Proof
Twenty-five years of P&L accountability, a commercial growth system already installed inside an MSP, and a proposition built from what eight MSP owners actually told us.
Cumulative revenue under direct accountability
Additional annual revenue delivered
Customers added
Operator, at GM and CxO level
Most growth advisers study growth. We have run it.
Twenty-five years of P&L accountability at GM and CxO level in customer-facing transformation, with responsibility ranging from £1.8bn to £12bn. Not advising on it. Carrying it.
The work has always been the same shape: the way the business made money had to change, the technology was one part of that, and somebody had to own the number while it happened.
Where the accountability sat.
Global GM, Commercial Growth
GM, Pay & Go
VP Marketing, EMEA
VP Marketing & Analytics
CPMO, Europe
CPMO, Global, Executive Board
Also: non-executive director of a £1.2bn NHS trust, main board, 2009–2011 — seven years of loss turned into surplus. MBA, London Business School. MA Marketing with Distinction, Kingston.
Operator. Practitioner. Researcher.
Three different questions an MSP owner is entitled to ask, and what answers each of them.
Has this person carried a number?
Twenty-five years of P&L accountability at GM and CxO level, while the way the business made money had to change — repeatedly, at scale, with a board watching.
Has it worked inside an MSP?
A commercial growth system installed with the leadership team of a UK managed service provider, and measurable economic outcomes that followed it.
Does it fit my business?
The proposition was designed after structured interviews with eight MSP owners and leaders about where their AI practices actually stall — not from a generic growth framework repainted for the channel.
Principle Networks.
He helped us put in place the growth structure, commercial discipline and strategic thinking required to scale the business more effectively — and challenged us to think about growth as a system rather than a series of isolated activities.
The sentence that started the business.
Before any of this was written, we ran structured interviews with eight MSP owners and leaders about where their AI practices actually stall.
“We are not consultants.”
Said independently
By owners who had no contact with each other, describing the same constraint in almost the same words. When eight people reach for the same sentence unprompted, it is not a coincidence — it is the shape of the problem.
Not a technology problem, and not a marketing problem
Every one of them could implement. None of them could reliably lead the conversation that comes first. More leads at the same level does not change what an MSP gets invited into.
The evidence base.
Every engagement strengthens a proprietary evidence base and emerging benchmark of how MSPs build AI practices — what the offers are worth, where the commercial model breaks, and what actually moves. It improves every engagement that follows it.
It is the reason a partner engaging today gets the benefit of every engagement that came before it — what an offer is worth, which sectors buy, and which arguments land with a CFO. A competitor would have to run the same engagements over the same years to hold it.
Test it in ninety minutes.
The fastest way to judge whether any of this is useful to you is to put your own business in front of it. A Growth Review is a structured conversation with you and your leadership team — including an honest answer on whether we are the right people to help.
Win the business case before you win the build.