Roberto Manunta
My role is to help you see what the situation is really made of: the strategic structure, the security exposure, the intelligence picture, the gaps between functions, and the frameworks that may no longer fit the reality they are meant to govern. From there, the response can be designed around the situation itself, rather than forced through a model that does not quite apply.
The problem you have flagged
is rarely the problem you have
When a serious situation goes wrong, attention usually fixes on the part that can be seen and named: the risk on the register, the threat in the framework, the function responsible, the standard that appears to apply.
That part is usually real. It is also usually incomplete.
The deeper issue is often not poor execution against the visible problem. It is disciplined execution inside a frame that no longer fits. Strategy, security, intelligence and resilience have been separated into functions; each may be competent on its own terms, while the real exposure collects in the seams between them.
Often enough, you already sense this. The situation feels larger than the item on the agenda. The framework gives order, but not quite truth. The standard is useful, but not sufficient. The room is solving a part while the whole remains unread.
That is where my work begins.
A confidential, fixed-fee reading of one live situation, so the frame can be tested before further resource, authority or reputation is committed on the basis of it. A focused briefing and a short written diagnosis you can use with a board, counsel or executive team.
AED 12,500 — fixed and agreed in advance. The full scope is set out below.
Begin a confidential conversation
The element is not the whole
When a problem resists effort, the answer is rarely just more effort. More often, the first frame placed around the situation has remained in place for too long.
A conflict is named, but no one stops to ask whether the adversary is really the adversary. A risk is assigned to a function, and the wider structure that produced it disappears from view. A framework is applied because it is familiar, even when the situation no longer fits the assumptions behind it.
This is where the work has to change. Not more force applied to the same reading, but a better reading of the whole: what is being mistaken for what, where the real exposure sits, what falls between functions, and what kind of response the situation now requires.
Many difficult problems are not impossible problems. They are the wrong problems, pursued with competence, discipline and good faith.
Roberto Manunta
For close to thirty years I have worked with principals, institutions and senior advisers across strategy, security, intelligence and resilience, in both public and private-sector contexts. The recurring lesson is simple: serious situations are rarely contained inside the category first assigned to them. My work is to read the whole, not the flagged part, so that the response is designed around the situation itself. More about me.
Those who own the problem
and can act on what is found
My intervention is most useful when the person asking the question has the authority to act on the answer.
It is for principals, owners, board members, chief executives, chiefs of staff, general counsel, and senior intelligence, security or resilience leaders. It is also for trusted advisers who sit close enough to the principal to know when the stated problem is not the whole matter.
Often, the principal already senses that something is wrong with the way the situation has been framed. The difficulty is not always seeing it. The difficulty is giving that understanding enough weight for the room to move.
That is where an external view can help. It gives structure to what may already be suspected, tests it against the whole situation, and makes it harder for the organisation to dismiss the real issue as internal politics, functional disagreement, or personal instinct.
It is not useful where a decision has already been made and only needs endorsement. Nor is it useful where no one involved has the authority to change course. My intervention requires a principal who can decide, and who wants the situation understood before more resource, authority or reputation is committed.
The situations I am
usually brought into
No two situations are identical, but the pattern is often recognisable: a visible problem is being worked seriously, while the larger structure that produced it remains unclear. My intervention is usually useful when:
- A strategic initiative has stalled despite competent people, serious effort and adequate resources.
- Intelligence, security, resilience or strategy functions are each doing their part, but the organisation still cannot see the exposure as a whole.
- A framework, standard or established procedure is being applied correctly, yet the situation still does not quite fit it.
- A board, leadership team or advisory circle is divided over what the real problem is.
- A conflict has been framed around an adversary, demand or threat that may not be the real one.
- A security, reputational or legal issue may in fact be strategic, or a strategic issue may be carrying a security exposure.
- The organisation has several competent explanations of the same situation, but no single picture strong enough to guide action.
- A decision is approaching, and the concern is not only what to do, but whether the situation has been understood correctly.
In each case, the question is not simply how to act faster. It is whether the situation has been framed in a way that allows the right action to become visible.
From situation,
to diagnosis, to response
I do not begin with a method to impose on the situation. I begin by understanding what is actually in front of us.
First, I reconstruct the situation: what has happened, what is being said, what is being assumed, who is involved, what has already been tried, and where the difficulty now appears to sit. This matters because serious problems are often misdescribed before they are badly solved.
Then I test that picture against the wider structure. I look at what may have been mistaken for what, where the real exposure sits, and whether the available frameworks still fit the reality they are meant to govern.
Only after that should the response be designed. Sometimes the right next step is simply a clearer decision; sometimes it is something more substantial. The form depends on what the situation requires, not on a menu prepared in advance.
You receive a clear written diagnosis of the situation as I understand it, the likely misreads, the decision points that matter, and the logic of any response that follows. The value is not in producing more material. It is in moving carefully from what is being presented, to what is really happening, to what should be done next.
Roberto Manunta
I have spent close to thirty years working across strategy, security, intelligence and resilience, as an advisor, scholar and teacher, with experience across both the public and private sectors.
My professional path has taken me through problems involving terrorism, crisis management, strategic security, institutional resilience, intelligence analysis and complex decision-making. Over time, the recurring lesson has been the same: serious situations are rarely contained inside the category first assigned to them. A security issue may be strategic. A strategic failure may carry an intelligence gap. A resilience problem may expose the way an institution understands itself.
This is the discipline I bring to my advisory practice: to look beyond the flagged element, recover the structure around it, and help principals understand what kind of response the situation requires.
I hold a BSc in Economics and Politics and an MSc in Military Operational Research. I am a Fellow of the Institute of Strategic Risk Management and a Fellow of the DIEM Network. I have also co-designed and delivered postgraduate programmes in security and intelligence analysis in the United Kingdom, Italy and Spain.
Over thirty years, I have worked in a wide range of contexts, in both public and private sectors.
- Public safety and security institutions.
- Strategic security and resilience programmes.
- Intelligence analysis, taught at postgraduate level.
- Crisis, terrorism and complex decision environments.
- Executive and postgraduate education in the UK, Italy and Spain.
- Private-sector advisory involving strategic exposure, reputational risk and organisational resilience.
Before you make the move,
make sure you are in the right game.
The Strategic Reading
A confidential, fixed-fee first intervention for one live situation, before further resource, authority or reputation is committed.
The Strategic Reading is for moments when something important is about to be decided, escalated, defended or reorganised, but there is a serious question about whether the situation has been understood correctly.
It is also useful when a capability is fragmenting. Strategy, security, intelligence and resilience may each be managed with competence, while the organisation still struggles to see the exposure as a whole.
This is not an audit, a workshop or a full advisory engagement. It is a focused intervention on one live matter: a decision, a conflict, a stalled initiative, or a fault-line in the way the organisation is understanding and responding to its environment.
- What I examine
-
- What is being mistaken for what.
- Which assumptions are quietly driving the room.
- Where the real exposure sits.
- What falls between functions.
- Which actors, forces and constraints actually matter.
- Which decision forks are real, and which are illusory.
- What should not be done yet.
- What you leave with
- A clearer picture of the situation before you act: what is probably being misread, which assumptions are carrying too much weight, where the real exposure sits, and which decision points now matter most.
The outcome is not a long report. It is a focused briefing and a short written diagnosis that can be used with a principal, board, counsel or executive team. Its purpose is to make the next decision narrower, more defensible and less exposed. - The fee
- AED 12,500, fixed and agreed in advance.
The fee is deliberately contained because The Strategic Reading is a first intervention. It gives you a serious outside diagnosis before deciding whether anything larger is warranted. The purpose is not to add another layer of advisory cost, but to test the frame before larger commitments of money, authority or reputation are made against it.
Where the diagnosis leads, if it leads anywhere, is decided afterwards, and scoped to the situation rather than assumed in advance.
If this describes
where you are
By this point, you will usually know whether the situation is familiar: capable people, serious effort, a problem that still does not quite move, and a sense that the real issue may sit somewhere other than where the organisation has been looking.
If that is where you are, the first step is simple. Tell me, briefly and confidentially, what is happening, what is at stake, and why the present understanding does not fully satisfy you. I will tell you honestly whether I can help, and whether The Strategic Reading is the right place to begin.
Begin the conversation