About / Value creation & business transformation

VladimirGoloborodko

I work on businesses where meaningful value exists, but the system is not producing what it should.

$7M → $15M

Unit revenue · ~breakeven to ~30% margin
Technoserv Consulting · 2014–2017

5 acquisitions integrated

One consumer-fintech platform
Woolsocks / APC · 2021–2025

3 teams → 12 squads

Scale-up operating model · 3 tribes
DEGIRO · 2019–2021

Selected track record

The economics.
The intervention. What changed.

Three settings. The same work: understand the constraint, change the system and make the outcome visible.

01 / Portfolio turnaround · 2014–2017

Technoserv Consulting

Head of Business Unit

$7M → $15M revenue~breakeven → ~30% margin

Over three years · ~180 → ~250 people

The constraint

Profitable programmes masked losses elsewhere. Separate functional departments meant nobody owned the full economics of a client.

What I changed

With full P&L responsibility and broad sponsor-backed authority, I created five P&L-owning portfolios, rebuilt incentives, changed leadership and closed structurally uneconomic work.

What remained

The portfolio leaders I appointed kept the model running after my exit and later scaled it to more than 1,000 people.

02 / Integration & reset · 2021–2025

Woolsocks / APC

Delivery & Platform Integration Lead
· shareholder

5 acquisitions integratedOne consumer-fintech platform

~3M users acquired · ~200–300k monthly active users at exit

The constraint

Expected hypergrowth did not materialise. The product and UX conditions required for scale were not in place. The agenda shifted to finding a viable economic engine.

What I changed

Built product and delivery capacity and initially led six teams across Amsterdam and the Baltics. As growth expectations changed, I resized capacity, integrated five acquired businesses and consolidated relevant B2B SaaS/API capabilities into the unified platform.

What changed

Gift cards became the core business as the company shifted its focus from growth to profitability. Commercial economics remain confidential.

APC is a €100M committed-capital fintech investment and venture-building platform founded by the DEGIRO founders. User figures describe platform scale, not a measure of organic growth.

03 / Scale-up operating model · 2019–2021

DEGIRO

Product & Delivery Transformation Lead

3 teams → 12 squadsIn 3 tribes, with Product Owners

Development organisation ~30 → 60–70 people

The constraint

Founder-led coordination no longer matched the demands of a growing online broker. Business demand and technology capacity had become disconnected.

What I changed

Built formal business reviews, capacity quotas and one prioritised backlog. Restructured development into 12 cross-functional squads across three tribes and, while the new leadership structure was being staffed, operated at tribe/GPM level across product direction, prioritisation, capacity allocation and cross-squad decisions.

What changed

A defined interface between business priorities and delivery capacity replaced ad hoc coordination as the development organisation grew.

A lesson carried forward: operating design needs sponsor alignment and a coalition able to sustain the change.

Tinkoff Insurance · 2013–2014Online sales live in five months

Greenfield under hard constraints. A new insurer’s core platform on a roughly $7M fixed-price programme. The binding constraint was scarce Guidewire expertise, so I built a ~30-person core team around the limited experienced talent available and ran inception as one team with the client and Guidewire Professional Services.

Online sales went live five months after implementation start, followed by phone sales a month later and further releases during the year. The fixed-price programme then became a continuing time-and-materials relationship as the client internalised the operating model.

Fortune Global 500 bank · 2010–2013Programme recovery · ~30,000 users

A stalled multi-vendor programme where the problem was the system, not the technology. Business units, internal IT, a prime contractor and our team were working under fixed-price commitments without a shared production cycle connecting demand to delivery.

I designed a common release model with fixed dates, capacity rules, prioritisation, entry criteria and explicit obligations for every party. Delivery became predictable, the team grew from ~50 to ~100, the programme reached ~30,000 users, the engagement economics recovered, and the client later absorbed the operating model into its own technology organisation.

Large retail bank · 2014–2015Turnaround through a portfolio leader

Transformation through others. The largest programme in my portfolio, representing roughly a third of portfolio revenue, was loss-making and had a dissatisfied client. With the portfolio manager, I diagnosed the problem and designed the recovery model and the case for changing how the programme operated.

I joined the critical executive discussions as the authority, but the portfolio manager owned execution. The programme recovered. For me, the important result was that the approach had become an organisational capability rather than something that depended on me personally.

Where I am most useful

When the answer needs
more than better execution.

Growth below expectations

The plan assumes growth that has not arrived. Which assumptions still hold, and what must change before the business can scale?

Margin under pressure

Revenue exists, but the economics are disappointing. Where is value being lost, and who can change the decisions behind it?

Post-acquisition complexity

Businesses have been brought together. What needs to change for them to work as one economic system?

Scale-up & platform constraints

The company has outgrown informal coordination or the platform has accumulated too much complexity. What should remain, what should be simplified, and how should product priorities, technology capacity and accountability connect?

Disconnected authority

People are accountable for outcomes they cannot control. Where do decision rights, incentives or dependencies need to change?

Changing business economics

AI or another market shift changes the assumptions underneath the business. What should it build, change or stop?

Strongest sector experience: financial services, fintech, brokerage, insurance, technology-enabled and professional services.

Advisory & operating mandates

The problem sets the agenda.
The engagement follows.

When Intelligence Is Free

The same question.
At a different altitude.

The economy

When Intelligence Is Free

Research and a public investment book on where value moves as intelligence becomes abundant, and when the capital cycle makes it worth owning.

One business

Business value creation

Where is value being created or destroyed inside a business? Which assumptions no longer hold, and what needs to change? Where relevant, the research adds an AI-exposure lens to that diagnosis.

Career

The operating experience behind the work.

2026–When Intelligence Is Free
Founder
2021–2025Woolsocks / APC
Delivery & Platform Integration Lead · shareholder
2019–2021DEGIRO
Product & Delivery Transformation Lead
2018–2019SmartPay
Founder · Built a payments venture through MVP, pilots and early revenue; wound it down after pilots failed to demonstrate a scalable market.
2007–2017Technoserv Consulting
Head of Business Unit, 2014–2017
Programme & Portfolio Lead, 2007–2013
LinkedIn ↗

Start a conversation

What needs to change?

Tell me about the business, the value at stake and the decision that is blocked. The first conversation establishes the problem and whether I can be useful.