Veredus appointed to the Government Commercial Agency’s RM6394 framework
Veredus is pleased to announce its appointment to the Government Commercial Agency’s Executive & Non-Executive Search 3 Framework (RM6394), providing public sector organisations with a compliant and efficient route to access our Executive Search, Interim Management and Leadership Advisory services. The framework has been designed to simplify the procurement of senior leadership solutions, enabling organisations to engage pre-qualified suppliers through an established commercial route. By reducing procurement timescales and administrative complexity, RM6394 allows organisations to focus on what matters most – securing the leadership capability needed to deliver organisational priorities. Supporting leadership across the public sector For decades, Veredus has partnered with organisations across central government and the wider public sector, supporting critical leadership appointments and organisational transformation. Our appointment to RM6394 reflects that experience and provides clients with access to a broad range of leadership solutions through a single framework. Executive Search Every executive appointment presents different challenges, governance requirements and stakeholder expectations. Our modular Executive Search methodology enables organisations to access the level of support appropriate to each assignment, whether that’s executive market mapping, leadership assessment, candidate benchmarking or a fully retained executive search campaign. This proportionate approach ensures every appointment is aligned to organisational priorities while maintaining the governance and assurance expected through RM6394. Interim Management Leadership requirements don’t always follow a permanent recruitment timetable. Periods of transformation, machinery of government change, financial recovery and major programme delivery often require experienced executive capacity at pace. Through RM6394, organisations can access Veredus’ network of senior interim leaders with extensive experience across government and the wider public sector, providing immediate capability to maintain momentum and strengthen delivery. Leadership Advisory Executive Search is increasingly just one part of effective leadership planning. Leadership Advisory enables organisations to define future leadership requirements before recruitment begins, supporting organisational design, succession planning, executive assessment, leadership capability and board effectiveness. By combining public sector insight, market intelligence and leadership assessment, we help organisations make informed leadership decisions that support long-term organisational objectives. A strategic partner for public sector leadership The challenges facing public sector organisations continue to evolve. Financial pressures, workforce reform, transformation programmes and increasing public scrutiny mean leadership decisions have never been more significant. RM6394 provides a trusted and compliant framework through which organisations can access the expertise required to address those challenges. Whether the requirement is Executive Search, Interim Management or Leadership Advisory, Veredus brings extensive public sector experience, independent judgement and a collaborative approach to every engagement. If you’d like to discuss how RM6394 can support your organisation’s leadership requirements, we’d be delighted to start the conversation. DOWNLOAD THE FRAMEWORK BROCHURE HERE.
Britain’s Drone Moment: Turning Defence Ambition into Industrial Advantage
Words by Gareth Wood, Director of Defence. One of the most important lessons from recent conflict is not simply that UAVs matter. It is that speed now matters as much as scale. For decades, defence advantage was often measured in platforms, larger ships, more advanced aircraft, longer-range missiles, more sophisticated sensors. Those capabilities remain essential. But the UK’s Defence Investment Plan makes clear that the next phase of military advantage will also depend on something different: the ability to develop, manufacture, adapt and deploy autonomous systems at pace. The Government has committed more than £5 billion over the next four years to drones and autonomous systems, including strike and surveillance drones, uncrewed land vehicles and capabilities linked to a more hybrid force structure. This is not a marginal adjustment to the defence budget. It is a signal to industry that uncrewed systems are moving from the edge of defence thinking to its centre. That matters because drones change the economics of conflict. A relatively low-cost uncrewed system can find, track, disrupt or destroy equipment worth many times more. First-person-view drones, loitering munitions, autonomous surveillance platforms and electronic warfare payloads have all shown how quickly technology can alter battlefield assumptions. The result is not the end of traditional defence platforms, but the arrival of a more complex operating model: crewed and uncrewed systems working together, supported by data, autonomy and resilient communications. The technical direction is clear. Future UAVs will be increasingly modular, software-defined and mission-adaptable. One airframe may support multiple payloads: ISR, communications relay, electronic attack, target acquisition or logistics support. AI and computer vision will improve navigation, recognition and decision support. Edge processing will allow systems to operate when bandwidth is limited or communications are contested. Mesh networking will help platforms share information across dispersed formations. Swarming will create mass without requiring every system to be individually controlled.This is where the industrial challenge begins. The UAV market does not move at the tempo of traditional defence procurement. Platforms are adapted in months. Software is updated in weeks. Operational feedback loops are immediate. That means manufacturers need more than production capacity; they need engineering cultures built around rapid iteration, test, evaluation and continuous improvement.This is why Swindon is such an important development. The opening of Europe’s largest drone testing centre at the new DroneTEX facility in Swindon is significant not just because of its scale, but because of what it represents: the ability to develop and field drone capability in weeks, not years. Alongside this, TEKEVER’s investment in Swindon as its main European manufacturing facility shows how the UK can begin to build the industrial backbone needed to support sovereign uncrewed capability. In practical terms, this means bringing together disciplines that have too often been treated separately: aerospace engineering, robotics, embedded software, AI, secure communications, advanced manufacturing, cyber security, systems integration and operational delivery. It also means thinking differently about workforce capability. The winners in this market will not simply be those with the best technology. They will be the organisations that can scale without losing agility. They will need leaders who understand regulated defence environments but can still operate at commercial technology pace. They will need manufacturing teams comfortable with digital engineering, modular production, additive techniques, quality assurance and secure supply chains. They will need programme leaders who can connect technical ambition with operational reality. As Veredus’ recent work across UAV manufacturers and high-growth defence innovators has shown, the organisations best placed for this shift are those that combine technical excellence, leadership strength and manufacturing resilience. The Defence Investment Plan should therefore be read not just as a funding announcement, but as a strategic signal: industry now needs to innovate fast, scale smart and lead confidently through complexity. There is a wider opportunity here too. The technologies being developed for defence UAVs will shape civilian markets: infrastructure inspection, emergency response, offshore energy, environmental monitoring, logistics and border security. The dual-use potential is substantial. Done well, this could create not only stronger national security, but high-value employment, export opportunities and a more resilient British manufacturing base. The UK has the ingredients: engineering heritage, world-class research, innovative SMEs, serious defence customers and now a clearer investment signal. But ambition is not enough. If Britain wants to lead in autonomous defence systems, it must build the ecosystem around them: factories, testing facilities, supply chains, leadership capability and skilled people. Drones may be the visible technology. The real strategic advantage will come from the industrial system behind them. That is the opportunity now in front of us. — From our perspective at Veredus, these shifts are already shaping the conversations we’re having with clients across the defence sector. As organisations look to scale UAV capability and bring increasingly sophisticated autonomous technologies into operational service, the leadership challenge becomes every bit as important as the engineering one. We’re seeing growing demand for executives who can combine deep technical credibility with experience of manufacturing scale-up, complex programme delivery, defence procurement and organisational growth. As investment in uncrewed systems accelerates, identifying leaders with that blend of capabilities will be critical to turning strategic ambition into operational success.
The Rise of Transnational Education
Implications for Strategy, Risk and Leadership in UK Universities Transnational education (TNE) has become an increasingly important component of the UK’s international higher education activity, allowing institutions to deliver programmes to students overseas through partnerships, joint degrees and offshore provision. While research-intensive institutions have long participated in TNE, for many it has not traditionally been a central pillar of their international strategy. However, there are increasing indications that more research-intensive institutions are expanding their engagement with TNE, raising questions about how this aligns with the traditional research-intensive model and its priorities. This shift reflects a combination of financial pressures within the UK funding model, greater uncertainty around international student recruitment, and intensifying global competition, alongside opportunities to maintain international reach and presence. This raises important questions not only about institutional strategy, but also about whether existing leadership structures and capabilities are aligned to support this shift. Recent announcements – such as the University of Exeter’s plans to establish a teaching presence in Cairo, alongside a growing number of UK universities expanding their presence in India, including Southampton and York – illustrate how some institutions are evolving their approach to TNE. The question for the sector is whether this reflects a longer-term strategic repositioning or a more immediate response to current financial and recruitment pressures. Choice of delivery model Branch campuses, joint ventures, dual-degree programmes and partnership-based provision all offer different levels of institutional control and financial exposure. These models often involve a trade-off between institutional control and speed or scale of expansion, requiring careful alignment with institutional risk appetite and brand positioning. While some UK universities have developed extensive international delivery networks through large portfolios of overseas partners, others have focused on a smaller number of strategically significant collaborations, such as joint institutes or dual-degree partnerships that involve closer academic integration. Different arrangements can enable varying levels of academic oversight, influencing the extent to which institutions can align programmes with their research strengths and manage reputational risk while building long-term partnerships in key regions. As institutional reputation is closely tied to perceptions of academic quality and research excellence, maintaining close oversight of teaching, assessment and partner governance is essential to ensuring equivalence with home-campus provision. This highlights the importance of selecting delivery models that both enable growth and are consistent with institutional strengths and risk appetite. These choices also have implications for the type of leadership capability required, particularly in balancing academic oversight, partner governance and commercial considerations across different operating models. Financial sustainability Establishing offshore provision often involves significant upfront investment in partnership development, regulatory approvals, staffing and programme development. In addition, institutions must establish robust legal and regulatory frameworks, including securing local approvals, structuring partnership agreements and ensuring compliance with accreditation and employment requirements. In many cases, programmes delivered overseas are offered at different price points to reflect local market conditions, with fee levels often lower than those for UK-based provision. Returns on investment may therefore take several years to materialise, particularly as student recruitment builds and local partnerships mature. Institutions must also consider the potential for changes in local regulation, political conditions in host countries, market demand and competitive dynamics, all of which can affect the long-term viability of offshore programmes. For research-intensive institutions in particular, this creates a tension between long-term international investment and the need to respond to more immediate financial pressures. For universities that have not traditionally operated at scale in this space, these financial timelines require careful strategic planning, particularly where institutions are balancing long-term international investment against short-term financial pressures. Evolving international leadership roles As a result, senior leaders responsible for international portfolios and campuses will find their roles increasingly involve engagement with foreign ministries, regulators, public authorities and local education partners, alongside their traditional responsibilities. This requires a broader skill set, including the ability to navigate complex regulatory environments, build trusted relationships with government stakeholders, and manage partnerships within different political and policy contexts. This reflects a shift from primarily outward-facing recruitment and partnership roles towards positions that combine strategic, regulatory and operational responsibilities. In practice, this is leading to a convergence between academic leadership, international strategy and commercial capability, creating hybrid roles that are still relatively ill-defined across the sector. While elements of TNE expertise exist across the sector, the combination of large-scale delivery experience and familiarity with research-intensive institutional contexts may be less common. Institutions may therefore need to consider whether to develop this expertise internally or draw on experience from parts of the sector where international delivery is more established. As a result, institutions are increasingly required to define roles that do not yet have clear sector benchmarks, making both role design and appointment more complex. Implications for institutions As institutions expand their engagement with TNE, there are a number of practical considerations emerging around organisational capability and leadership: Defining new leadership roles – Traditional PVC International or Director of Global Engagement roles may not fully reflect the breadth of responsibilities required, particularly where institutions are developing offshore delivery or navigating complex regulatory environments. Accessing the right experience – Experience of large-scale international delivery, regulatory navigation and partnership governance is often concentrated in a relatively small number of institutions globally, making it a constrained and competitive talent market. Balancing internal development and external hiring – Institutions will need to consider where to build capability internally versus where external expertise is required to accelerate delivery or de-risk investment. Understanding the global talent landscape – Effective decision-making in this space increasingly relies on robust market insight, including how peer institutions are structuring roles, where relevant expertise sits globally, and what motivates individuals to move. These shifts are not only strategic but organisational, requiring institutions to reassess how leadership capability is structured, developed and accessed. Conclusion As more universities consider expanding their engagement with transnational education, the challenge is not simply identifying opportunities but ensuring that expansion is underpinned by a clear understanding of risk, capability and long-term strategic fit. The extent to which universities begin to embed TNE within