Chief Executive Officer — Mission-Systems Portfolio

The mandate

A mission-systems portfolio operates several long-duration programmes. Schedule assumptions depend on scarce engineers, supplier relationships and customer decisions, while local teams use different definitions of progress. The board has created a CEO appointment to produce enterprise choices and align programme execution.

Approximately 700 employees and material partners span systems engineering, software, secure electronics, integration, programme management, supply chain, quality and customer support. The CEO owns portfolio P&L, contracts, capital, leadership, delivery and customer outcomes, reporting to the Group board and Group Chief Executive. Security, export, safety and customer-authorised technical responsibilities remain with appropriately cleared and qualified officers.

The first obligation is to establish one credible programme baseline. Work breakdown, technical maturity, supplier status, test evidence, staffing and risk must reconcile to forecast cost and schedule. The CEO will remove unsupported management reserve releases, optimistic productivity assumptions and progress claims based on spend rather than accepted output.

Estimate-at-completion discipline will be rebuilt programme by programme. Teams need explicit remaining work, uncertainty ranges, dependencies and accountable owners. The CEO will distinguish a recoverable variance from a structural contract loss and take provisions promptly where evidence requires. Finance cannot own the estimate in isolation; engineering and programme leaders must sign the operational truth.

Customer commitments require controlled renegotiation. Some milestones may be preserved through priority and additional investment; others need scope, sequence or schedule change. The CEO will enter discussions with evidence, options and consequences, avoiding promises that merely defer another breach. Classified or restricted information will be shared only through authorised channels.

Engineering capacity is the central portfolio constraint. Systems architects, verification specialists and cyber-qualified engineers are being allocated informally across programmes. The CEO will institute enterprise resource choices based on mission consequence, contractual exposure and maturity. Every acceleration request must identify the work it displaces.

Technical debt and requirements change need commercial visibility. Late customer direction, internally generated redesign and defect correction should be distinguished and documented. The portfolio will pursue equitable adjustment where contract terms and evidence support it, while accepting responsibility for self-inflicted rework.

Supplier recovery must address more than expediting. Obsolescence, constrained components, special processes and security requirements can make nominal alternatives unusable. The CEO will require qualified recovery routes, design authority, provenance and test evidence. Inventory buys made from anxiety without configuration fit will not count as mitigation.

Integration and test are likely to reveal the real remaining work. Readiness reviews will include interfaces, software loads, test assets, ranges, customer witnesses and defect disposition. The CEO will prevent premature movement into formal test simply to claim milestone progress. Failed tests need rapid containment and disciplined root cause, not suppression.

Contract strategy will differentiate fixed-price, incentive, cost-reimbursable and support commitments. Each programme needs a deliberate position on claims, customer funding, liability, cash and future margin. Attractive backlog cannot remain valued as though every order carries equal economic quality.

Cash recovery will follow operating change. Milestone acceptance, billing support, inventory, subcontractor terms and unbilled receivables require leadership attention. The CEO will not improve cash by pushing premature acceptance or weakening evidence. Customer trust and auditability are worth more than a temporary quarter-end result.

Leadership accountability will change. Programme executives who escalate early, revise estimates honestly and close technical decisions will be supported. Persistent concealment, unowned assumptions or pressure to override independent assurance will carry consequence. Succession should include leaders who can run classified, multi-stakeholder delivery at scale.

The board expects a portfolio decision, not only recovery activity. Some programmes may merit investment, partnership, restructuring or exit. The CEO will show mission, customer, capability and economic consequences, then recommend where the enterprise should concentrate. Sunk cost or political visibility cannot make every programme equally strategic.

What you will own

• Portfolio P&L, programme baselines and customer commitments.
• Engineering capacity and technical decision governance.
• Estimate-at-completion, cash and contract recovery.
• Supplier, obsolescence and integration readiness.
• Security, export and independent assurance partnership.
• Programme investment, restructuring and exit choices.
• Board, customer and stakeholder confidence.
• Executive talent and succession.

The first 12 months

Within 30 days, validate the five largest programme estimates, identify unsupported milestones and place immediate controls around technical or supplier risks. Present the board with downside ranges and decisions.

By month five, agree rebaselined customer plans, allocate scarce engineering and implement integrated cost-schedule-technical reviews. Decide the weakest portfolio positions.

At twelve months, reduce forecast cost growth by at least 60% from the opening run rate, improve milestone acceptance on time by 25 percentage points and release USD 150 million of cash from validated billing, inventory and supplier actions. Ninety-five per cent of portfolio forecast movement should reconcile to named operational drivers, with no security or assurance override.

What the board will examine

• Estimates supported by remaining work and technical maturity.
• Customer commitments reflecting deliverable evidence.
• Scarce engineers allocated through explicit portfolio choice.
• Supplier alternatives qualified rather than merely sourced.
• Test entry governed by readiness, not milestone optics.
• Leaders escalating loss and uncertainty early.

The person

You bring 28+ years in aerospace, defence or mission systems, including CEO, sector president or programme-portfolio authority. Your record includes a material cost and schedule recovery, complex government customers, classified work, systems integration and full P&L accountability in the United States.

Candidates must demonstrate an estimate they reset before external pressure forced it and a programme they restructured or stopped. Washington, DC is the hybrid base, with frequent secure-site and customer presence. Appointment remains subject to all required eligibility, clearance and conflict checks.

Compensation and terms

Base compensation is USD 500,000–750,000 plus annual incentive and long-term participation linked to programme recovery, customer delivery, cash, assurance and leadership. The permanent hybrid appointment is anchored in Washington, DC and reports to the Group board and Group Chief Executive. The search is urgent because rebaselining decisions are active.

Confidentiality

The client, programmes, customers, technical data, suppliers, security arrangements and financial exposures remain confidential. Detail follows eligibility, conflicts and signed confidentiality. Applicants must not approach government customers, contractors or programme personnel to identify the organisation.