Select Page

Due Diligence

Your due diligence is probably wrong

Global Advisors: a consulting leader in defining quantified strategy, decreasing uncertainty, improving decisions, achieving measureable results.

Learn MoreThe Global Advisors due diligence practice

Our latest perspective - What's behind under-performing listed companies?

Outperform through the downturn

Experienced hires

We are hiring experienced top-tier strategy consultants

Quantified Strategy

Decreased uncertainty, improved decisions

Global Advisors is a leader in defining quantified strategies, decreasing uncertainty, improving decisions and achieving measureable results.

We specialise in providing highly-analytical data-driven recommendations in the face of significant uncertainty.

We utilise advanced predictive analytics to build robust strategies and enable our clients to make calculated decisions.

We support implementation of adaptive capability and capacity.

Our latest

Thoughts

Global Advisors’ Thoughts: Getting the Balance Right

Global Advisors’ Thoughts: Getting the Balance Right

By Kate Barnes

I am a working mother, as are many of my friends and past colleagues. Naturally we often debate the challenges of getting the balance between work and family right.

Personal circumstances vary widely and have a big impact on the choices one has, but my solution has been to work on a part-time basis. I have been lucky enough to do so for the past seven years and to me it seems like an excellent compromise. Yet there are many times when it feels like balance is the last thing I am achieving – in fact, I have the distinct feeling that I am failing on every front – my kids, my husband, and my boss, colleagues or direct reports, all want more of me.

Perhaps the truth is that I want too much. I want to be stimulated, challenged and to feel like I am adding value in the work place, but I also want to see my children more than the average, full-time working mother.

Many working mothers have made decisions involving changes to their working day in order to manage the work-family balance better. Unfortunately, I have found that one of the biggest issues is that one cannot simply decide on an approach, agree it with your employer, and then settle into whatever routine that entails. You might agree an arrangement to work 5, or 6 or 7 hours a day, or 30 hours a week, or to arrive at work early and leave by 3 or 4pm. But in most jobs, you will have to consider the balance equation on a daily basis, sometimes multiple times a day. Is today the day I give more to work because there is a demanding deadline and everyone else is working late, or is it the day I give more to my child, because he is receiving an award at school or swimming in a gala?

And often the call has to be made taking into consideration not only what is happening today, but also looking at where the pendulum fell yesterday, or last week, or over the past couple of weeks.

As with any decision there are consequences, even if at first they are unforeseen. In the early stages of my career, I like many, was an idealistic youngster with dreams of holding a very senior, leadership position. I was ambitious, and some might say that I had much of what it takes to achieve my goal. Some years down the track I was being interviewed for a prospective job and the potential employer noted from my CV that the achievements in my career (or lack thereof) were not in line with my academic record, and he wondered why this was. I can’t remember what my response was, but I know I knew the answer. I even knew at exactly which point in my career the upward trajectory slowed. It was the day I was working at a large corporate, and I asked for flexitime. I negotiated that on two afternoons a week, I would be allowed to leave at 2pm and I would make up the time in the evening, after my young children were asleep.

Shortly thereafter, when a potential internal move to a new position was being discussed I was informed that I could not be considered for the role as I was “part-time”.

This was a wake-up call.

Read more at http://www.globaladvisors.biz/thoughts/20170719/getting-the-balance-right/

read more

Strategy Tools

Strategy Tools: Growth, Profit or Returns?

Strategy Tools: Growth, Profit or Returns?

By Stuart Graham and Marc Wilson

Stuart is a manager and Marc is a partner at Global Advisors.
Both are based in Johannesburg, South Africa.

Growth, profit or returns? It’s all three, however we find that the relationship between these and shareholder value creation is poorly understood – if at all.

All three measures become critical to the way forward as companies navigate the Covid-19 crisis.

After ensuring business survival, navigating through the Covid-19 crisis requires returns on invested capital AND growth to deliver shareholder returns. S&P 500 companies averaged 13% RONA and 5% revenue growth (CAGR) through the financial crisis (2008-2012) .

Monolithic survival approaches may starve compensating growth opportunities – a portfolio approach is required.


Key insights

Returns are not enough – companies must also grow to create value.

Profits and cash flows cannot increase indefinitely through cost-reduction, efficiency, business mix, etc – top-line growth is critical.

Returns must be above costs of capital to be value accretive.

S&P 500 companies averaged 13% ROIC and 5% revenue growth (CAGR) through the financial crisis (2008-2012).

Margins and revenue growth, or even profit growth in themselves don’t answer that question of whether shareholder value was created or destroyed. There are many examples of where growth and high margins actually destroy value.

Company valuations reflect an aggregate of their business portfolio – rebalancing segments based on their growth and return profiles can lift company value.

Growth requires investment – at the very least in the working capital required to support revenue growth.

Measuring RONA or ROIC and Revenue growth shows whether business activity is value accretive or destructive.

You can use the Global Advisors Market Cap (valuation) framework to map your business – and agree action to deliver improved shareholder returns.

read more

Fast Facts

The use of full absorption or average costing in asset-intensive industries with under-utilisation can lead to self-defeating pricing strategies

The use of full absorption or average costing in asset-intensive industries with under-utilisation can lead to self-defeating pricing strategies

Non-conformance costs can distort pricing decisions The use of full absorption or average costing in asset-intensive industries with under-utilisation can lead to self-defeating pricing strategies

  • The use of full absorption or average costing in a manufacturing environment with under-utilisation can lead to self-defeating pricing strategies
  • The increase in price to cover costs results in volume decreases – lowering factory utilisation and increasing unit production costs. This is the start of the utilisation-pricing “death spiral”
  • Costing according to factory utilisation – partial absorption costing – offers the opportunity to be more strategic about costing and utilisation
  • “Unabsorbed” costs can be targeted through OEE and volume improvements. At the same time, the “disadvantage” of having a large factory is normalised and pricing can compete with more fully-utilised factories
  • A recent manufacturing client saw 60% of unit costs arise from factory under-utilisation – sub-optimal OEE levels (non-conformance), low volumes and work-centre bottlenecks contributed to the utilisation gap
  • These principles can apply to any asset-intensive business – for example banking
read more

Selected News

Quote: Julian Schrittwieser – Anthropic

Quote: Julian Schrittwieser – Anthropic

“The talk about AI bubbles seemed very divorced from what was happening in frontier labs and what we were seeing. We are not seeing any slowdown of progress.” – Julian Schrittwieser – Anthropic

Those closest to technical breakthroughs are witnessing a pattern of sustained, compounding advancement that is often underestimated by commentators and investors. This perspective underscores both the power and limitations of conventional intuitions regarding exponential technological progress.

 

Context of the Quote

Schrittwieser delivered these remarks in a 2025 interview on the MAD Podcast, prompted by widespread discourse on the so-called ‘AI bubble’. His key contention is that debate around an AI investment or hype “bubble” feels disconnected from the lived reality inside the world’s top research labs, where the practical pace of innovation remains brisk and outwardly undiminished. He outlines that, according to direct observation and internal benchmarks at labs such as Anthropic, progress remains on a highly consistent exponential curve: “every three to four months, the model is able to do a task that is twice as long as before completely on its own”.

He draws an analogy to the early days of COVID-19, where exponential growth was invisible until it became overwhelming; the same mathematical processes, Schrittwieser contends, apply to AI system capabilities. While public narratives about bubbles often reference the dot-com era, he highlights a bifurcation: frontier labs sustain robust, revenue-generating trajectories, while the wider AI ecosystem might experience bubble-like effects in valuation. But at the core—the technology itself continues to improve at a predictably exponential rate well supported by both qualitative experience and benchmark data.

Schrittwieser’s view, rooted in immediate, operational knowledge, is that the default expectation of a linear future is mistaken: advances in autonomy, reasoning, and productivity are compounding. This means genuinely transformative impacts—such as AI agents that function at expert level or beyond for extended, unsupervised tasks—are poised to arrive sooner than many anticipate.

 

Profile: Julian Schrittwieser

Julian Schrittwieser is one of the world’s leading artificial intelligence researchers, currently based at Anthropic, following a decade as a core scientist at Google DeepMind. Raised in rural Austria, Schrittwieser’s journey from an adolescent fascination with game programming to the vanguard of AI research exemplifies the discipline’s blend of curiosity, mathematical rigour, and engineering prowess. He studied computer science at the Vienna University of Technology, before interning at Google.

Schrittwieser was a central contributor to several historic machine learning milestones, most notably:

 
  • AlphaGo, the first program to defeat a world champion at Go, combining deep neural networks with Monte Carlo Tree Search.
  • AlphaGo Zero and AlphaZero, which generalised the approach to achieve superhuman performance without human examples, through self-play—demonstrating true generality in reinforcement learning.
  • MuZero (as lead author), solving the challenge of mastering environments without even knowing the rules in advance, by enabling the system to learn its own internal, predictive world models—an innovation bringing RL closer to complex, real-world domains.
  • Later work includes AlphaCode (code synthesis), AlphaTensor (algorithmic discovery), and applied advances in Gemini and AlphaProof.

At Anthropic, Schrittwieser is at the frontier of research into scaling laws, reinforcement learning, autonomous agents, and novel techniques for alignment and safety in next-generation AI. True to his pragmatic ethos, he prioritises what directly raises capability and reliability, and advocates for careful, data-led extrapolation rather than speculation.

 

Theoretical Backstory: Exponential AI Progress and Key Thinkers

Schrittwieser’s remarks situate him within a tradition of AI theorists and builders focused on scaling laws, reinforcement learning (RL), and emergent capabilities:

Leading Theorists and Historical Perspective

Name
Notable Ideas and Contributions
Relevance to Quote
Demis Hassabis
Founder of DeepMind; architect of the AlphaGo programme. Emphasised general intelligence and the power of RL plus planning.
Schrittwieser’s mentor and DeepMind leader. Pioneered RL paradigms beyond games.
David Silver
Developed many of the breakthroughs underlying AlphaGo, AlphaZero, MuZero. Advanced RL and model-based search methods.
Collaborator with Schrittwieser; together, demonstrated practical scaling of RL.
Richard Sutton
Articulated reinforcement learning’s centrality: “The Bitter Lesson” (general methods, scalable computation, not handcrafted). Advanced temporal difference methods and RL theory.
Mentioned by Schrittwieser as a thought leader shaping the RL paradigm at scale.
Alex Ray, Jared Kaplan, Sam McCandlish, OpenAI Scaling Team
Quantified AI’s “scaling laws”: empirical tendencies for model performance to improve smoothly with compute, data, and parameter scaling.
Schrittwieser echoes this data-driven, incrementalist philosophy.
Ilya Sutskever
Co-founder of OpenAI; central to deep learning breakthroughs, scaling, and forecasting emergent capabilities.
OpenAI’s work on benchmarks (GDP-Val) and scaling echoes these insights.

These thinkers converge on several key observations directly reflected in Schrittwieser’s view:

  • Exponential Capability Curves: Consistent advances in performance often surprise those outside the labs due to our poor intuitive grasp of exponentiality—what Schrittwieser terms a repeated “failure to understand the exponential”.
  • Scaling Laws and Reinforcement Learning: Improvements are not just about larger models, but ever-better training, more reliable reinforcement learning, agentic architecture, and robust reward systems—developments Schrittwieser’s work epitomises.
  • Novelty and Emergence: Historically, theorists doubted whether neural models could go beyond sophisticated mimicry; the “Move 37” moment (AlphaGo’s unprecedented move in Go) was a touchstone for true machine creativity, a theme Schrittwieser stresses remains highly relevant today.
  • Bubbles, Productivity, and Market Cycles: Mainstream financial and social narratives may oscillate dramatically, but real capability growth—observable in benchmarks and direct use—has historically marched on undeterred by speculative excesses.
 

Synthesis: Why the Perspective Matters

The quote foregrounds a gap between external perceptions and insider realities. Pioneers like Schrittwieser and his cohort stress that transformative change will not follow a smooth, linear or hype-driven curve, but an exponential, data-backed progression—one that may defy conventional intuition, but is already reshaping productivity and the structure of work.

This moment is not about “irrational exuberance”, but rather the compounding product of theoretical insight, algorithmic audacity, and relentless engineering: the engine behind the next wave of economic and social transformation.

read more

Polls

No Results Found

The page you requested could not be found. Try refining your search, or use the navigation above to locate the post.

Services

Global Advisors is different

We help clients to measurably improve strategic decision-making and the results they achieve through defining clearly prioritised choices, reducing uncertainty, winning hearts and minds and partnering to deliver.

Our difference is embodied in our team. Our values define us.

Corporate portfolio strategy

Define optimal business portfolios aligned with investor expectations

BUSINESS UNIT STRATEGY

Define how to win against competitors

Reach full potential

Understand your business’ core, reach full potential and grow into optimal adjacencies

Deal advisory

M&A, due diligence, deal structuring, balance sheet optimisation

Global Advisors Digital Data Analytics

14 years of quantitative and data science experience

An enabler to delivering quantified strategy and accelerated implementation

Digital enablement, acceleration and data science

Leading-edge data science and digital skills

Experts in large data processing, analytics and data visualisation

Developers of digital proof-of-concepts

An accelerator for Global Advisors and our clients

Join Global Advisors

We hire and grow amazing people

Consultants join our firm based on a fit with our values, culture and vision. They believe in and are excited by our differentiated approach. They realise that working on our clients’ most important projects is a privilege. While the problems we solve are strategic to clients, consultants recognise that solutions primarily require hard work – rigorous and thorough analysis, partnering with client team members to overcome political and emotional obstacles, and a large investment in knowledge development and self-growth.

Get In Touch

16th Floor, The Forum, 2 Maude Street, Sandton, Johannesburg, South Africa
+27114616371

Global Advisors | Quantified Strategy Consulting