Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Career, Stratégie, CARAVELLE, What Talon.One is: A Berlin-based loyalty…

- - - - avantages:
      - Contrôle total sur l'expérience
      - Capture 100% du revenue
      - Actif immobilier valorisable
      - Barrière à l'entrée pour les concurrents
      - inconvenients:
      - Capital immobilisé énorme
      - Croissance lente
      - Exposition totale aux cycles
      - Coûts fixes lourds
      - Marges structurellement basses
  - - - ce que chaque marque est prête à accepter localement
        
        Non-RevPAR: abonnements (type ALL Accor+), les partenariats, les frais liés à l'immobilier résidentiel, et les revenus générés par leur bureau de procurement (achats groupés pour les hôtels)
  - - - prélèvement Accor: Royalty (4-6% revenue chambres) + frais marketing et distribution
        
        Résilience aux crises
        
        Rentabilité structurellement élevée
        
        Valorisation boursière plus haute
        
        Cash flow stable
        
        Focus stratégique
        
        Avantages:
        
        Inconvenients:
        
        Dépendance aux propriétaires
        
        Perte de contrôle sur l'expérience
        
        Marge de manœuvre limitée sur le pricing
        
        Revenue apparent plus faible
        
        La marque devient tout
        
        Concurrence intense sur les signatures
        
        Croissance rapide
    - - ce que le siège veut pousser globalement
- - - - Le premier, et c'est celui qui m'enthousiasme le plus : j'ai construit et déployé un agent IA basé sur Claude pour automatiser la valorisation de projets d'innovation. L'agent ingérait la documentation des projets et des paramètres de contexte — prix des matières premières, coûts CO2 et énergie — pour guider les analystes dans une évaluation structurée. Résultat : moins de travail manuel, plus de cohérence sur tout le portefeuille. C'est exactement le type d'automatisation que vous décrivez — veille, analyse documentaire, routines intelligentes — et je l'ai fait de l'idéation jusqu'au déploiement réel. mon expertise c'est la conception du workflow, le paramétrage, et l'intégration dans un usage métier réel
        
        Le deuxième, plus orienté création de valeur : une intégration post-fusion dans le fleet finance où j'ai contribué à 50M€ de synergies, dont 8M€ que j'ai identifiés côté IT en dimensionnant les leviers sur plusieurs scénarios. C'est du concret, de l'exécution, avec un impact financier mesurable — pas une recommandation qui reste dans un tiroir.
        
        Le troisième montre ma capacité à analyser vite des opérations complexes à grande échelle : une rationalisation de portefeuille IT sur dix géographies, plus de mille applications évaluées, une dizaine de DSI coordonnés pour aligner les priorités et restructurer le paysage applicatif.
- - - - l'échelle internationale — j'ai un profil assez multilingue et multiculturel, j'ai travaillé sur des projets en Europe et en Amérique latine, et une entreprise présente dans plus de 100 pays c'est un environnement dans lequel je me sens à l'aise
    - - complexité opérationnelle — l'hôtellerie c'est un secteur où les décisions stratégiques ont un impact très direct sur le terrain, j'aime ça
        
        Plateforme > Hôtellerie
        
        j'ai découvert que ALL Accor est présenté comme bien plus qu'un programme de fidélité. C'est à la fois une plateforme de réservation, un écosystème de fidélité, un vecteur de partenariats et une porte d'entrée vers des expériences lifestyle.
        
        dimension
        
        Ce qui m'intéresse particulièrement, c'est la complexité de l'environnement, 45 marques, 100 pays, 6 mil hôtels. Pourtant, le client doit avoir une expérience cohérente de l'écosystème ALL
    - - travailler côté client plutôt qu'en conseil — je veux construire des choses et rester assez longtemps pour voir si elles fonctionnent.
  - - - Le projet dont je suis la plus fière, c'est la refonte de la gouvernance IT chez le leader mondial de la certification et de l'inspection.
      - L'enjeu de départ était simple à énoncer mais très difficile à résoudre : ce groupe opérait dans 10 géographies, avec plus de 1 000 applications actives et une dizaine de CIOs qui prenaient chacun des décisions IT de façon autonome, sans vision d'ensemble. Résultat : des doublons de coûts, aucune cohérence entre les régions, et une direction générale qui n'avait aucune visibilité consolidée pour arbitrer les investissements. Le vrai risque, ce n'était pas technique, c'était politique : réunir 10 CIOs autour d'une même feuille de route sans qu'aucun d'eux ne se sente dépossédé de son autonomie.
      - Je n'avais aucune autorité hiérarchique sur ces CIOs. Ma valeur ajoutée a été de construire une méthode qui leur permette de comparer objectivement leurs applications entre elles — j'ai mené des entretiens structurés avec chacun d'eux, noté chaque application candidate à la mutualisation selon des critères fonctionnels et techniques communs, puis j'ai organisé un forum réunissant tous les CIOs pour présenter ces résultats ensemble, au même moment, avec les mêmes chiffres. Ça a changé la nature de la conversation : au lieu de défendre leur territoire un par un face à la direction, ils ont commencé à négocier entre pairs, sur la base de données qu'ils avaient eux-mêmes validées.
      - Le résultat : un plan de rationalisation du portefeuille applicatif accepté par les 10 géographies, et un modèle de gouvernance cible qui a arbitré les décisions IT sur la durée, bien après la fin de ma mission.
      - Ce que ça démontre, c'est ma capacité à faire converger des stakeholders puissants et autonomes vers une décision commune, sans levier hiérarchique — uniquement par la structuration de l'information et la légitimité que ça crée. C'est exactement la compétence centrale d'un rôle de Chief of Staff.
    - - Le projet sur lequel je suis engagée depuis le plus longtemps, et qui me tient le plus à cœur, c'est le pilotage du portefeuille d'innovation d'un grand groupe industriel.
      - L'enjeu de départ n'était pas de lancer de l'innovation — il y avait déjà plus de 150 projets en cours, pour un budget de 70 millions d'euros, couvrant des sujets aussi différents que le drone d'inspection, la robotique ou l'analytique prédictive. Le vrai problème, c'était que personne au niveau de la direction n'avait de vision consolidée de ce qui créait vraiment de la valeur, de ce qui stagnait, et de ce qui méritait d'être arrêté. L'innovation avançait, mais elle avançait à l'aveugle.
      - Je n'étais pas propriétaire des projets eux-mêmes — chaque chef de projet restait responsable de sa feuille de route. Mon rôle a été de construire un langage commun pour comparer l'incomparable : j'ai mis en place un cadre de valorisation partagé, j'ai coaché chaque porteur de projet à quantifier son impact selon les mêmes critères, et j'ai construit un reporting de portefeuille qui remonte régulièrement à la direction. Ce qui rend ce projet différent des autres, c'est que je le porte dans la durée — ce n'est pas une mission de trois mois qu'on referme, c'est un dispositif qui doit continuer à vivre et à s'adapter à mesure que de nouveaux projets entrent et que d'autres sortent du portefeuille.
      - Le résultat, c'est que la direction dispose aujourd'hui d'une vision de portefeuille qui lui permet d'arbitrer où réinvestir et où couper, projet par projet, plutôt que de piloter à l'instinct sur 150 initiatives en parallèle.
      - Ce que ça démontre, c'est ma capacité à transformer une ambition stratégique diffuse en un système d'exécution qui tient dans la durée — pas seulement structurer une décision ponctuelle, mais maintenir un dispositif vivant qui continue à produire de la clarté pour la direction mois après mois. C'est exactement ce qu'on attend d'un Chief of Staff : traduire l'ambition stratégique en exécution organisationnelle, en continu.
  - - - prep codirs
      - gouvernances
      - alignement de dirigeants avec des agendas ambigues, dans des géographies différentes
      - création de nouveaux modèles opératoires
      - structuration de sujets peu définis
- - - - So, I'm an engineer by training — I did a master's in manufacturing engineering in Brazil. I started at Alstom as a PMO on infrastructure projects, then joined Accenture Strategy almost eight years ago, first in Brazil and then in Paris.
      - At Accenture I work on technology strategy and delivery, always at the interface between business and tech teams, coordinating across geographies.
        
        Two projects give the clearest picture of what I do. One was for a global certification company: I led an IT governance program coordinating around ten CIOs across ten geographies, aligning a portfolio of over a thousand applications with the group's priorities. I had no direct authority over any of them, so the whole thing was about building trust and getting people to commit to decisions together. The other was in payments: I implemented Open Banking compliance for a payments provider, interpreting Central Bank regulations and coordinating engineering teams across India and the US to adapt to them.
        
        I help organizations make decisions about their technology — what to build, what to consolidate, how to organize it — and then coordinate the people and teams to make those decisions real.
        
        Four types of work: portfolio and application rationalization (making sense of sprawling IT landscapes), M&A integration (merging technology and capturing synergies), regulatory and operating-model work (like Open Banking compliance), and innovation portfolio management (running new solutions from idea to deployment). The common thread is coordinating across geographies and between business and technical teams, usually without direct authority over the people involved.
      - Payments is actually one of most interesting industries I've worked in — it moves fast, and the technical and business stakes are always intertwined. That's part of what keeps things interesting
      - But the bigger reason is that I want to change how I work. I've spent years advising from the outside, and I don't always get to see what happens after I leave. What I'm looking for now is to own the delivery directly — be accountable end to end, see the results persist, be part of the team that makes it work. That's exactly what this role is, and Adyen is where I want to make that move.
    - - We make good decisions and consider long-term benefits Your Open Banking work: you weren't just implementing compliance for the short-term regulatory deadline — you were coordinating product, legal, and engineering to build something the client could sustain beyond the project. Same with the M&A integration: you flagged €8M in IT savings not as a quick cut but as part of a structured scenario analysis.
        
        We launch fast and iterate Your innovation portfolio at TotalEnergies: 150+ projects at various stages, constantly moving from scouting to testing to deployment. You didn't wait for perfect conditions — you ran pilots in parallel and scaled what worked.
        
        Winning is more important than ego; we work as a team across cultures and time zones
        Coordinating 10 CIOs across 10 geographies with different agendas, languages, and priorities. You had no direct authority over any of them. Getting alignment on a shared IT roadmap required putting the collective outcome ahead of any one stakeholder's preference, including your own recommendations when they weren't landing.
        
        We don't hide behind email, pick up the phone
        In the Bureau Veritas project, getting CIOs to commit to decommissioning applications they'd built or sponsored required direct conversations, not written recommendations. Email doesn't get people to make uncomfortable decisions.
        
        We talk straight without being rude
        Your M&A integration work: telling a merged entity's leadership that €8M of their IT budget was redundant is not a comfortable message. You had to deliver it clearly, with evidence, without softening it to the point of uselessness.
        
        We seek out different perspectives to sharpen our ideas
        Your "Digital Days" format in the Bureau Veritas project — you deliberately brought all 10 CIOs into the room together so they could challenge each other's assumptions, not just react to your analysis. The insight that came out of that cross-geography confrontation was sharper than anything you could have produced alone.
        
        We create our own path to grow toward our full potential
        The transition you're making now. Seven years in consulting is a deliberate choice to build breadth, and leaving it to move into execution ownership is equally deliberate. You're not following a standard consulting-to-consulting progression — you're defining your own trajectory.
        
        We build to benefit all customers (not just one)
        Your Bureau Veritas project: the IT rationalization roadmap was designed to work across 10 geographies and multiple business lines, not just solve the loudest CIO's problem. You had to resist local optimization to get to a global architecture that served everyone.
    - - THE INDUSTRY
        
        Payments is one of the industries I've found most compelling throughout my career. I've worked in it twice — once implementing Open Banking compliance for a global payments provider in Brazil, coordinating engineering teams across three countries to adapt to new Central Bank regulations, and once doing competitive benchmarking for another payments player where Adyen actually came up as a reference. Both times I found the industry genuinely interesting — it moves fast, the technical and business stakes are intertwined, and there's still a lot happening. That's the space I want to go deeper in, not just visit on projects.
      - THE TRANSITION
        
        The second reason is more personal. I've spent 7 years at Accenture advising large organizations on technology strategy and transformation. I'm good at it, but I don't always get to see what happens after I leave. What I'm looking for now is to own the delivery side directly — be the person accountable end to end, see the results persist, be part of the team that makes it work in practice.
      - THE COMPANY
        
        The platform complexity, the global merchant base, the fact that you're expanding — Talon.One just closed last week — means the scope of what your team is managing is growing. And the culture encoded in the Formula, particularly the hands-on, direct communication style, is exactly how I already prefer to work.
    - - 1. I connect and move things behind the scenes. In a team, my instinct is to be the person making sure everything is linked up and progressing — not necessarily running the room, but making sure the room's work actually goes somewhere. When things get chaotic, my process is to step back and think first, structure my communication, and then reach out to people — rather than reacting immediately.
      - 2. I work best with autonomy plus dialogue. I like to be given clear direction and the reasoning behind it, then have the space to try something on my own and iterate. Good feedback for me is specific and collaborative — someone tells me what they need and why, asks what I think, and we refine together. What doesn't work is being managed in a way that feels adversarial or undermining.
      - 3. I calibrate how much direction I need to the situation. When someone holds context I can't access — a stakeholder's preferences, prior history — I want a defined path, because guessing wastes everyone's time. When the problem is genuinely new and there's no playbook, that's when I want to shape the approach myself and problem-solve it.
    - - CERTIF. & INSPEC COMPANY
        
        CONTEXT
        
        This was a global certification and inspection company. Their IT landscape had grown completely fragmented — over a thousand applications and a hundred-plus projects spread across ten geographies, each with its own CIO, each serving different business lines. There was no unified view at group level, which meant no ability to rationalize, capture synergies, or align IT spend with strategy. The stakes were real: duplicated systems, wasted budget, and no coherent direction.
        
        MY ROLE
        
        I led the assessment. Practically, that meant two things. First, the analytical side — running discovery sessions to inventory what existed, what worked, what didn't, and triaging the applications and projects into keep, stop, or hold. Second, and harder, the coordination side. I was working with ten CIOs who had no prior relationship with our team and were protective of their regional autonomy. I had no authority over any of them. So I designed a format we called Digital Days — bringing all of them into the room together over two days to present, challenge each other, and commit to decisions collectively rather than have a roadmap imposed on them.
        
        OUTCOME
        
        We got to a shared target architecture and a roadmap with action plans per workstream — something that hadn't been possible at group level before. And the client trusted the work enough to extend the engagement into the innovation portfolio program I still run today.
      - ENERGY COMPANY
        
        CONTEXT
        
        the client extended us into running their innovation portfolio. The challenge was managing a live portfolio of over 150 projects at every stage, from raw business ideas through vendor scouting, testing, and deployment, against a budget of around €70M. The stakes were making sure innovation spend actually turned into deployed solutions rather than pilots that went nowhere.
        
        MY ROLE
        
        I run these projects through the full lifecycle. I work in pairs with a technical lead — I'm not the engineer, but I need to understand enough to coordinate. I take ideas from the business, run scouting to find vendors or decide to build internally, move to testing, and then deploy, sometimes replicating a solution across all the countries the company operates in. I also coordinate the surrounding stakeholders: legal and IP, technology vendors, and the deployment and inspection teams on the ground.
        
        OUTCOME
        
        A functioning pipeline where innovation actually reaches deployment, with portfolio-level reporting so leadership can see where the value is.
      - PAYMENTS PROVIDER
        
        CONTEXT
        
        This was a payments provider in Brazil, at the moment the Central Bank was rolling out Open Banking regulation. For the client this wasn't optional — they had to become compliant, which meant both interpreting a complex and evolving set of regulations and making real technical adaptations to their systems. Getting it wrong meant regulatory exposure; getting it right meant being positioned for new revenue streams.
        
        MY ROLE
        
        My job was to translate the regulation into what the business actually had to do — on compliance and on the technical upgrades needed to support Open Banking. I coordinated engineering teams across India and the US to implement those adaptations, managing priorities across product, legal, and technology stakeholders who didn't naturally align. So I was the connective layer between the regulatory intent and the engineering execution.
        
        OUTCOME
        
        The client got to a compliant Open Banking model, and the work positioned them to think about new products on top of it
    - - ANSWER
        
        My instinct is to understand the resistance before pushing against it.
      - EXAMPLE
        
        On one project, I had a CIO who was blocking a rationalization decision because it meant decommissioning a system his team had built. Rather than argue the group-level logic at him, I sat down with him one-on-one first to understand what he was actually protecting
      - CONCLUSION
        
        it turned out to be less about the system and more about his team's credibility. Once I understood that, I could frame the change in a way that didn't cost him face. He ended up backing the decision in the group session