Defence Investment Plan: Sovereignty will be built in the supply chain
Words by Gareth Wood, Defence Director The Defence Investment Plan should not be read simply as another spending announcement. The real test will be whether it helps Britain rebuild the industrial depth, sovereign capability and manufacturing resilience needed to compete in a more dangerous world. The headline numbers are significant. The Government has set out £298 billion of defence investment over the next four years, including an additional £15 billion through the Defence Investment Plan, while taking core NATO defence spending to 2.7% of GDP from 2027/28. But the more important question is not only how much is being spent, but where that money lands. The Government’s language around the plan was deliberately industrial. The message was to “back British”, with defence spending used wherever possible to support British workers, businesses and innovators. He also spoke directly about bringing SMEs and start-ups into defence supply chains, ensuring the economic benefit is felt across regions and communities, not simply captured by the traditional prime contractors. That matters because modern defence capability is no longer built by a small number of major platforms alone. The conflicts of today and tomorrow depend on drones, autonomy, AI, cyber, sensors, counter-drone systems, software, secure communications, advanced manufacturing and rapid production capacity. These are areas where smaller, specialist and high-growth businesses can be decisive. But sovereign capability cannot exist only at the top of the supply chain. It depends on the depth beneath it: the specialist manufacturers, component suppliers, software firms, materials businesses, testing facilities and engineering teams that allow capability to be produced, upgraded and replenished at scale. This is the central challenge. Britain may have world-class innovators, but if those firms cannot access contracts, finance, facilities, production partners or qualification routes, innovation risks remaining trapped at prototype stage. The real test of the DIP will be whether it helps create a supply chain that can not only invent, but manufacture, certify, deliver and sustain capability at pace. There is another constraint that receives far less attention than funding or procurement: capability. Defence, nuclear and advanced manufacturing are all competing for the same engineers, commercial specialists and transformational leaders needed to deliver growth. As investment accelerates, the organisations that succeed will not necessarily be those with the largest budgets, but those that can attract, develop and retain the talent required to turn investment into delivery. The UK’s sovereign capability challenge is therefore not only industrial, it is also a leadership and workforce challenge. For British SMEs, the opportunity is clear, but so is the challenge. Many already have the technical expertise, agility and ambition that defence needs. What they often lack is predictable demand, simplified procurement, patient capital and the manufacturing infrastructure to move from concept to volume production. That is why the Defence Office for Small Business Growth matters. A clearer front door into defence is welcome, as is the commitment to increase MOD spending with SMEs. But access alone is not enough. If Britain wants sovereign capability, it must help SMEs scale. That means clearer demand signals, faster procurement, better qualification routes, investment in facilities and a willingness to bring innovative firms into major programmes earlier. It also means primes working differently with smaller businesses, not simply treating them as peripheral suppliers, but as essential partners in national resilience. Or it requires SMEs to work and unify differently as a collective, taking control via collaboration, to challenge the programme delivery status quo. The lesson from Ukraine has been clear. Capability advantage is no longer only about having the most exquisite platform. It is about speed, adaptability, resilience and the ability to replenish. It is about whether a nation can surge production when the strategic environment changes. Yet perhaps the biggest risk to this delivery is neither funding nor intent. It is execution. Across defence, nuclear and advanced manufacturing, organisations are increasingly be forced to compete for a limited pool of experienced leaders capable of delivering complex programmes, scaling industrial operations and managing highly regulated environments. As investment increases, the ability to attract the right Technical and operational leadership may become as important as access to capital itself. A sovereign capability strategy ultimately depends on having the people capable of turning policy into outcomes and investment into delivery. The Defence Investment Plan sets the direction. The supply chain, its leadership and its people will determine whether Britain can deliver. Veredus partners with organisations across defence, aerospace, nuclear and critical infrastructure to identify and secure the leadership and specialist talent that enables complex programmes, industrial growth and long-term capability development. To discuss your leadership requirements, please contact gareth.wood@veredus.co.uk
The next challenge for bus franchising
Peter Keegan, Director of Transport, shares his perspective on the next phase of bus franchising. The bus market itself has changed. Hybrid working has reduced commuter peaks, while discretionary travel – retail, leisure, health – has become more important. This requires a rethink of network design, moving away from radial, peak-driven services toward more flexible, all-day connectivity. Franchising enables this shift, but does not guarantee it. Authorities must be bold enough to redesign networks around emerging travel patterns, rather than simply preserving legacy routes. Growth will come not from restoring the past, but from attracting new users through simplicity, reliability, and relevance. The Operator Question Franchising reshapes the role of operators – from market-driven decision-makers to contracted service providers. This creates opportunities for standardisation and performance management, but also raises questions about market health. A smaller number of larger contracts can concentrate risk and potentially limit competition. At the same time, ensuring space for SMEs and fostering innovation within a more controlled system requires deliberate contract design. The future model must balance efficiency with diversity, and discipline with partnership. Decarbonisation Without Decline The UK’s net zero ambitions place buses at the centre of the transition to sustainable transport. Yet the shift to zero-emission fleets introduces significant capital and operational pressures. Infrastructure, grid capacity, and vehicle costs all require long-term investment. The leadership challenge is to ensure that decarbonisation enhances, rather than constrains, the network. A green bus system that is less frequent or less accessible will struggle to deliver mode shift. Franchising provides the framework to align environmental and service goals – but only if funding and planning are integrated. Managing Expectations in a Political Cycle Franchising is a long-term reform operating within short-term political cycles. Public expectations for visible improvements are high, yet the benefits – ridership growth, behavioural change, network optimisation – take time to materialise. This creates a critical leadership task: setting realistic expectations while maintaining momentum. Transparent performance metrics, clear narratives of progress, and early “quick wins” (such as fare simplification or branding) will be essential to sustaining public confidence. Beyond the Model: A System Mindset Ultimately, the future of UK buses will not be defined by franchising alone, but by the system thinking that surrounds it. Integration with rail, active travel, housing, and economic development is where the real value lies. Buses must be positioned not as a residual mode, but as the backbone of place-based transport strategies. Franchising makes this possible – but does not make it inevitable. The Strategic Imperative The UK now has a window of opportunity. With multiple city regions moving toward franchising, there is the potential to reset the role of buses in national life: from fragmented safety net to integrated, high-quality public service. Realising this vision will require three things: Franchising is not the end of reform – it is the beginning of responsibility. The next phase will determine whether the UK simply changes how buses are governed, or fundamentally transforms how they are used. To discuss your leadership requirements, contact peter.keegan@veredus.co.uk
Executive Conversations: Belinda Phipps on Leadership Under Pressure
What does it really take to lead when the consequences of failure are significant, uncertainty is constant, and every decision carries weight? In this edition of Leadership Conversations, Simon Pickerell speaks with Belinda Phipps, Interim Chief Executive of the British Refugee Council, about the realities of leading complex organisations through periods of significant change. Drawing on a career spanning healthcare, the public sector and the charity sector, Belinda reflects on the experiences that have shaped her leadership approach, from her first chief executive role in the NHS to leading transformation in organisations facing financial, operational and societal pressures. Together, they explore what creates a genuine burning platform for change, how to build momentum in the face of scepticism, why the most effective leaders focus on solving dilemmas rather than accepting compromise, and the personal resilience required to lead when the stakes are high. — 1. What first drew you to transformation work? Was there a defining moment early in your career? Early in my career, the defining moment came when I took on my first chief executive role, leading the regional Blood Transfusion Service for the South East. I arrived feeling proud and excited, and like any new CEO, I went out to see how things worked on the ground. On only my second or third day, I visited the team that takes orders from hospitals for blood products. I stood and listened as call handlers repeatedly told hospitals they couldn’t have what they were asking for, effectively negotiating and arguing over orders. In my naivety, I asked what would happen if we didn’t deliver the blood. The answer was that operations would be delayed or cancelled. Then I asked, “What happens if it’s an emergency?” There was a deathly silence. The unspoken truth was that the patient might not get the blood they needed and might not survive. That was a chill‑down‑the‑spine moment. I suddenly understood that I was responsible for an organisation that could, in effect, be contributing to people dying if it failed. I had to ask myself, “Do I really want to do this?” Because if I stayed, then I had to fix it. Fresh from an MBA, I decided to radically change how the service operated so it could reliably provide the blood required. My initial toolkit wasn’t enough, so I went back for more help and brought in a different methodology. Within about 18 months, we had enough blood not only for our own region but also to support other centres, and we stopped missing orders. The transformation changed everything. We went from the fear of failing patients to the pride of staff who were genuinely delighted with what they were achieving and hungry to improve further. That success helped drive a national merger of the separate blood services, so the same approach could be rolled out everywhere. Seeing that kind of turnaround, the impact on patients and the pride in staff, can be almost addictive. That experience was my entry point into real transformation work 2. What was the real burning platform that convinced you this transformation was non‑negotiable? In the blood service, the burning platform was stark: you cannot be killing people. If the organisation fails to deliver blood when it’s needed, you are putting lives at risk. In that situation, transformation isn’t a strategic option—it’s an ethical necessity. Continuing as you are simply isn’t morally defensible. In other transformations I’ve led, the burning platform has often been financial and existential. Organisations reach a point where their financial sustainability, and therefore their future, is in serious doubt. By the time I’m asked to step in, most of the incremental fixes have already been tried. So the burning platform often sounds like: “We’re running out of options. If we carry on like this, we may not survive.” At that point, a significant transformation, not just marginal change, is non‑negotiable. 3. What has been the most difficult trade‑off you’ve had to make in a transformation so far? I’m actually not a great believer in trade‑offs as they’re commonly framed. “Trade‑off” often becomes a respectable word for “we’ve decided to compromise,” and that can be a sign we haven’t done enough deep thinking. Take the NHS as an example. The system constantly wrestles with three pressures: The typical response is to “balance” these, focus on one at the expense of the others, then shift back again. You end up institutionalising a permanent sense of compromise. Whenever I’m told, “This is a trade‑off,” I try to treat it instead as a dilemma to be solved. I ask: how can we improve quality and quantity of service, and be financially sustainable at the same time? It’s not that everything is easy or that you never make hard calls, but often, when you really apply yourself to the problem, you can find creative win‑win solutions instead of living forever with unhappy compromises. The real work of transformation is less about tolerating trade‑offs and more about resolving long‑standing dilemmas that people have assumed are unfixable. 4. How do you bring sceptics and “fence sitters” in the organisation along on the journey? At the beginning, I don’t. Every organisation has three groups: If you start by focusing on sceptics and fence sitters, you burn a lot of time and emotional energy for very little progress. So early on, I focus on finding and working with the willing. I have a lot of individual conversations to identify those who really want to give change a go. I then work closely with them to build momentum and deliver visible progress. Once things are moving and good things start to happen, the dynamics change: In short, I lead with the willing, let success become the persuader, and allow sceptics to make their own decisions once the direction of travel is obvious. 5. Can you share a moment when a transformation nearly went off the rails, and what you did about it? When a transformation feels like it’s going off the rails, my first move is to look in the mirror. In my experience, things often wobble when: Transformations are emotionally intense. They involve high stakes, conflict, and
What makes a great Interim Management provider?
Lessons from a market built on trust The interim management market has evolved significantly over the past decade. As organisations face increasing pressure to deliver transformation, manage financial constraints, navigate regulatory scrutiny and accelerate strategic change, interim leaders have become a critical component of organisational success. However, while much attention is often placed on selecting the right interim executive, less discussion is given to the role of the interim management provider itself. The quality of the provider can have a significant impact on the success of an appointment, influencing everything from candidate quality and speed of delivery to cultural fit, stakeholder confidence and long-term outcomes. This is possibly why the Institute of Interim Management (IIM) Survey remains one of the most respected benchmarks in the sector. Unlike many industry awards, rankings are based entirely on feedback from the interim community, providing an independent assessment of how providers are perceived by the market. In the 2026 survey, Veredus achieved Gold Award recognition and a top 20 ranking overall. While we are proud of this achievement, it also prompted an important question: What actually makes a great interim management provider? Understanding the client challenge before the search begins The best interim appointments are not usually about replacing a vacancy. More often, organisations require experienced leaders to solve specific challenges: Delivering organisational transformation Leading restructuring or turnaround programmes Stabilising critical functions Managing periods of significant growth Providing specialist expertise during times of change Delivering strategic programmes with limited internal capability A strong interim provider begins by understanding the challenge itself rather than simply focusing on the job description. This distinction is important because successful interim appointments are defined by outcomes, not activities. Market knowledge matters more than ever The interim market has become increasingly competitive. Senior leaders today have more options, greater flexibility and higher expectations regarding assignments. At the same time, organisations are operating within increasingly complex environments, particularly across sectors such as government, defence, transport, infrastructure and higher education. Providers must therefore do more than maintain candidate databases. They need a deep understanding of: Leadership capability requirements Sector-specific challenges Regulatory and governance considerations Market availability Emerging leadership trends This level of market intelligence allows organisations to make informed decisions and access talent that may not be visible through traditional recruitment channels. The human element remains critical Artificial intelligence and automation are increasingly shaping recruitment processes. Technology undoubtedly has a role to play in improving efficiency, streamlining administration and enhancing market intelligence. However, interim leadership appointments remain fundamentally human decisions. The most successful appointments often depend on factors that cannot be easily quantified: Leadership style Stakeholder management capability Political awareness Cultural fit Judgement under pressure Ability to influence complex environments Understanding these qualities requires conversation, experience and professional judgement. The most effective providers combine technology with human expertise rather than replacing one with the other. Candidate experience influences market reputation One of the strongest indicators of provider quality is candidate feedback. Senior interims invest significant time and effort into building their careers and reputations. They expect transparency, communication and professional engagement throughout the recruitment process. Providers that consistently demonstrate respect, honesty and professionalism build stronger networks and attract higher-calibre talent. Over time, this creates a virtuous cycle where better candidate relationships lead to stronger client outcomes. Why trust remains the ultimate differentiator Despite advances in technology, changing market conditions and evolving organisational requirements, one factor continues to underpin successful interim management: trust. Clients need confidence that providers understand their challenges. Candidates need confidence that providers represent opportunities accurately and professionally. Boards and executive teams need confidence that recommended leaders can deliver results in complex environments. Trust is difficult to measure but easy to recognise. It is built through consistency, expertise, transparency and delivery over time. Looking ahead The demand for experienced interim leaders is unlikely to diminish. Organisations across the public and private sectors continue to face unprecedented levels of change, complexity and scrutiny. As a result, the quality of leadership appointments has never been more important. For organisations selecting an interim management provider, the question should extend beyond speed of delivery or access to talent pools. The more important question is whether that provider has the expertise, judgement, relationships and market credibility to deliver leaders who can succeed in demanding environments. About Veredus Veredus is a specialist executive talent consultancy providing interim management, executive search and leadership advisory services across defence, transport, central government and higher education. In the 2026 Institute of Interim Management Service Provider Survey, Veredus achieved Gold Award recognition and ranked within the UK’s top 20 providers, based entirely on feedback from the interim management community. LEARN MORE
IIM Interim Management Survey 2026 Now Live
The Institute of Interim Management (IIM) has officially launched its 2026 Interim Management Survey, marking one of the most important moments in the interim calendar. Widely regarded as the leading source of insight into the UK interim market, the survey captures the experiences, challenges and opportunities shaping the profession today. From day rates and assignment trends to sector demand and market confidence, the findings provide a valuable benchmark for both interim managers and hiring organisations. At a time when organisations are navigating increasing complexity, the role of interim leadership continues to evolve. Interims are no longer seen solely as a short-term solution, but as a critical lever for maintaining operational continuity, delivering transformation, and managing risk in high-stakes environments. The IIM survey plays a key role in evidencing this shift, offering data-led insight into how the market is responding. We strongly encourage all interim managers within our network to take part. The strength and credibility of the survey relies on broad participation, ensuring it reflects the full breadth of experience across the interim community. For organisations that rely on interim expertise, the results will offer a clear view of where the market is heading – helping to inform workforce planning, resourcing strategies, and leadership decisions over the year ahead. At Veredus, we remain committed to supporting the interim community and contributing to a more informed, transparent and effective market. Take part in the survey here.
Interim Management webinar: the first 30 days
https://player.vimeo.com/video/1180794420
Veredus to Host Interim Leadership Webinar on Building Early Impact
How the first 30 days are shaping interim mandate success in 2026 Veredus will host a webinar for interim leaders exploring how to establish credibility, build trust and create early impact within the first 30 days of a new assignment – a period increasingly recognised as critical to the success of interim mandates. Across regulated sectors including Defence, Government, Transport and Education, expectations around interim leadership have shifted. Organisations are placing greater emphasis on early traction, stakeholder alignment and demonstrable progress, often within compressed timeframes and high-accountability environments. As a result, the initial phase of an interim engagement has become more decisive. Early interactions, behaviours and delivery signals can significantly influence both mandate trajectory and longevity. This session will examine how experienced interim managers navigate this period effectively, combining behavioural insight with practical application. The webinar will be informed by the work of Veredus’ occupational psychologist, drawing on leadership assessment, stakeholder perception and behavioural credibility. These insights will be complemented by reflections from an experienced interim executive, offering a grounded perspective on what drives – and sometimes undermines – early-stage success in live mandates. The discussion will cover: • How interim leaders establish trust quickly within existing leadership teams• The role of perception and behaviour in early mandate credibility• Balancing pace, visibility and governance in high-scrutiny environments• Structuring the first 30 days to demonstrate measurable progress The session is designed for both experienced interim leaders and those considering a move into the interim market, particularly those operating within complex or regulated environments. Webinar: The First 30 Days: How Interim Managers Build Trust and Create Early ImpactDate: 30th March 2026Time: 12.30-1.30pmRegistration: https://forms.gle/SshE4rDL2oSfgkH38
Leadership assessment as a decision discipline
In our work at senior and executive level, leadership assessment is rarely about establishing capability. By the time candidates reach final stages, track record, experience and technical credibility are typically well evidenced. What we are focused on is how that capability will translate into performance within a specific operating environment — and where the risks sit. This distinction is important. Senior leadership roles do not exist in neutral conditions. They are shaped by governance arrangements, regulatory oversight, stakeholder expectations, organisational maturity and, in many cases, public or political scrutiny. These factors materially affect how leadership capability is expressed, tested and experienced. Assessment approaches therefore need to be sensitive to context. Data derived from psychometrics, interviews or exercises can be valuable, but only when interpreted through a clear understanding of the environment in which a leader will operate. Without that lens, assessment risks producing information that is technically sound but operationally limited. In practice, we have found that effective leadership and talent assessment benefits from considering three dimensions together. Leadership capability This includes cognitive ability, experience, technical credibility and leadership repertoire. At senior level, this is often the most visible dimension, but it is only part of the picture. Operating environment Governance structures, regulatory constraints, stakeholder complexity, organisational culture and the degree of scrutiny all shape what effective leadership looks like in practice. The same leader can perform very differently across environments. Decision behaviour This concerns how leaders prioritise, manage risk, respond to challenge and operate under pressure. It is often the least visible dimension, yet one of the most critical in high-stakes roles. When these dimensions are considered in isolation, the resulting view of a leader is partial. Considered together, they allow for a more accurate and defensible assessment of leadership risk and readiness, and provide panels with clearer evidence on which to base decisions. Our Leadership & Talent Assessment practice is led by Chartered Occupational Psychologists with deep experience of senior and executive appointments across public sector and regulated environments. We integrate validated psychometric evidence with structured, psychology-led interviews and bespoke, role-specific assessment design, aligned to the demands of each leadership context. For us, the purpose of leadership assessment at this level is not reassurance. It is to support clear, evidence-based decision-making in roles where the consequences of getting it wrong are significant. That is the standard we believe senior leadership assessment should be held to. Find out more at www.veredus.co.uk.
Navigating senior leadership in a more constrained employment landscape
The Employee Rights Bill is another reminder that senior leadership roles are becoming more constrained – not less. With major provisions due to come into force this year, the Bill signals a shift towards greater protection, increased scrutiny and a narrowing margin for error in senior people decisions – particularly in regulated industries such as Government, Defence, Education and Transport. Not because of the legislation itself – but because of what it signals. Senior leaders are increasingly operating in environments where: Employment risk is higher Decision-making is more visible Flexibility is harder to preserve The consequences of getting senior appointments wrong are amplified In this context, executive recruitment can no longer be treated as a transactional exercise. We’re seeing boards and executive teams rethink how they access senior capability – especially during periods of change or uncertainty. For many, this has led to a more deliberate use of interim leadership: experienced leaders who can step in quickly, operate with authority, and lead through complexity without locking organisations into long-term risk. At Veredus, our role increasingly sits upstream of the appointment itself: Advising on leadership risk and capability gaps Stress-testing roles against the realities of the operating environment Supporting senior appointments – interim and permanent – where judgement, credibility and adaptability matter as much as experience The Employee Rights Bill doesn’t reduce the need for strong leadership. It raises the bar for it. And in constrained, highly regulated environments, confidence in senior appointments is no longer a “nice to have” – it’s a governance issue. Get in touch to discuss your leadership requirements with us.
Here’s what senior leadership looks like this year.
This month, we’ve introduced a refined brand identity for Veredus — one that more clearly reflects the senior leadership work we deliver across executive search, interim management and leadership advisory. It’s a considered evolution, shaped by how leadership expectations are changing and by what our clients and candidates are navigating in practice. Over the past year, we’ve also taken time to reflect on how leadership itself is evolving — and what organisations are increasingly asking of senior leaders. This perspective informs how we talk about our work at Veredus, but more importantly, it reflects what we’re seeing on the ground across complex regulated environments. As organisations plan for 2026, several consistent themes are emerging. 1. Senior roles are expanding in scope Leadership roles are carrying broader responsibility than before. Strategy, delivery, people leadership, governance and stakeholder management are increasingly converging into a single remit. Depth of expertise still matters — but the ability to operate across complexity is becoming just as critical. 2. Interim leadership is being used more deliberately Interim appointments are no longer simply reactive. We’re seeing experienced interim leaders brought in to stabilise teams, lead transformation, manage risk and create momentum during periods of change. Used well, interim leadership is becoming a strategic asset. 3. Judgement is overtaking track record Past success remains important, but it’s no longer sufficient on its own. Organisations are placing greater emphasis on how leaders make decisions under pressure, adapt to uncertainty and lead through ambiguity — particularly in highly regulated or publicly accountable environments. 4. Assessment is becoming more rigorous — and more human There is growing recognition that senior appointments require deeper assessment. Understanding how a leader thinks, influences and responds in complex situations is increasingly valued over automated screening or surface-level indicators. 5. Leadership credibility is under closer scrutiny Senior leaders are operating with less margin for error. Behaviour, values and impact are more visible than ever — internally and externally. Credibility is now built through consistency, trust and the ability to lead responsibly through change. Looking ahead These shifts are shaping appointment decisions now — and they will continue to do so through 2026 and beyond. Through The Leadership Brief, we’ll share perspective drawn from real appointments, interim mandates and advisory work — offering practical insight into how senior leadership is evolving, and what organisations should be thinking about next.