I considered the Partner path from the beginning of my consulting career, and had not planned on leaving before achieving that level. If you are to leave consulting, there are two natural points to leave: the two-year mark, after you have been through the first promotion cycle, and the five-year mark, at which point you have to make the commitment to push for Partner. At my five-year mark, I had my second child, which was a personal game changer for me, and I had to weigh the pros and cons of choosing to pursue Partner with my new family dynamic.
As you become more senior in consulting, you expand your network and gain additional control over some aspects of the job. An area where you do not have that control, however, is travel, because you have to follow the plum assignments that will best set you up for the next level. This meant I would be on the road more and not less, which would exacerbate the strains in my family life. So the choice was to either “see what happens” with my family or leave consulting. I chose to leave consulting for an opportunity in industry that would require less travel, and it worked. I chose a company that knew how leverage former consultants looking for work life balance. Working in this environment, where 60% of the team were ex-consultants like me, gave me a soft landing as we all “spoke the same language”. My new role also took me off the road completely, allowing me to spend quality time with my family.
As you become more senior in consulting, you expand your network and gain additional control over some aspects of the job. An area where you do not have that control, however, is travel, because you have to follow the plum assignments that will best set you up for the next level. This meant I would be on the road more and not less, which would exacerbate the strains in my family life. So the choice was to either “see what happens” with my family or leave consulting. I chose to leave consulting for an opportunity in industry that would require less travel, and it worked. I chose a company that knew how leverage former consultants looking for work life balance. Working in this environment, where 60% of the team were ex-consultants like me, gave me a soft landing as we all “spoke the same language”. My new role also took me off the road completely, allowing me to spend quality time with my family.
Having been in the General Practice at A.T. Kearney as well as internal strategy across different industries including financial services and consumer goods, are you tied to any specific industry at this point? Why or why not?
Personally, I love CPG. Most of my consulting projects were in that area, including work on the consumer side of marketing. Even my work in financial services involved working with a consumer-facing product. I like the idea of working with a tangible product that plays a role in people’s lives. As a learning opportunity, it offers insight into a variety of topics, from consumer segmentation, demographic, cultural influencers to the role a “brand” plays in influencing purchasing and usage behavior. It is as much about the product as it is about the people that the products touch.
In addition to my work in CPG, I have also gained expertise from 10-12 years of experience working across other industries. This has allowed me to identify and appreciate commonalities in challenges and opportunities that exist for companies regardless of their industries. This is why I feel comfortable “crossing industry lines”.
From your own experience and knowledge as Head of North American Strategy at Avon, what separates a great Head of Strategy position from a good Head of Strategy position?
If a company is good at acquiring and managing talent, you will find a lot of smart people on strategy teams. However, being smart just gets you into the game. To be effective, I think you need three basic elements. The first is your relationship with the head of the business or company – specifically, how open and honest you can be with the person. There is no absolute right answer in strategy, and too often you can get paralyzed by analysis. The “right” answer comes from identifying the best fit, most relevant and “execution-able” path for your company. Having access to the business unit lead, and the ability to speak openly and honestly with this person, is an enabler in identifying the “right” strategy for the company – the one that has his / her support, because a strategy isn’t good if it can’t be implemented.
The second element is your ability to recognize, attract and develop a strong team. This is essential to any successful leader – but particularly to strategy, as your asset really is the team and not the individual.
The last element is conviction and passion for the job. Strategy is not about growth all the time, and if a company is in dire straits the strategy lead will need to help identify how to change company direction. Not everyone thrives in change, or welcomes change, so you will find yourself proposing some tough choices. You have to be able to lead throughout all of this – and I think you need conviction and passion to help you through.
You went from working at smaller companies abroad to staying in relatively the same location with much larger, multi-billion dollar global firms here in the U.S. How do you compare / contrast the different experiences? Do you think one or the other is more valuable for corporate success today?
I worked in smaller companies in the beginning of my career, which allowed me to handle a lot more responsibility at a much younger age (it was also a lot easier to take risks and make mistakes back then!). Getting an MBA helped validate and enhance my early experiences, enabling me to join much larger companies. Both phases of my career, before and after graduate school, helped round out my exposure to different types and size companies.
From my personal experience, I think it is good to have worked in both environments because having the range allows you to appreciate the pros and cons of each. If a company is too big, it can be slow to move, make decisions or affect change. But if a company is too small, it might lack resourcing which could inhibit growth.
If I have to choose, I prefer the mid-sized companies, because it allows me to see impact more quickly. In a larger company, it can take a lot longer to make things happen or see your plans take affect. It is not necessarily a bad thing, but would take longer to learn where you need to course correct.
You co-founded a startup just before A.T. Kearney and have since worked at two Fortune 200 companies. Do you think you would go about a startup any differently now with your additional consulting / corporate experiences?
Our startup took advantage of the market at a time when there were very few services available that provided company information, specifically in Asia. We created a company based on that demand, and eventually sold it to a firm with the resources to carry it further. Looking back, it would have been helpful to have been more familiar with the startup lifecycle, and to know that there is a real window of opportunity to raise enough money before you start operations. In terms of what I would have done differently, I think I would have been much more aggressive to keep control of the firm, and to continue to do that sort of entrepreneurial work. But it was during the time I was emerging from business school so I felt like I had to grow up and take the offer from a management consulting firm.
What has it been like working with other former consultants at your two most recent companies (American Express and Avon)? Do you have any tips for current consultants about how to best thrive in a large company corporate environment?
You cannot underestimate the value of building a network as soon as you land in corporate. Consulting firms are built to create those networks to facilitate team work and group success. In industry you have to make your own way because it is not always part of the corporate structure. Also, you do need to adjust your expectations on the pace at which things can move or get done. Projects have longer lead times and decisions involve more people than in consulting.
What would you say is the most important skill that got you where you are today? What skills or perspective did you take specifically from consulting that makes you successful in your job now?
The five years that I spent in consulting taught me how to listen, ask questions, structure my thinking and work with ambiguity. Those are functional skills that I have used in every job since. No question is too small, too stupid or too obvious to ask. You can’t be afraid to ask questions – which help give you valuable information. This is key to helping you learn quickly.
What I learned from my industry jobs has helped me adjust to different work styles, levels of motivation and definition of success. Consultants tend to be alike on these three dimensions – because we were hired to “fit” with each other. My colleagues in industry tend to offer more variety and diversity in background and ways of thinking.