A large European company had a mature risk function. Plenty of data. Regular reports. Structured processes. And yet, the Executive Committee and Board were still flying half-blind. Not because information was missing, but because it wasn’t decision-ready.

• Too much detail, not enough signal
• Risks described, but not translated into business impact
• IP treated as a legal topic, not a strategic exposure

We started with a simple question:
What decisions should this reporting actually support?

That changed everything.

• Reframed risk reporting around business consequences, not categories
• Reduced noise and surfaced what actually requires action
• Integrated IP into the core risk narrative, including exposure, timing, and dependency

We also fixed the flow:

• Upwards: clearer escalation of what matters for executive decisions
• Downwards: better guidance on what needs to be monitored and why

Result:
A reporting structure the Board could actually use.
Faster alignment on critical risks.
IP risks no longer invisible until they become expensive.

Risk reporting is not about completeness, but about enabling decisions before the damage is done.

A solo professional was relocating to a new country. The obvious problem looked operational. New market. New clients. New setup.

The real problem was strategic.

• What stays the same, and what must change?
• What is actually worth rebuilding vs. discarding?
• How do you move existing clients without breaking trust or contracts?
• And where does IP matter, before anything goes live?

We redesigned the business model first. Not the website. Not the marketing.

• Defined the core offer that could survive both the move and the shift online
• Adapted positioning to the new market instead of copying the old one
• Structured delivery so it works digitally without losing value

Only then did we translate that into execution:

• Clear transition plan for existing clients
• New contract structure aligned with online delivery and cross-border reality
• Targeted IP protection, focused on what actually creates leverage

Result:
A controlled transition instead of a risky restart.
No legal clean-up after the fact.
No dilution of positioning in the new market.

Because the move was not treated as a logistics exercise but as a decision problem.

A food sector SME changed ownership. On paper, it was a takeover. In reality, it was a reset. The business had products, history, and some market presence.

What it didn’t have was a clear position or a defendable advantage.

The risk was predictable:
cosmetic rebranding, same underlying confusion, slow decline.

We started with the uncomfortable questions:

• What is this business actually competing on?
• Where does it win, and where does it bleed margin?
• Which elements are worth protecting, and which are just legacy?

Strategy first. Not logos.

• Defined a focused market position with a clear niche
• Stripped out activities that diluted attention and resources
• Aligned product, pricing and story around that position

Then we built the IP layer to support it:

• Secured protection where it reinforced differentiation, not everywhere
• Rebuilt contracts to match the new commercial reality
• Introduced internal review points so IP decisions evolve with the business

Result:
A business that stopped trying to be everything.
And started competing where it could actually win.
Rebranding was the visible outcome. Clarity was the real one.

A small services company was growing. Revenue was coming in. The team was working hard. And everything felt slower than it should. Delays. Rework. Friction between teams. Customers noticing. The instinct was to “optimise processes.” That’s usually code for adding more structure to something that’s already unclear.

We didn’t start there.
We mapped how decisions were actually made.

• Where things stalled
• Where responsibility was unclear
• Where work was repeated because nobody trusted the output

The issue wasn’t workload. It was decision flow.
So we redesigned that first:

• Clarified ownership at each step
• Removed unnecessary approvals that added time but no value
• Standardised key workflows where variation created errors
• Aligned internal processes with what customers actually experience

Only then did we streamline operations.
Result:

• Operational costs reduced by 15%
• Customer satisfaction increased from 73% to 84%
• Faster delivery without adding pressure on the team

Because the goal was not efficiency per se, but removing friction where decisions break down.

A niche event organiser wanted to grow beyond its home market. The opportunity looked obvious: replicate success elsewhere. That’s where most businesses get it wrong. Different markets don’t just mean new customers. They mean different expectations, partners, pricing logic, and risks.

The key questions were not “where can we go?” but:

• Where does this model actually translate?
• What needs to change, and what must stay untouched?
• Do we enter directly, partner, or license?
• And how do we scale without breaking what makes the events valuable?

We filtered expansion options before committing resources.

• Identified markets where the concept had real pull, not just theoretical demand
• Defined the right entry mode per market, direct, partnership, or hybrid
• Adapted the offer and pricing to local dynamics without diluting positioning

Then we built the execution logic:

• Clear market entry sequence instead of scattered expansion
• Partner criteria and deal structure where local presence was needed
• Alignment of brand, delivery, and contracts across borders

Result:
Expansion with control, not guesswork.
Growth without losing identity.

International growth is not about going everywhere, but about choosing where you can actually win.

An investor was acquiring a local coffee shop chain. On the surface, it was straightforward. Established brand. Multiple locations. Stable revenue. Classic small deal.

The risk sat where most buyers don’t look hard enough:

• Brand ownership and consistency across locations
• Supplier and franchise-style dependencies
• Contracts that didn’t match how the business actually operated
• IP scattered, informal, or simply assumed

We used due diligence to answer one question:
What are you really buying?

Not just assets. Control.

• Mapped brand ownership and usage across all locations
• Identified gaps between contractual reality and operational reality
• Flagged risks that would limit scaling or resale value

Then we moved to post-deal planning immediately.

• Defined how the brand should be structured and protected going forward
• Cleaned up agreements to align with actual business logic
• Built an IP strategy that supports expansion, not just protection

Result:
No surprises after closing.
A business that could be scaled, not just maintained.
Clear positioning of the brand as an asset, not just a name.

The deal is not where value is created, but where bad decisions become expensive.

An artisanal alcoholic beverage producer wanted to build an online presence. The default move would have been simple: “Be active on all platforms.” That’s how brands burn time and dilute identity.

We started with focus.

• Who actually buys this product, and where do they pay attention?
• What part of the brand creates pull, and what is just noise?
• How do you stay visible without losing control over how the brand is used?

The decision was not “which platforms”, but “what role each channel plays.”

• Chose one primary channel where the brand could build consistent visibility
• Defined content boundaries to protect positioning, not just generate engagement
• Aligned tone, visuals and messaging with the commercial strategy

Then we made it operational:

• Built a content logic the internal team could actually execute
• Transferred ownership to a dedicated social media manager
• Trained the team on IP basics so brand use stays consistent and protected

Result:
Visibility that supports the business, not distracts from it.
Internal ownership without losing control.
Brand built deliberately, not accidentally.

Social media is not a marketing exercise, but a scaling mechanism for your brand, for better or worse.

Over the past decade, I’ve mediated 23 complex disputes, most of them cross-border, where intellectual property, commercial interests and human dynamics collided.

They were situations where:

• positions were entrenched
• relationships were strained or breaking
• and the cost of escalation was real, financial and reputational

Mediation in these cases is not about compromise for the sake of peace, but about finding a resolution that holds, commercially, legally and psychologically.

Below are selected examples.

I’ve worked with 160+ clients across 17 countries. Different industries. Different stages. Same pattern. They don’t come to me because they lack options. They come because the decision is unclear.

• Too many variables
• Conflicting advice
• High stakes, with no obvious “right” answer

This is not coaching in the traditional sense. No motivation. No generic frameworks. No surface-level clarity. We work on the decision itself.

• What is actually at stake
• Which assumptions are driving the situation
• Where bias, fear or sunk cost are distorting judgment
• And what a defensible move looks like, given reality

The goal is clarity you can act on.

Results typically show up as:

• Decisions taken faster, with less second-guessing
• Cleaner positioning in business and career moves
• Fewer “expensive lessons” caused by avoidable mistakes

Selected cases are available below. They show how decisions evolve when the right questions are asked.