An Interview with Derek Richardson

Derek Richardson

Director – E-Squared

E Squared are “Operational consultants”, what does that really mean ?

I’m sure it means different things to different people and even different consultancies but for us its quite simple. We work very closely with our clients  to deliver a quantifiable change to their operational performance which is aligned with their business needs. The key words are deliver and quantifiable so the change is real and meaningful and it can be proven. Because that  alignment exists there is always a significant financial return. Our work is seen or considered as an investment regardless of funding arrangements which a client chooses, and for the vast majority that investment is a very prudent and attractive one.

What are some of the typical needs customers come to you with ?

Before I answer that, I think it’s important to recognise that customers tend to come to us on a repeat basis because they trust us because we really do deliver both performance and behaviour change which makes things very sustainable. When we join with a new customer there is often  a connection to us from someone else who has either moved roles or knows someone and has recommended us. 

In terms of the kinds of things we help customers with there tends to be three touch points which trigger work.

The first and perhaps most frequent is  coming in at some kind of strategic level to either assist with a major asset strategy or an operational excellence strategy, this then tends to lead to individual programmes of work either in functions or manufacturing locations.

The second is really a version of the first where we are asked to design and deliver a programme of work which is part of an existing strategy at either a functional or manufacturing site level.

The last is less common but only really happens with existing customers where there has been some kind of major change usually in market circumstances which requires a swift a decisive response and result. These tend to be either market demand has changed and manufacturing capacity needs urgent uplift or market factors have changed and manufacturing cost needs to decline very quickly.

In more general terms our clients all have a common need to see their operational performance significantly improve. The shape of that varies both in time and by client but perhaps the most common are operational driven capacity optimisation and operational cost optimisation a close third would be around service provision such as on time delivery or product quality. All these tie directly to profits and cash.

Your clients seem to stick with you, why do you think that is ?

I believe there are two factors at play, fist is the human or comfort factor. Clients get to know us, we get to know them and in that relationship there is a real bond and real trust. Our work is often hard and harsh truths often need to be faced, its easier facing those with someone you know and trust to deliver a really good outcome than with a stranger who is unknown both personally and professionally. 

The second factor is the results we deliver, we blend strong analytics which allow opportunities to be unearthed and robust solutions designed with outstanding change delivery. I see these for us as being at world-class levels.

How much of that success is down to your people?

Our teams are of course vitally important in that success, there are not many wallflowers on our teams and each member is a true expert their field. The majority of our team members have held senior line roles in industry prior to their consulting careers and bring that pragmatic real world experience with them. Beyond that we have a way of working, a set of operational processes which performs as a backbone on which we lean. Without those work processes I am convinced we would see much more variation in outcome than we do.

It sounds like process standardisation is a topic you support and advocate, do you?

It’s a super interesting topic and it doesn’t have a straightforward answer. There is absolutely a time and a place for standard process, the challenge and difficulty is in creating process which genuinely help deliver efficiency whilst delivering outstanding performance. For me the difference often comes down to having the right people in combination with a good enough process. The good enough ultimately depends on the process itself and how prescriptive it really can be made. 

We have worked for world class  companies with real global footprints deploying generally good standard process and there was absolutely no correlation in process maturity and plant performance, there should have been a strong relationship. Our job in this assignment was to establish why the relationship which logically should have existed just didn’t and fix it. People and behaviours were their gap, and this was primarily around leaders. This experience and finding led us to introduce a leadership assessment option to our  own analysis process.

For the best outcome a strong “People” management and development process is needed in conjunction with robust work processes.  The process deals with 80+% of all circumstance and the “right people” bridge the gap and allow performance excellence to be realised.

Clearly a big part of E Squared’s approach has roots in knowledge, data and statistical analysis but you talk about the  people or softer side more than I was expecting. Why is that ?

I was fortunate enough to be given many opportunities as a young leader and I advanced in truth faster than my leadership capabilities deserved. I was judged on results not on how I got them, my results were good. I did however reach something of a lightbulb moment when faced with my first compulsory 360 degree assessment. The feedback was honest, fair and accurate but it was very painful for me to receive.  After a period of denial I was smart enough to enlist a coach to help me understand and figure out how to move forward, improve myself and in turn lead the teams that worked for me in better way and to even better results. The next year the feedback was much better and many of the things I was doing were realising solid results. I was hooked. I owned my own actions and accepted the consequences.

In that process I learned to be a leader and learned the absolute importance and difference good, well motivated and appreciated people make. I learned the difference a good leader can make. I also learned that sometimes we have round pegs in square holes and its best for everyone to find a more appropriate home for them. Jack Welch affectionately describes this as “Weeding”.

I am still critiqued for being a little too direct and relishing a conflict  but at least now that’s a conscious choice and I think  a very good match for the role I play.