599 Um I had a had a situation where I we inherited um a lot of concentration of talent in um a couple of um hubs in Asia, for example. 00:21:41.920 --> 00:21:47.599 And uh at the time those decisions were made, they they probably were made for really good sense. 00:21:47.839 --> 00:21:57.039 Um one they had lots of advantages to hub talent in certain locations in Asia versus others. 00:21:57.200 --> 00:21:59.759 Um, but one of the disadvantages was that. 00:22:00.240 --> 00:22:03.279 That the talent wasn't close to local client needs. 00:22:04.319 --> 00:22:10.319 And also those hubs tend to be places that lots of organizations like to hub talent. 00:22:10.720 --> 00:22:20.079 And therefore, the cost of doing that goes up and is driven up by the market settings and market conditions. 00:22:20.319 --> 00:22:28.880 So one of the things we needed to do over time was unwind that so we got a better balance between hubbing and spoking. 00:22:29.359 --> 00:22:48.240 That is having high quality talent local to clients in many cities and countries across Asia, as well as retaining some of the benefits of having certain forms of expertise hub from central locations. 00:22:49.519 --> 00:23:08.160 And so working through that process, unwinding that a bit, making sure that we got a really good balance in that equation was something that really required partnership between a business leader and the various geography leaders. 00:23:08.960 --> 00:23:18.720 And that partnership where each party believed that their interests were getting a benefit, that was really, really important. 00:23:18.880 --> 00:23:28.720 Because if one side of that equation gets a big benefit and the other side doesn't, then you're not going to have the right settings for the partnership or good collaboration. 00:23:30.079 --> 00:23:43.440 So yeah, I think you know, people with who have worked with me would say I'm not a particularly patient person, but uh I think I've had to learn some patience over time, Louise. 00:23:43.599 --> 00:23:46.319 Um I'm still trying to learn that. 00:23:48.079 --> 00:23:56.000 Yeah, so really making sure those partnerships and collaborative efforts have the time to uh nurture and mature. 00:23:56.160 --> 00:24:03.839 Um yeah, behavioral change, the humans are always the biggest complexity, I think, in any leader's leader's role. 00:24:04.240 --> 00:24:04.960 Oh, sure. 00:24:05.599 --> 00:24:09.440 So let's talk about turning growth into profitable growth. 00:24:09.599 --> 00:24:16.960 Um, I know some of the um examples you shared with us, profit grew much faster than revenue growth. 00:24:17.200 --> 00:24:23.279 So, what were some of the biggest changes behind that that really drove the profitable growth? 00:24:23.440 --> 00:24:28.880 Is there anything that you would sort of put

as the key contributors to that? 00:24:29.920 --> 00:24:44.480 Well, I think um important to note in in that role and that organization, um, top line revenue growth uh went from 10% to 14% for my area of responsibility. 00:24:44.559 --> 00:24:53.759 And so that's still, you know, 40% revenue growth over three and a half years uh or thereabouts. 00:24:53.920 --> 00:25:05.359 Um, so that was still important and accelerating that growth so that it was um sustainable, uh not just not just uh for the for the time, if you like. 00:25:06.240 --> 00:25:18.000 And then the um profit or eBIT growth was grew faster because there was the opportunity to be really more disciplined with how we deployed our expense. 00:25:18.160 --> 00:25:33.519 Um and so that system that I described earlier of making sure that you know each business and each each geography was meeting a hurdle level of financial performance or financial performance improvement, if you like. 00:25:33.680 --> 00:25:34.079 Yes. 00:25:34.319 --> 00:25:49.759 So that 100 basis points or more uh of revenue growth over expense growth, then what that did was it it really took all the um the lower performing units and improved them. 00:25:49.839 --> 00:26:03.599 Um yeah, and so the higher performing units continued to perform and continued to, and they were growing faster, so therefore they were throwing off more profit growth just as an as a matter of mathematics. 00:26:03.920 --> 00:26:10.720 But by getting all the underperforming units to perform better, um, that made a big contribution. 00:26:10.799 --> 00:26:19.039 And when you do that, um, the cumulative effect of that over multiple years uh improves the the outcome enormously. 00:26:19.200 --> 00:26:42.720 And that was really important, period, because it meant that we we won a lot of confidence in uh further investment through acquisitions and through partnerships, which so that the snowball effect um really took hold um not just on the business we had, but on the business that we built through the acquisitions and the partnerships. 00:26:43.039 --> 00:26:43.599 Absolutely. 00:26:43.839 --> 00:26:52.799 Were there any other key um metrics that you tracked to sort of define or determine that improvements would last, that it was sustainable? 00:26:53.599 --> 00:26:57.920 Yes, so definitely uh revenue mix was very important. 00:26:58.000 --> 00:27:03.920 So looking at recurring revenue streams versus um one-off revenue streams. 00:27:04.079 --> 00:27:20.000 Um, so making sure that we were, you know, the big bets I referred to, the three solutions that we called out as big bets were all recurring revenue stream businesses, uh, multi-year, uh long-dated contracts with clients. 00:27:20.240 --> 00:27:30.559 Um and so that revenue mix shift was really a big, big priority through through the course of the period as well. 00:27:31.680 --> 00:27:41.599 You've you've probably answered part of this question, but how do you distinguish growth that builds value from growth that builds complexity and cost? 00:27:41.759 --> 00:27:43.839 Because we see this happening a lot. 00:27:44.000 --> 00:27:57.440 There's a lot of um acquisition, organic growth, but it tends to not deliver the value that is hoped for sometimes because of the additional complexity and cost and investment required to sustain that. 00:27:57.680 --> 00:28:00.559 How have you differentiated between the two? 00:28:02.319 --> 00:28:02.960 Wow. 00:28:03.119 --> 00:28:28.880 Um, well, I think deliberately, deliberately in my last three roles, um, so at Australian Retirement Trust and at MERSA, uh, we establish simplification as a priority um in our planning uh because um all large organizations have degrees of complexity. 00:28:29.119 --> 00:28:36.319 Um and in my experience, and I don't want to sound like a cynic, but I'm risking sounding like a cynic. 00:28:36.480 --> 00:28:50.079 In my experience, the more the larger the organization, the more chance that there are more people um identifying ways to make the organization more complex, not less complex. 00:28:50.480 --> 00:29:05.920 Absolutely, and so I think simplification and and um being clear about your target operating model and where you're trying to get to is certainly in my last three roles was very, very important. 00:29:06.559 --> 00:29:20.640 Um because by their very nature, by the number of either geographies or the number of businesses or the number of stakeholders, they were more complex than than they needed to be. 00:29:21.680 --> 00:29:27.599 Uh, and so I think I think it's easy. 00:29:27.759 --> 00:29:38.480 I did work for a really impressive uh executive for quite a number of years who you who had the expression of is this is this core or is this a hobby? 00:29:38.640 --> 00:29:53.920 Um I think uh and that simplification process applies to not just the solutions that you're taking to market, but also uh how you organize yourself and how work gets done. 00:29:54.240 --> 00:29:55.680 Yeah, absolutely. 00:29:55.920 --> 00:30:02.079 And that sort of takes us quite neatly to let's talk about um your experience at art. 00:30:02.319 --> 00:30:09.680 So I think when you actually joined as CEO, you looked at how you could potentially simplify the operating model. 00:30:10.079 --> 00:30:18.960 Um, so what drove you um to think that that was the right answer, that simplification of the operating model, that what were you trying to achieve? 00:30:20.079 --> 00:30:33.440 Well, uh having worked in professional services and financial services for most of my career, um you know I you can you can see complexity when you see it. 00:30:35.440 --> 00:30:49.920 Um through conditioning and through experience, um you know, I had a sense that things were a little more complex than they needed to be. 00:30:50.160 --> 00:30:59.920 And um, by grace of my colleagues, um, in listening to them and talking to them and asking for their feedback, they told me so. 00:31:00.240 --> 00:31:02.960 Um

and how did they tell me? 00:31:03.119 --> 00:31:08.640 They they said things take too long to get done here. 00:31:09.359 --> 00:31:19.039 They say they said um decisions could be made faster if we knew who who to go to to make the decision. 00:31:19.279 --> 00:31:23.839 Um and so every organization has opportunities for improvement. 00:31:24.160 --> 00:31:28.799 And I think listening to colleagues, uh you've you can find out a lot. 00:31:28.880 --> 00:31:41.119 Um, and so their steer, their steer was essentially an encouragement to me and the team to make their jobs easier and more productive. 00:31:41.440 --> 00:31:42.640 Yeah, that makes sense. 00:31:43.039 --> 00:31:53.519 Because most of them are there, and most most employees in any business are there to have a positive impact and to do well for clients and customers. 00:31:53.680 --> 00:32:01.039 Um and so that's they were underlying drivers for the simplification. 00:32:01.200 --> 00:32:07.039 Um was there anything you tried um that didn't work as you intended? 00:32:07.200 --> 00:32:14.720 You were obviously looking to simplify, and that was your intention, making it easier for the organization to work together and serve the customer. 00:32:15.119 --> 00:32:18.559 Anything that didn't work as you'd intended? 00:32:20.240 --> 00:32:24.319 Probably there were probably several things. 00:32:25.839 --> 00:32:49.680 Uh because um uh because I'm human and um the teams I led were human and um and so I I think one of the things that I really hoped would be helpful was um listening to the customer experience firsthand. 00:32:50.400 --> 00:32:51.039 Yeah. 00:32:51.359 --> 00:33:06.720 And so spending a lot of time uh in the call center um and in previous roles at MERSA, spending a lot of time in front of clients um when I visited various cities and countries and listening to their feedback. 00:33:06.960 --> 00:33:11.359 Um and when you do that, it it's very rich. 00:33:11.599 --> 00:33:13.759 Um it's very rich. 00:33:13.920 --> 00:33:23.039 And often what one of the things that I've uh I've been fascinated about for a long time, Louise, is what what are our colleagues hearing? 00:33:23.200 --> 00:33:28.880 What are they listening for when they're in front of a customer or in front of a client? 00:33:29.119 --> 00:33:33.119 Because most clients and customers will tell you their life story, all right? 00:33:33.359 --> 00:33:43.039 Absolutely, and they'll tell it without your organizational boundaries in their mind, because that's not how they imagine their life playing out. 00:33:43.279 --> 00:34:13.199 Um their life, their life happens in a pretty organic way, and so when you when you hear the customer and client feedback, I always was interested in how is it that we're not listening to the full extent of that feedback and that input, and then improving ourselves as a consequence of that, yeah, and improving ourselves at a much faster rate than than maybe we were. 00:34:13.440 --> 00:34:21.440 So

that was one of the things I'm still I'm still challenged by that uh today, Louise. 00:34:21.679 --> 00:34:32.320 Um I still think that you know the secret in understanding how business can be better is can be told by its customers and told by its employees. 00:34:32.480 --> 00:34:34.719 Um I I couldn't agree more. 00:34:34.960 --> 00:34:40.639 So, how do we harness harness it in a way that's executable and operational? 00:34:40.880 --> 00:34:41.760 Um Yeah. 00:34:42.000 --> 00:35:01.599 It will be interesting as I see um, even within our own organization, as sort of developments in product and technology, how that voice of the customer now leveraging AI and different data solutions, we can get the actionable insight surface to lead us from the richness of calls. 00:35:01.760 --> 00:35:09.280 We can actually train AI to consistently look out for the things that if you were there in front of your customer, you would be listening for. 00:35:09.360 --> 00:35:20.400 Um, so it will be interesting as we see this next iteration, whether we can translate that into valuable experience improvement um for customers. 00:35:20.639 --> 00:35:23.039 But it'll be interesting in this next chapter. 00:35:23.360 --> 00:35:24.800 I agree entirely. 00:35:24.960 --> 00:35:35.119 Um, what I would add to that is let's not let's be careful not to program the listening to look for the things that the humans would have looked for. 00:35:35.360 --> 00:35:39.920 Um not only the things that the humans would look for. 00:35:40.079 --> 00:35:54.639 Let's let's program the technology to listen and look for things that perhaps have not been captured as value opportunities in the relationship with the customer or the client. 00:35:55.039 --> 00:35:55.840 Definitely. 00:35:56.079 --> 00:36:14.000 So with the leadership change, as you went through the simplification of operating model and you really shifted simplified decision making, is there anything sort of practically in how you ran your cadence or your leadership meetings that shifted to really sort of embed that change in the organization? 00:36:14.880 --> 00:36:28.480 Yes, um, probably a lot of things, but some things that immediately come to mind are we established a smaller executive committee, so uh a team of seven plus me uh as the CEO. 00:36:28.960 --> 00:36:30.559 That's a total of eight. 00:36:30.719 --> 00:36:40.960 And then we established uh an operating committee which included um a number of other leaders, and I think that group was as large as 18 at the time. 00:36:41.039 --> 00:36:51.360 Um I may or may not be right on that, but um we established really um you know overt objectives for both of those forums. 00:36:51.519 --> 00:37:09.679 One was to lead the strategic direction of the enterprise, um, to put to think about what colleagues need to be the very best and to um you know manage uh stakeholders, um, particularly in such a highly regulated um industry. 00:37:09.920 --> 00:37:13.519 Um regulators would be one of the important stakeholders. 00:37:13.760 --> 00:37:14.159 Absolutely. 00:37:14.559 --> 00:37:26.960 Um the board would be an important stakeholder, um, media would be an important stakeholder, um uh members are an important stakeholder, of course. 00:37:27.119 --> 00:37:40.079 So the executive committee was focused on you know the direction of the enterprise, the effectiveness and engagement of colleagues, and um just how great stakeholders uh felt about us. 00:37:40.159 --> 00:37:46.159 Uh the operating committee was really focused on the performance of the organization. 00:37:46.239 --> 00:37:55.840 So that's delivering delivering what we promised to deliver um to our members and to our regulators and to our board. 00:37:55.920 --> 00:38:01.440 Um, and that was more sort of operational in nature by by definition. 00:38:01.679 --> 00:38:02.079 Yeah. 00:38:02.400 --> 00:38:19.440 And the cadence um was really uh the the executive committee would get together every Tuesday morning for an hour and a half, and that had a pretty loose and open agenda was let's talk about the things that are important this week right now. 00:38:19.599 --> 00:38:22.320 Um, and make sure we have room to do that. 00:38:22.400 --> 00:38:29.760 Um, make sure we don't have an agenda that's got seven or eight things on it, and you don't get to spend the time on the important things. 00:38:29.920 --> 00:38:34.719 Um I think that's where it's oh sorry, I was sorry, I thought you you'd finished. 00:38:34.800 --> 00:38:46.320 I was gonna say that's where it's important where you sort of started going back to getting laser focused on the things you're gonna prioritize that you haven't got that jam-packed agenda of priorities that you're trying to work through. 00:38:46.639 --> 00:38:47.679 Yeah, that's right. 00:38:47.840 --> 00:38:49.440 That that's so important. 00:38:49.840 --> 00:38:56.960 There's never enough time to spend the right amount of time on the important things. 00:38:57.280 --> 00:38:57.760 Yeah. 00:38:58.000 --> 00:39:05.280 So I think one of your ambitions was very clear are the whole member outcomes was was key to the strategy. 00:39:05.599 --> 00:39:10.639 How did that translate connecting executive decisions directly to member value? 00:39:10.719 --> 00:39:19.440 Are there any examples of key decisions that you made as that executive committee that drove the outcome? 00:39:19.920 --> 00:39:34.639 Lots of examples where better uh member outcomes or member value outcomes and member experience outcomes were driven by decisions that we took as a team. 00:39:34.719 --> 00:39:40.400 Um, and I know the team at art continue to deliver in that regard. 00:39:40.559 --> 00:39:48.079 Um, hundreds of decisions a a year are made to try and improve value for members. 00:39:48.159 --> 00:39:57.760 Um, I haven't haven't worked in an organization that is more focused on that purpose than than uh than at art, actually. 00:39:58.159 --> 00:40:18.800 Um but one of the big

decisions that we took in my time was to move about 1.4 million members, um default My Super members under the age of 50 from into a higher growth default investment option. 00:40:18.960 --> 00:40:23.840 Um so where a member hadn't made an investment option, they would get a default option. 00:40:23.920 --> 00:40:32.000 And so we effectively changed the default setting to be a higher growth um investment option for those members. 00:40:32.239 --> 00:40:44.400 And you know, one of the things that we were thinking about in doing that was what's the lifetime duration of investment for someone under the age of 50? 00:40:45.199 --> 00:40:56.320 If you think about making your super last for your whole life, not just your working life, um, because after all, when you need it most is when you stop working. 00:40:56.800 --> 00:41:31.920 When you stop working, not while you're working, then how do uh and and really you know, with continuing um uh longevity improvement in Australia, uh, we've we sort of struck the realization that even someone at at the age of 50 in Australia um that has um you know uh a lifetime expectation of about 83 or 83 and a half years of age, they they have an investable time frame of you know more than 30 years. 00:41:32.159 --> 00:41:45.039 And so as custodian for them, acting in their long-term interests, how do we maximize the use of that time frame for for their advantage? 00:41:45.280 --> 00:42:03.039 Um and so knowing full well that every member had the right to change their investment option at any time, um, those that were entrusting us to make the decision for them, we wanted to make the very best decision that we possibly could for the long term. 00:42:03.599 --> 00:42:04.639 Yeah, no, absolutely. 00:42:04.960 --> 00:42:06.079 That would have been huge. 00:42:06.239 --> 00:42:08.960 I'm sure they'll be thanking you, thanking you now. 00:42:10.000 --> 00:42:14.719 Thanking us now or thanking them in, you know, 10, 15, 25 years. 00:42:16.079 --> 00:42:16.800 Exactly. 00:42:17.039 --> 00:42:22.639 Um, so we like to keep um give our listeners practical takeaways. 00:42:22.960 --> 00:42:33.840 For any leader that's listening out there that has a strategy that looks right on paper, but the results are potentially falling a bit short of where they would like them to be. 00:42:34.159 --> 00:42:40.320 What key questions would you suggest they put on their next executive meeting agenda? 00:42:43.440 --> 00:42:53.440 Uh well, you know, one, does it address a real and demonstrable client or customer need? 00:42:53.599 --> 00:43:06.800 Um so is the market telling you, and how is the market telling you that this is this is a strategy or a set of priorities that um are either missing or really needed uh in the market? 00:43:07.840 --> 00:43:14.880 Um two, I would ask what what do colleagues think about this priority or these set of priorities? 00:43:15.039 --> 00:43:18.079 Um one, do are they aware? 00:43:18.320 --> 00:43:24.880 Um uh do they feel a sense of connection and ownership to the priorities? 00:43:24.960 --> 00:43:31.280 Um, do they understand how what they do for you every day contributes to them? 00:43:31.440 --> 00:43:56.000 Um and and you'll find that where value is not being created as much as expected, often that comes from the market not needing what you think it needs or not needing it in the way you think it needs it, and colleagues not feeling a sense of true ownership for its success. 00:43:57.360 --> 00:44:05.119 And if they ask those questions and got some of those insights, what would you want them to do differently as a result of that conversation? 00:44:05.280 --> 00:44:07.599 How would they make it tangible? 00:44:08.079 --> 00:44:17.679 I definitely uh work out how to adjust the way in which you're going about delivering the strategic plan or the initiatives. 00:44:17.840 --> 00:44:36.639 Um and I think adaptability is one of the most important skills for a senior leader and certainly a CEO to have because the world is moving at a pace that's faster now than ever, and it's only getting faster. 00:44:36.800 --> 00:44:46.239 Um and therefore, actually, needs and wants and and attitudes in customers and clients are also changing fast. 00:44:46.320 --> 00:44:56.559 Um, how do you stay up with it and how do you adjust the way in which you play a meaningful role in their life and deliver value for them? 00:44:56.800 --> 00:44:57.039 Yeah. 00:44:57.519 --> 00:45:05.920 Um, so make the adjustments, and there are many ways you can test alternative ways to get to where you'd hope to get to. 00:45:06.480 --> 00:45:19.679 Um, lots of, in my experience, lots of clients and customers that are really eager and open to helping you understand how to do what you're doing better. 00:45:20.000 --> 00:45:21.599 Yeah, no, absolutely. 00:45:21.840 --> 00:45:24.320 Um, so thank you so much, David. 00:45:24.639 --> 00:45:28.239 I think all the insights you've shared have been incredibly valuable. 00:45:28.480 --> 00:45:31.840 We have a tradition that we close every podcast with. 00:45:31.920 --> 00:45:33.039 One last question. 00:45:33.280 --> 00:45:38.239 In your experience, where do you believe most of the value actually gets delivered? 00:45:38.719 --> 00:46:04.320 In my experience, value, real improvement in value being delivered comes from having a clear purpose, having a clear set of priorities, having really clear capital allocation, and having really super clear colleague engagement and empowerment. 00:46:04.800 --> 00:46:21.360 And through that system, that's been the way in which I've learnt and many others have learned to you know improve an organization um for its colleagues but also for its customers. 00:46:21.760 --> 00:46:22.400 Fantastic. 00:46:22.639 --> 00:46:24.079 Thank you so much for joining us. 00:46:24.320 --> 00:46:25.360 Much appreciated. 00:46:25.840 --> 00:46:27.119 Thanks so much, Louise.