At Trace, our work is shaped by the people doing it. In Conversation at Trace is a new series where we sit down with our consultants to unpack how they approach complex problems and apply their thinking across diverse environments.
First up is David Carroll, a Management Consultant at Trace with more than eight years of experience across Federal Government, Defence, and private enterprise. David brings deep expertise in operating model design, governance, and end-to-end process reengineering, and is known for working closely with senior stakeholders to co-design solutions that are practical, context-aware, and built to last.
We sat down with David to talk about what he’s learned working across highly constrained environments, how to spot when an operating model is holding an organisation back, and what it really takes to turn strategy into execution.
You’ve worked across Federal Government, Defence, and private enterprise. How have those environments shaped the way you approach problem diagnosis and solution design?
DC: They’ve taught me the importance of understanding client context, especially when it comes to designing solutions. What works in one environment doesn’t necessarily work in another. For example in Government and Defence, changes to organisational charts are significantly harder than in private companies, as are opportunities to introduce new systems. In my experience, the degrees of freedom are far greater in private enterprise, with Defence being the most constrained due to security requirements and the mix of civilian and military personnel. However, Defence has a very hierarchical structure on the military side which at times can make it easier to gain buy-in and action when the senior officer is on our side.
When it comes to diagnosing problems, the tools and frameworks I’ve learned are applicable across all businesses, but they’re not enough on their own. Understanding the client is critical as while problems may appear similar, there is always something unique. There’s no substitute for interviews, workshops, and ideally sitting alongside teams to truly understand the problem and design solutions that fit their organisation.
Operating model design can sound abstract from the outside. How do you make it tangible for the teams who have to live with it day to day?
DC: The team on the ground wants to know how it will affect their day-to-day, so maintaining that focus is vital. Every layer of the operating model includes elements that are tactical for the team and strategic for the organisation. For instance, in organisation design the team on the ground are concerned on who their supervisor is and how many members are in their team. Meanwhile, management is more focussed on where that team sits, how that team impacts layers and spans of control. For the operational team, these considerations have no bearing on their day to day, as long as they aren’t broken and systems keep running smoothly.
For the team I have found the key is quickly identifying which documents/artifacts/systems are required and will be used either daily or as reference material. RACIs are a good example; they are rarely used daily but when a dispute arises they are excellent reference documents to determine responsibilities and help settle disputes. A process map and checklist on the wall is the opposite example, it is a quick reference that is used every day to make sure tasks are on track, and is vital for supporting new staff to get up to speed and be efficient.
Process optimisation is often framed as a cost exercise. What broader role does process design play in service quality, decision-making, and capability uplift?
DC: That's right, process optimisation is often seen as a way of freeing up time, and often with the aim of headcount reduction, but as you mention, the benefits can extend far beyond that. An optimised process can be a competitive advantage as the speed of activity increases, improving customer experience. An optimised process is also repeatable and reproducible meaning it can be done the same way and produce consistent outcome over and over again, hopefully providing a reliable, high quality and fast service that customers prefer.
AI, robotic process automation, machine learning and other emerging technologies offer significant opportunities in process optimisation. Not only to improve efficiency and consistency, but also to free up time for, in my view, more interesting work as the technology handles the low value add repetitive tasks like digital filing or system transfers. This enables staff to do work that is more meaningful, requires them to use their brain, which ultimately supports job satisfaction.
You’ve partnered with senior stakeholders in high-stakes environments. What does genuine co-design look like in practice?
DC: Genuine co-design requires an open mind from both sides but in particular the consultants. It requires spending time with the stakeholders, using a whiteboard to throw up half developed ideas and debate over their merits. Basically bringing the stakeholder into the tent on the design process and treating them as a member of the team. But it won't work if the consultant isn’t open to not only hearing but also exploring and using the stakeholders ideas. Co-design where the stakeholder is at the white board but none of their ideas are included in the end solution, will just breed resentment and make implementation harder.
Consulting is a team sport and my most successful projects have included client stakeholders on the team to develop solutions as they are brought in and become champions for the idea in the organisation.
Many organisations struggle to turn strategy into execution. What helps bridge that gap?
DC: You have to make it real to those on the ground, not just the c-suite and executives. Ideally everyone in the organisation should be able to read the strategy and clearly see how their role contributes to it, understanding that without their involvement, it simply won’t land.
That needs to be backed by active management support. Not just oversight to drive change, but a genuine willingness to explain the why, listen to concerns, and take feedback back up the chain. When even the most junior team members feel heard and understand how they fit into the bigger picture, they’re far more likely to take ownership and help turn a well-designed model into successful execution.
Government and Defence contexts come with unique constraints. What do leaders in these environments most need from a consulting partner?
DC: They need a partner who understands their environment and what levers are available to them. Reducing headcount, while not impossible in the public service, is harder in Government and Defence for instance.
I think the biggest constraint for those that may not have worked in Government and Defence is the need to consider the public good and stewardship of tax payer funds. This extends to Government Business Organisations and Not For Profits too, where scandals over incentives and perks that are commonplace in the corporate world have resulted in disciplinary action on leaders and even their dismissal. However, this is why those engagements can be fun, as the playbook for corporate companies can’t just be applied, rather new options need to be developed and explored.
When organisations talk about operational excellence, what’s one misconception you see time and time again?
DC: I find people often jump straight to the technology lens, which while critical and certainly an enabler, is not where one should start. You can have the best tech in the world but without the right people, processes, procedures it will not provide operational excellence.
To me, step one is always ensuring you have the right governance in place, step two the right people with the right skills and the third is tech and data. Organisations can provide a lot of value from just getting the first two right. But when they jump straight to number three, the term white elephant starts to come into play, which is a very expensive way to determine you don't have the right governance or people to achieve operational excellence.
Looking ahead, what shifts do you see emerging in organisational design across public and private sectors?
DC: The obvious answer is AI and technology upending work. However, while many people have said we will see an almost elimination of junior team members as they are replaced by AI, I am not as convinced.
Your junior team members today are your leaders of tomorrow. There are many very successful companies where their c-suite started at entry level and have worked through the ranks (Nike, GM, Disney CEOs come to mind), and most of them are very successful CEOs as they understand the business at every level. Without understanding the basics, the how, and why something is as it is, it's a lot harder to make effective business-specific changes.
Now there will probably be less of them as there is less activity for them to do, but that just means initial hiring needs to step up, rather than casting a wide enough net to ensure you capture a couple of high performers. So I see the net becoming smaller, but given the nature of junior hires, companies still need to take on enough to account for not all of them being rock stars, or even wanting to stay in that career long term, to ensure that in 20-30 years time there is suitably qualified and experienced people to fill senior positions.
David’s perspective reinforces a core Trace belief: lasting change doesn’t come from templates, technology alone, or theory. It comes from understanding context, working side-by-side with teams, and designing operating models that are both defensible at the top and usable on the ground.
In Conversation at Trace will continue to share how our consultants think about complex problems, work through real constraints, and help organisations move from intent to execution. More conversations are coming soon.
