Network Operations Adviser — Franchise Decision Rights

Clarify who can decide before changing the network

Review the existing allocation of responsibilities across pricing, assortment, promotions, staffing, service standards and investment. Distinguish contractual requirements from informal practices. Where interpretation requires legal advice, work with appointed specialists rather than presenting operational recommendations as legal conclusions.

Listen for the recurring disputes

Speak with authorised central and franchise stakeholders to understand where decisions repeatedly stall or produce inconsistent outcomes. Test whether the problem is unclear authority, inadequate information, conflicting incentives or a standard that is impractical in particular locations. Avoid assuming that tighter central control is always the answer.

Develop options that preserve necessary brand and service consistency while allowing justified local responsiveness. Explain how exceptions would be requested, approved and reviewed. Recommendations should consider the resources needed to operate the proposed arrangements and the consequences for franchisee economics.

Experience behind credible advice

Candidates should have substantial franchise or dealer-network operating experience, including responsibility for relations between central teams and independent operators. They need evidence of resolving governance problems through practical changes rather than relying on persuasion alone. Financial literacy and understanding of multi-site execution are required.

Applicants should be able to describe a decision that appropriately remained local and one that required stronger central ownership. Clear writing, balanced facilitation and independence from interested network participants are important.

The output will be a decision-rights assessment, recommended operating rules and a practical implementation sequence. Management retains responsibility for adoption, contractual changes and communication with operators. The adviser has no authority to impose standards or negotiate commitments without explicit scope. Success is a network in which consequential decisions have a clear route, exceptions are visible and accountability matches the practical ability to act, reducing recurring disputes without creating unnecessary bureaucracy.