Four recent assignments: what the client needed, what I did, and what changed.

AI-Supported Invoice Processing
Technical Facilities Service Company

Result: 36% more billable hours captured.

The company handles maintenance and callout work across multiple sites. Technicians wrote fault descriptions and remediation notes in the field, under time pressure, and rarely in a form that could go straight to a customer. Office staff then rewrote them into invoice text. It was done inconsistently, and there was no reliable way to make sure all hours and work performed were actually billed.

I introduced an AI-supported step that turns raw field notes into professional fault descriptions and remediation texts ready for the invoice. I designed the workflow, fitted it into existing routines and defined how staff review and approve the text before it reaches the customer.

Customers also received clearer, more consistent documentation of the work performed.

Relevant for service companies where field documentation affects both customer experience and how much of the work gets billed.

Redesigning the Operating Model Through Consolidation
Nordic Holding Group

Result: 60+ people moved, three leases became one, lower rent and overhead.

The group had three subsidiaries running from separate locations. Overhead was duplicated, management attention was split and working across the units was difficult. The group paid for three leases to house an organisation that could work as one. The decision to consolidate had been made. The real task was to redesign how the group operated, using the move as the lever.

I used Lean methods to map how work was done in all three entities and to find what was duplicated, in both processes and space. From there I designed a step-by-step transition where each step could be completed without disrupting the next. The work covered the operating model, workspace planning, phasing across all three organisations and managing the dependencies along the way.

The move was completed on schedule, without disrupting operations. The new setup also made it possible for the three subsidiaries to work together in ways the previous model had effectively prevented.

Relevant for holding groups where the cost structure and organisation no longer match how the business needs to operate.

CSRD-Aligned Sustainability Reporting
Swedish Industrial Holding Group

Result: Two reports delivered on schedule, rated strong by external auditors.

The group operates across construction, automation, real estate and infrastructure, with subsidiaries in Sweden, Norway and Southeast Asia. After the Omnibus proposal reduced the mandatory requirements, the group chose to follow the CSRD framework voluntarily and to set a clearly higher standard than in its previous sustainability reporting. For a group with an active ownership agenda, the quality of that reporting matters both to capital markets and in the governance of its portfolio companies.

I led the work over about twelve months. It covered four areas:

  • the group-wide double materiality assessment across eleven material topics
  • setting up the ESG data platform and working with subsidiaries on Scope 1, 2 and 3 data in line with the GHG Protocol
  • GHG methodology, including base year, consolidation boundaries and intensity metrics
  • writing all narrative sections of the report

In parallel, I produced a separate sustainability report for another entity in the group, including the double materiality assessment, value chain illustrations and the English translation.

The external auditors considered the quality strong and the organisation well placed for future reporting cycles.

Relevant for groups that use sustainability reporting as a governance and positioning tool, not only for compliance.

Defining Strategic Direction
Multi-Division Technical Services Group

Result: A framework now used in recruitment, onboarding and acquisitions.

The group had grown through separate divisions, and each subsidiary had developed its own way of working. Leadership had no common basis for hiring, setting priorities or evaluating opportunities, and the differences became more visible as the group grew.

I worked with the executive team and selected managers through a series of workshops. We mapped how decisions were actually made across the organisation, found where the logic was inconsistent and worked through the contradictions together. The result was a written framework of values and guiding principles, specific enough to use in real decisions.

The group now uses the framework as a management tool. It guides recruitment, shapes how new employees are introduced to the company and forms the basis for how the group presents itself in acquisition discussions.

Relevant for groups where divisions have grown independently and leadership needs a common basis for decisions on hiring, priorities and growth.