Suzan van Zitteren (1967) brings a unique professional approach and skill set to her career. That is why her curriculum vitae is similarly unique, offering real insight into the smart solutions she offers to complex challenges.

This website pulls together Suzan’s six core values: ‘how she develops’ on page one, ‘her conceptual approach to gain buy-in for change processes’ on page two, and ‘practical examples of solutions to four diverse Executive Board challenges’ on pages three to six.

She prepared for her career by studying business economics and administration and audit at Tilburg University. A fresh graduate, she was quickly snapped up by Arthur Andersen, one of the then Big Five. She learned her business by working closely with clients. It was as a part of an Andersen Group think-tank that she laid the foundations for her later (international) role as conceptual thinker and problem solver. Suzan then moved on to Rodamco Europe, later Unibail-Rodamco, as financial advisor with ultimate responsibility for Group Risk Management. A sabbatical where she honed her emotional intelligence, studying social sciences while caring for a terminal parent has rounded out a strong creative background and supported her development. Most recently, working closely with legal advisors, she has applied her unique range of expertise to developing solutions for SMEs challenged by the current economic crisis. Today, she is:

a chartered accountant (Register Accountant) and financial expert, with solid track record in perhaps the less appealing side of business (eg. compliance/in control, risk management, other accountancy specializations), who makes complex issues clear and can synthesize across alpha and beta disciplines. She ‘sees’ processes, absorbs them rapidly, and ‘fixes’ them by thinking creatively and sensitively;

a creative conceptual thinker who understands the need for/and is able to integrate advanced people involvement, she is able to successfully create environments to achieve goals, specifically through well-thought out communication;

a committed, constructive out-of-the box finder of solutions to a range of business challenges, specifically on strategy and multi-disciplinary change-related projects, including ensuring people’s buy-in and goodwill, but also any other process or mindset-related change aimed at:

• elevating policy, image and management to higher levels;
• driving rapid growth through above;
• supporting clients who are in the spotlight, eg. through IPO ambitions, smart product development, etc;
• exploring values, not only on how clients are managed, but also relating to their customers, finance-providers, shareholders, regulatory authorities, supervisors.

The approach Suzan van Zitteren’s approach to (complex) business issues always starts with understanding all the implications from every conceivable perspective. This means she researches the current context and analyses the required end result. Typically, she will discover and consider:

• What is the company’s broader agenda?
• What is the issue at hand all about?
• Who are the key in-/external stakeholders to this issue?
• What are the stakeholders’ key drivers:
  • economic?
  • political?
  • emotional?

From a timeline perspective she brings in:

• Past – where are we coming from?
• Present – what is required now?
• Future – what will be required in future?
• How much change will have to be managed?

What key dilemmas or conflicting interests (will) arise around this issue?

The method Based on the outcomes, she applies conceptual thinking to both issue and context and tailor-designs a solution that:

• Fits the context;
• Sustains over time – as it respects the past, deals with today’s practicalities and will meet (anticipated) future requirements;
• Balances risks/rewards and seeks a cost/benefit optimum (applying 80/20-rule);
• Reconciles dilemmas or conflicting agendas by focusing on ‘best of both worlds’;
• Can be realistically implemented with available internal people and budget resources;
• Can be clearly communicated and effectively sold to various key stakeholders as it covers the key ‘What’s in it for me’ questions: ‘Why?’, ‘What’, ‘Where’, ‘When?’, ‘Who’ and ‘How’.

The implementation ‘In implementation,’ says Suzan van Zitteren, ‘I plan, lead, explain, organize, hands-on manage and monitor the project from start to finish, efficiently involving available internal people. I’m convinced my approach has long-lasting, positive effects on organizations because I’m committed to transparency and co-worker buy-in. Rather than opting for solutions that require (expensive) external consulting resources, I prefer to work closely with existing in-company people. I’m used to working in uncharted territory and maintain a low-profile throughout, encouraging the “group benefit” concept that makes the whole team, whatever the level, look good.’

The challenge A listed real-estate company was primarily financed through a myriad of (secured) bilateral bank loans against the backdrop of a global financial crisis and a deflation fear in the financial markets.

The goal To finance future growth, secure access to capital and manage interest-rate risk.

The background Significant in-company change was required to diversify the finance structure. The company also needed a credit rating. Attempts to prepare for a credit-rating with the help of outside consultants in the preceding year had become bogged down and ultimately failed due to lack of internal buy-in. Suzan van Zitteren was hired as financial advisor and asked to restart the process and achieve fast results under high time and financial-market pressure.

The method First, Suzan van Zitteren explored and analyzed the issue, its context and the background against the desired goal. She concluded that a transparent need-for-change-case (‘What’s in it for all of us?’) was needed to convince non-financial people and obtain their support. Says Suzan van Zitteren, ‘The idea was to show people how the proposed diversification of funding would positively affect their part of the business, achieving buy-in that was based on a reality people would understand.’

A scenario concept was developed that proved the best and most convincing tool. The concept was expanded into a presentation for both Executive and Supervisory Boards. ‘The presentation showed clearly and transparently the company’s interest cost sensitivity to interest rate developments in the financial markets,’ she explains. ‘The scenario results were later verified and confirmed by both JP Morgan and ABN Amro.’ Based on this presentation it was decided to rapidly apply for a credit rating followed by a €500 million debut-bond issue – both within a six-month period.

The result Working with JP Morgan rating advisory, a credit-rating presentation was prepared and rehearsed with all Executive Board and country managers over a three-month period. This process resulted in securing the best credit-rating in the European real-estate sector. In a record time frame of 10 weeks, Suzan van Zitteren then managed the preparation of a European roadshow for a €500 million debut-bond issue in conjunction with the book-runners, JP Morgan, ABN Amro and UBS. She accompanied the CEO and CFO on the actual roadshow. This project resulted in a highly successful, oversubscribed debut-bond issue.

The challenge How to achieve greater reporting transparency in an industry often characterized as less than clear in its dealings with stakeholders.

The goal For the company to be recognized as a transparent organization whose reporting and performance could be evaluated in the same way as other listed corporates – also in light of strong growth ambitions in challenging financial conditions.

The background The company’s annual reporting had traditionally been an inefficient and extremely stressful process for the whole organization. At the same time, real estate did not have a significant reputation for transparency.

The method Suzan van Zitteren took on the annual report process, redesigning and streamlining so that co-workers could be involved effectively and efficiently. ‘What was key here,’ she says, ‘is that people needed to understand what was expected of them and when it was needed. We also had to enable the external design/writing agency to focus their time on their expertise: transparent writing and design.’

The result Good conceptual oversight, transparent communication, planning and follow-up of responsibilities, hands-on leadership and advanced people involvement, resulted in significant process streamlining and improvements in the annual report’s quality and transparency. An environment and process were created which enabled all participants to focus on their own expertise/responsibility (‘do what you are good at’) and succeed. The company went on to receive numerous nominations for the Henri Sijthoff award for transparency in reporting – the only real-estate organization in the Netherlands that was recognized in this way.

The challenge In the wake of (global) corporate scandals, listed companies were increasingly required to firm up the transparency of their corporate governance. In many jurisdictions, executive directors are now held personally liable. This is framed in a legal requirement that they make ‘in control statements’. Companies must be able to substantiate these public statements. At the same time, more stringent risk management reporting also became a requirement in annual reports.

The goal As part of a clear thrust towards visible compliance and transparency on all business components, the company’s aim was to be demonstrably ‘in control’ of all its business processes, including risk management.

The background There was and remained uncertainty (for years) about the scope of In Control Statements: it was unclear what was really expected, there were no clear norms and guidelines. These were all to come and evolve in practice. What was clear was the fact that any ‘statement’ by executive directors had to be based on thorough control at every level and every location in the European organization.

The method For the internal context, she studied how In Control could be fitted into the organization not as a mere legal requirement, but as a value-added exercise driven by a legal requirement.

‘The conceptual challenge was threefold,’ Suzan van Zitteren explains. ‘One: How do you overcome the negative emotional connotation of “internal control” that is bound to trigger strong resistance in the organization;
Two: Can you somehow logically integrate this new requirement in context of all the organizational alignment change projects that people had to undergo (address internal change fatigue);
Three: How can you turn it from a box- ticking, legal cost into a positive, added-value project?’

The result The process began with an interactive kick-off that included an In Control workshop for head office personnel that was developed by Suzan van Zitteren and delivered by the CEO. Similar workshops were delivered throughout Europe by the country managers. These workshops were well attended and well received by people throughout the organization (high to low, country by country).

The content had been developed in efficient smaller workshops, involving people from all functional areas. It was based on determining what exactly our key value drivers are (‘what are the things we have to do well to be successful?’) and what the related key performance indicators are (‘In what numbers does success show?’). These value drivers and KPIs were integrated and synthesized into an In Control Dashboard. This dashboard was the communication and reporting tool that would help substantiate our external In Control Statement.

The challenge Embed new international financial reporting standards (IFRS) into a European organization.

The goal Ensure this regulatory requirement was implemented in a manner that reinforced the company’s stated aim of being an industry leader in transparency.

The background Against the backdrop of major accounting scandals (Enron, Parmalat, etc.) the financial markets and (inter)national environment penalized uncertainty and rewarded transparency. Avoiding external uncertainty and pursuing transparency were fully in keeping with the company’s internal ambitions of organizational alignment and controlled growth from a Midkap to an AEX-listing. From a strategic perspective, greater transparency would lead to improved access to capital at reduced interest rates, which would finance an accelerated growth ambition. Growth equalled opportunities for the entire Group.

The method IFRS was positioned not as ‘a legal requirement for the financial department’ but as a ‘business issue that impacted the entire organization and represented opportunities to differentiate the company as an industry leader in transparency’. ‘The real challenge,’ Suzan van Zitteren believes, ‘was that we had to create and raise awareness among internal stakeholder groups who were not always familiar with the financial jargon and would be quick to brush IFRS and its implementation aside as “not important here”. We had to show them with clear practical examples that IFRS has a real impact on their side of the business.

‘This created the communication challenge of attracting non-financial people’s attention to and basic understanding of a less than appealing topic. And that had to happen across international borders (language issues) and functional departments. There was also a tight time frame and a lot of uncertainty to manage.’

For Suzan van Zitteren, developing a nuanced communication plan, project strategy and timetable was key. Transparency played a central role in all project phases from development to embedding. ‘What we did was develop a bedrock for IFRS before creating a stepped-up implementation and ultimately taking ownership. This was a two-year process that matched the organization’s own ability to manage the embedding of a wholly new reporting standard that had implications for the whole business. Essentially,’ she explains, ‘we started at the top and worked our way down to the people responsible for execution.’

For the IFRS roll-out, a one-day IFRS training session and ‘IFRS tool-kit’ including a manual were developed. Suzan van Zitteren went on a second tour across the countries, this time accompanied by the external auditor. For the financial team, the auditor’s presence added an additional credibility while providing the external auditors with the necessary insight in the company’s actual IFRS implementation status and progress.

The result The IFRS manual had a cool ‘look and feel’ and a creative and highly user-friendly access for non-financial people. It proved a tool that would appeal and be widely used across the organization, instead of what usually happens with manuals: they gather dust in a cabinet at the finance department.

For external reporting purposes, an IFRS section and ‘impact-visual’ were developed for inclusion in the annual report. This section also earned a best-practice recommendation from the Sijthoff Award jury.