I help teams build complex physical products with clarity, control, and fewer unpleasant surprises.

I’ve spent my career designing, manufacturing, high-value hardware and helping teams navigate the risks that sit between concept and production.

Developing physical products is never straightforward.
The challenges are rarely isolated to engineering alone. Commercial assumptions, supply chains, manufacturing readiness, and delivery pressure all collide — often late, and often expensively.

My role is to help teams see those risks early, make informed decisions, and choose the right path forward — whether that means progressing with confidence or stopping before momentum does real damage.

I work primarily with organisations developing complex products in defence, aerospace, and industrial sectors, where reliability, credibility, and delivery matter.

When teams usually get in touch

I’m typically brought in when:

  • A product is moving towards production and confidence is mixed

  • Internal teams need an experienced external view

  • Manufacturing or supply-chain questions are unresolved

  • The cost of getting it wrong is high

Sometimes that leads to a clear delivery plan. Sometimes it leads to a decision not to proceed.

Both are valid outcomes.

Most teams discover the real problems too late

Most teams don’t realise where the real risk sits until production exposes it. If you’re already committed to a design or supplier, this is where hidden exposure usually lives.

What usually goes wrong

Not because teams are careless — but because risks hide until it’s too late to address them cheaply.

In complex physical products, problems rarely appear where people expect them. Instead, they surface later as:

  • Designs that technically “work” but are fragile or expensive to manufacture

  • Suppliers selected too early — or too late — locking in cost and quality risk

  • Assumptions made during concept that quietly break during scale-up

  • Tooling, certification, or integration issues discovered after commercial commitments are made

  • Engineering teams optimising locally while programme risk increases globally

By the time these issues are visible, the options are limited:

  • Accept higher unit cost

  • Accept schedule slip

  • Or accept technical debt that will surface later in the field

The earlier these risks are surfaced, the cheaper and less political they are to fix. Once production has started, none of these decisions are cheap — and very few are reversible.

About

I work directly with CEOs and senior leadership teams to bring new physical products to market — particularly where the commercial stakes are high and the margin for error is low.

Over more than three decades, I’ve been involved in the development and delivery of hundreds of products across more than thirty industries, spanning startups through to multinational organisations. Many of those products have gone on to underpin substantial, long-term revenue for the businesses behind them.

What that experience provides is not speed for its own sake, but perspective.

I’ve seen enough development programmes succeed and fail to recognise patterns early — where risk is building, where assumptions are weak, and where the traditional new product development process will slow progress rather than protect it. That allows me to help teams shortcut unnecessary stages, focus on the decisions that genuinely matter, and move forward with greater confidence.

My work typically involves shaping products that are both technically viable and commercially defensible, often supported by protectable IP. I’ve been named on more than forty patents and have founded and supported multiple ventures built around new product opportunities.

I am also the founder of The Product Group, an organisation that develops products for international brands in tools, sports, defence and consumer markets. I am a director of Corcoran Yates, a specialist in the manufacture of high-value critical products.

I work with a small, proven core team and a wider, trusted network, allowing me to assemble the right capabilities for each programme without unnecessary overhead. This model suits organisations that need results rather than theatre, and delivery rather than optimism.

Alongside commercial work, I advise at board level, lecture at universities, and act as an expert witness when required.

I now focus on working with a limited number of partners where experience, judgement, and clear decision-making materially improve the outcome.