Pros
The company still has highly capable, resilient teams who keep delivery running despite increasing structural pressure. • Strong client understanding and operational knowledge built over years - this remains the only real competitive advantage. • At the team level, collaboration is often the only thing compensating for systemic inefficiencies.
Cons
Cost is prioritised over actual value There is a consistent pattern of shifting roles to lower-cost locations without fully accounting for: • knowledge loss • delivery quality impact • increased coordination overhead On paper, it looks efficient. In practice, it creates a weaker system. ⸻ The operating model is becoming more complex, not simpler Work previously handled by one experienced person is now distributed across multiple individuals, often requiring additional oversight. This leads to: • slower execution • diluted accountability • increased dependency on coordination If more people are needed to achieve the same result, this is not optimisation - it’s inefficiency. ⸻ Leadership narrative vs. employee reality There is a growing disconnect between what leadership communicates and what employees experience. At a time when teams are dealing with layoffs, instability, and real financial pressure, leadership messaging can feel strikingly out of touch. Public-facing narratives that highlight personal passions and lifestyle contrasts only reinforce that perception. This isn’t about communication style - it’s about credibility. ⸻ High performers are not being retained There is no visible, consistent effort to: • protect experienced employees • retain high-potential talent • preserve institutional knowledge As a result, the people who hold the organisation together are leaving - and the impact is underestimated. ⸻ Shift towards a transactional model The focus is increasingly on output and volume rather than value and expertise. This risks turning a strategic service into a low-margin, low-trust delivery function.
