Operational turnaround, stabilisation and program recovery
I step into executive roles when a business needs stabilising, a program has gone off track, or an operating model has outgrown the way it was built. Twenty years across Defence, government, infrastructure and the community sector, in roles where the brief was to fix what was broken and leave the capability behind.
Capability statement · Leadership philosophy · aaron@systemicadvisory.com.au · +61 400 448 393
I work with government agencies, not-for-profits, PE-backed organisations and infrastructure programs, most often at the point where the next stage is bigger than the current design.
A CEO needs an interim GM or COO who can step in with authority and restore function without a long handover
A transformation program has lost momentum, stakeholder confidence, or delivery discipline
Investment in technology, AI or a major program is not producing enterprise value, with gains at team level failing to reach the bottom line
New capability has been introduced, but work design, decision rights and accountability were never changed around it
The organisation is growing faster than its structure, governance and people systems were built to handle
Performance has plateaued despite sustained investment in strategy, people and systems
I am Aaron Thomas, principal of Systemic Advisory. My career has been built in high-change environments, in roles where the brief was to fix what was broken, stabilise what was failing, and build the systems that make performance hold afterwards.
Twenty years of Defence service, from enlisted through to commissioned officer, produced a specific capability. I can read an organisation quickly from the delivery layer as well as the executive layer, and understand what a decision costs the person who has to make it work. That pattern recognition has since been applied across a $4B Commonwealth infrastructure portfolio, a 150-entity stakeholder community, and national capability programs reaching 5,500 people.
I work through co-design. The people who carry the work help build what replaces it, so the capability stays in the organisation once the engagement ends.
Twenty years of people leadership and systems thinking, applied across Defence, government, infrastructure and the community sector.
Engaged to support a Defence client on an infrastructure program uplift. The engagement framed the system and analysed it in detail to determine the problem and solution state with a supporting roadmap. Engaged in an interim executive capacity acting as senior partner to 10 Defence leaders and the senior executive to achieve national outcomes. Acquired client decision-making authorities, attending steering groups as the sole client representative.
Navigated a complex NFP stakeholder community of 150 independent legal entities operating under one brand. Briefed the COO on a weekly basis and held direct engagements with the CIO and technology leaders. Delivered projects on time and at or under budget. Developed a $5M strategic program for board consideration.
Held sponsor-delegated authority to lead a national training and change strategy for a vehicle fleet rollout. Designed the approach, ran initial pilots to prove the concept, and led a rollout that cascaded capability through the enterprise to 5,500 people across geographically dispersed locations.
Most engagements start with a conversation about what is actually happening, not with a proposal.
Stepping into COO, GM or Director roles with full delegated authority during a transition, a restructure, or a leadership gap. Two decades of leading teams of teams in high-stakes environments, with the presence to hold executive accountability from day one and no lengthy run-up.
For organisations in structural instability and for programs that have stalled, gone at risk, or lost executive confidence. The first task is to read the system rather than impose a solution, then find the systemic causes underneath the surface delays, rebuild governance, and restore assurance without losing the people who have to deliver.
Growth, restructure, technology change and strategic uplift share a failure pattern: the operating model was built for the stage before this one, and the delivery program runs as a separate system from business as usual. This engagement diagnoses the current state across the eight capability domains and redesigns the model for what the organisation is becoming.
I also advise boards and audit or risk committees on transformation governance and accountability structures, particularly where AI integration or major operating model change carries governance implications not yet well understood at board level.
Most engagements begin with the Enterprise System Health Check. It is a fixed-fee, two-day on-site screening that shows where the organisation is actually constrained, across eight connected capability domains: technology, governance, structure, people, process, information flow, data, and purpose.
Day one is one-to-one sessions with each functional executive. Day two triangulates what was said against documents, systems and the people doing the work. You receive an enterprise traffic-light view and an executive summary of systemic findings.
The Health Check tells you where to look. The Enterprise System Diagnostic, which follows where it is warranted, establishes what is true, what is constraining performance, and what has to change first.
Travel and expenses at cost. Commission the full Enterprise System Diagnostic within 90 days and the Health Check fee credits against it.
A reading of Australia's 2026 executive priorities, and the systems engineering principles that make it steerable. Why the current executive agenda demands a system view.
Organisations pursuing AI integration one workflow at a time are accumulating a hidden constraint. The symptoms appear later, and by then they are significantly more expensive to address than the original problem.
Where Australian organisations actually stand with AI in 2026. What the data shows about adoption, value realisation, and the operating model gap that most reports do not name.
As professionals do progressively less foundational work and move into AI oversight, the capability to validate AI outputs, and to operate without it, may be quietly eroding.
If any of this is close to what you are dealing with, I am happy to have a conversation about it.
A focused conversation about what you are navigating and whether there is a fit. No obligation, and no proposal unless you ask for one.