I currently work as operations manager for Capgemini Nordic. I am also Nordic responsible for business process information for a number of infrastructure applications.
I have been with the company Capgemini for many years. My plan was to never stay in a company for longer then 3-5 years, but within Capgemini I have stayed over 20 years. I have had a lot of different roles, spanning very different kind of responsibilities:
- Within an office
- Project Manager
- Account Manager
- Office Manager
- Within two offices
- Quality manager
- Within a branch of 6 offices
- Administration Manager
- IT Manager
- Branch Delivery Manager
- For a number of teams
- Team Manager
- Within Sweden
- Compensation Manager
- Development Manager
- Within Nordic
- Operations Manager
- Service desk Manager
- Business Process Information Manager Sales, Delivery,Knowledge Management, HR, Enterprise Infrastructure
- Directory Manager
- Within Northern Europe and Asia
- Telephony Manager
- Directory Manager
- Within group
- Architecture Board member
- As project manager
- Transforming financial administrative processes within Nordic, spanning defining new roles, responsibilities and processes, and outsourcing the work from four countries to Poland, building a new unit and its processes for 55 employees, including a contracted further move of tasks to India
- As operations manager
- Rolling out 3200 new PCs to all employees in Nordic (28 offices)
- Transforming all operations from an old outsourcing contract to a new Nordic contract with the vendor being in India, building a new unit and its processes for 27 employees
- Transforming service desk from a Swedish vendor to a new Nordic contract with the vendor being in India, whic together with the same changes for SAN and backup handling previously done by another vendor, has led to India staff now being 33 persons for operations and service desk.
All roles have one thing in common: My work is as a Change Manager, changing the processes, changing the organization, changing the environment.
The culture of our company is not to hierarchical, not to say "Just F Do It", instead, what I have to do is to get enough people to believe in the routes I believe in, in order to make it all happen. This is very stimulating, trying to listen and understand enough people to understand what direction we should take, what services we could benefit from, how the processes could work. Then trying to describe and broadcast that message and vision so enough many have the same picture as I believe is the best for us. Independent of who makes the decision (I or those higher up in organization) when the belief is shared enough, the change is easier to decide upon, and the steps needed more readily accepted. At the same time, it is essential that there is enough freedom for others to exploit different roads that do not point in the thus defined main direction, without the company spreading the efforts in too many directions.
One of my major experiences is that to achieve the really big differences, the change has to be viewed on a broad scale. There is a lot of things that are really important, and even if well catered for they can often be improved, but then mostly the gain (efficiency, cost saving, ...) is limited to something like 5-15%. On a higher scale it is harder to paint the picture, it is harder to achieve the goal, but the effect can often be between 30-50%. The way to achieve success at those levels often requiers both a high level picture as well as a lot of detailed parts (strategy, roles, responsibilities as well as process and routines and instructions and reports). Common for success in such attempts is information sharing. To collect it, analyze it, synthesize it, and also to spread it. Thus a major interest of mine is around information handling through tools.
To sum it all up: I really enjoy doing a lot of things, and have had the fortune to be allowed to do a lot of different things. I have been successful at all of them, mostly because I am interested in so many things that I really engage myself. This interest for a lot was just as obvious in my youth, where I studied to become both a Master of Science at the same time as studying to a Master of Economy. I became a master of science, but never finished the master of economy (I only missed one short course of 20 points, but did not feel it important to finish them).
I frequently miss having the time to sit down and do some "hands-on" work, but if I did I would most likely miss doing the kind of things I do nowadays. One of the "outlets" for this interest is my studies of the stock market and how to win money on it, and another is the rebuilding of my house. Also golf, and lately kayaking, are hobbies I have gotten much positive experience from.