Building Meaningful Connections: A Conversation with Bjarne Sandager Nielsen on Joining Pacific International’s Advisory Board

As Pacific International launches its Advisory Board to strengthen its impact in executive search, it welcomes experienced leaders who share its relationship-driven philosophy. One of them is Bjarne Sandager Nielsen. In this conversation with Margaret Jaouadi, he shares what drew him to Pacific and why its approach to leadership search stands out.

Margaret Jaouadi
Bjarne, what drew you to Pacific International and makes you passionate about championing its mission and approach to leadership search?

Bjarne Sandager Nielsen
For me, everything comes down to people. My relationship with Pacific started when I first connected with David Howells, CEO of Pacific, a few years ago. We had some brief interactions at the time, but about a year ago, he reached out again, and we started having more in-depth discussions.

Sometimes, you meet people with whom communication flows—you understand each other without needing to over-explain. That’s something I value highly: building relationships based on a shared understanding. We finally met in person when David visited Copenhagen to meet with clients. He assisted me with some contacts related to board searches, and later, our discussions led to the idea of establishing an advisory board at Pacific.

What resonated with me was the way Pacific operates. It’s not just about filling roles—it’s about developing genuine connections. I’ve interacted with other firms where the process feels purely transactional, operating on a supply-client model. That approach works for some, but it’s very different from Pacific’s way of doing things.

At its core, Pacific is a people’s business. Of course, it’s an effective executive search firm, but more than that, it’s about people working with people. That distinction made me excited to be part of this journey and meaningfully contribute to Pacific’s mission.

Margaret Jaouadi
You’ve had leadership experience across multiple industries. What leadership qualities are essential for sustainable success, regardless of the sector?

Bjarne Sandager Nielsen
There are a few fundamental qualities. First and foremost, the ability to listen. We have two ears and only one mouth for a reason. A great leader must be able to take in input from the organization—ideas, concerns, perspectives—and create an environment where people feel encouraged to share. When you foster that kind of openness, you also build trust. And trust is the foundation of any successful team.

Another crucial trait is clear and compelling communication. I’ve always believed that the responsibility for being understood lies with the person delivering the message. As leaders, we must ensure that what we say genuinely resonates with people and is communicated in a way they can relate to and act upon. That’s much easier if you’ve already built strong relationships through listening.

One of the most important things to communicate is direction. Setting the company’s strategic course is a top-down responsibility, but how we get there—that’s something the organization needs to figure out together. For that to happen, people need to understand what we’re doing and why we’re doing it. When they understand the “why,” they can make more informed decisions about the “how.” You don’t need to micromanage because you’ve empowered people to take ownership and release their full potential.

I often reflect on my experience 25 years ago when I was running Vestas’ only blade plant. Vestas was still a relatively small company, with about 2,000 employees globally. We received the most significant order we’d ever had for the U.S. market, and we had to scale from 600 to over 1,500 employees in just one year. It was an incredibly manual industry, requiring a lot of teamwork, and we had to train many new hires, many of whom came from farming, fishing, or construction backgrounds, to build blades with precision.

One of our biggest challenges was getting them to understand why the most minor details mattered. For example, a two-millimeter bump in a road or a wall is generally not a significant issue in construction. However, in blade manufacturing, a tiny imperfection in a 40-meter blade could cause it to break. If we had just told them, “This has to be perfect,” it wouldn’t have sunk in. Instead, we set up hands-on training, where they built two specimens—one with perfect quality and one with defects. Then, we put them in a test rig. The flawed one broke within minutes; the other remained intact. That’s when they truly understood the why. And once they understood, they remembered.

That experience reinforced the importance of communicating in a way that resonates with people. When people understand why something matters, they take ownership, which drives real, sustainable success.

Margaret Jaouadi
Having operated at the C-suite level, what are the most significant challenges organizations face today in securing high-impact leaders?

Bjarne Sandager Nielsen
That’s a great question. One of the biggest challenges is the tension between achieving short-term results and maintaining long-term sustainability.

Many businesses today, especially publicly listed ones—particularly in the U.S., but increasingly in Europe—are driven by quarterly results. Achieving those numbers is crucial because it impacts stock prices, investor confidence, and dividend payouts. However, if an organization becomes overly focused on the short term, it risks jeopardizing its long-term performance.

The key challenge is assembling a leadership team that strikes the right balance. You need people who can execute effectively in the short term, but you also need leaders who are thinking about the long-term sustainability of the business. And that balance is challenging to strike.

The leaders who receive the most recognition often deliver quick wins, as short-term success is readily apparent. It’s what gets reported in the news, what gets celebrated internally, and what makes an immediate impact. The problem is that quick wins aren’t always sustainable.

That’s why organizations must be very intentional in building leadership teams. It’s about ensuring that short-term execution doesn’t come at the expense of long-term resilience. Of course, there are times when focusing on immediate results is necessary. If a company is in survival mode, making it to the next quarter can be the difference between staying in business and going out of business. But in the long run, leadership isn’t just about the first 100 days. It’s about creating a company that thrives for years to come. Maintaining that balance is one of an organization’s most significant leadership challenges.

Margaret Jaouadi
When interviewing for leadership positions, have you ever been asked, “What are you planning to achieve in the first 100 days?” What was your reply?

Bjarne Sandager Nielsen
Yes, this question came up many times. And my answer has always depended on the situation.

In some cases, I had to deliver clear commitments—specific targets or urgent challenges that I had to address within a set timeframe, whether 100 days, six months, or another milestone. My response is straightforward in those situations: I outline how I plan to execute those commitments.

However, I always follow up by emphasizing the importance of understanding the organization. No matter the urgency, I want to spend that initial period listening. I want to understand the thinking within the organization, including the existing ideas and the concerns people have. Even in crises, there are usually valuable insights within the company that point to the solution. The key is to engage with the organization early to align as many people as possible to turn things around.

If it’s not a crisis scenario, there are still always priorities. I’ve never taken on a role without clear expectations about what must happen within the first six months or years. But my approach has always been the same: spend the beginning listening, absorbing information, and understanding the company’s pulse. Then, after two to three months, I come back with a more comprehensive and well-informed plan.

The first 100 days aren’t just about action but setting a foundation for long-term success.

Margaret Jaouadi
Statistics suggest that companies owned by private equity firms are more likely to change their leadership teams. Private equity (PE) investors often seek quick wins, typically with a five- to seven-year exit strategy in mind. Have you had any experience working with a private equity-owned company?

Bjarne Sandager Nielsen
Yes, I have. When I joined LM Wind Power in 2016, Doughty Hanson & Co., a British private equity firm, had owned the company for about 15 years, which was unusually long for a private equity firm, far exceeding their original intent. They had attempted to list the company twice but had pulled back at the last minute on both occasions.

I was aware that the company was up for sale when I signed my contract. However, due to a non-compete clause, I had to wait 12 months, until November 2016, before I could start, which the CEO accepted. Due to circumstances (another person wanted to move from LM to Vestas), we were able to move the start date back to August 2016.

On my third day on the job, it was announced to the management team that GE had submitted a bid for the company. By day four, we were preparing for due diligence. That was an incredibly intense way to learn a new company—you suddenly find a sixth gear you didn’t even know you had.

We operated under Doughty Hanson for almost a year until the final closing of the deal in April 2017. It was a fascinating experience seeing how private equity firms navigate leadership transitions and structure businesses for sale.

Margaret Jaouadi
Is there a big difference between working for a private equity-backed company and one that isn’t?

Bjarne Sandager Nielsen
Yes, absolutely. One of the most significant differences is the speed at which private equity firms are willing to invest in new ideas. Their entire model is based on acquiring a company, growing it—often aggressively—over five to seven years, and then exiting at a higher value. They understand the need to take risks, invest in innovation, and experiment with new approaches to achieve that kind of growth.

That’s also why leadership teams are often changed. The skills and strategies that brought a company to its current state aren’t necessarily the ones that will generate threefold growth in a short timeframe. Private equity firms are seeking leaders who can drive transformation and scale rapidly.

At the same time, private equity firms are highly results-driven. They scrutinize performance management, reporting, and key financial metrics more rigorously than in many traditionally owned companies. If you fall behind targets, you must have a solid plan to correct course immediately.

But I think that’s a good way of working. It creates a disciplined, high-accountability environment where you have the freedom to test bold ideas and the responsibility to deliver on them. It’s a model that encourages both ambition and execution.

Margaret Jaouadi
As a Pacific Advisory Board member, how do you see your expertise and insights helping clients attract and retain transformational C-suite leaders?

Bjarne Sandager Nielsen
One key aspect, of course, is the network. Having access to the right people is critical, but beyond that, it’s about truly understanding what kind of transformation a company needs.

The term “Transformational leader” is broad, and if an organization doesn’t clearly define the kind of transformation it requires, it risks looking in the wrong places for talent. It’s like a football team focusing on recruiting high-profile strikers when their real issue is defense. They won’t get the right players for the job without a correct diagnosis of the situation.

The search can be more targeted when the transformation goal is well-defined. This approach will draw the right leaders to roles that align with their strengths and expertise. If the position brief doesn’t accurately reflect the company’s needs, the most suitable candidates may never consider it.

By ensuring that companies accurately assess their transformation challenges and align their leadership search accordingly, we can help them attract and retain leaders who will genuinely drive change.

Margaret Jaouadi
How do you think leadership expectations are evolving to meet the demands of a more sustainable and purpose-driven future? And how can companies ensure they attract the right talent to align with this shift?

Bjarne Sandager Nielsen
That’s a crucial question, especially in today’s climate. Some companies are starting to waver in their commitment to sustainability and purpose. Still, these elements will become a license to operate in the future. Not only from a legislative standpoint, but just as crucially, to attract the right people.

The younger generations entering the workforce today see their careers differently than my generation did. In the past, staying with a company for 10 to 15 years was a common practice. Now, many professionals view themselves almost like their own startups—staying at a company for just a few years as long as it aligns with their purpose and makes them proud.

For companies, sustainability and purpose can no longer be just buzzwords. They must be deeply embedded in the organization’s culture and operations. If businesses approach leadership the way they have in the past, they’ll struggle to attract and retain top talent.

Attracting talent is one thing, but keeping them is another. If a company brings in a great leader, only to have them leave six months later because they don’t feel connected to the mission, that’s a significant setback. It delays progress on key initiatives and forces the organization to start over.

To truly align with this shift, companies must intentionally define their purpose and demonstrate a genuine commitment to sustainability, because in the future, this will not just be a differentiator; it will be essential for long-term success.

Margaret Jaouadi
Is there anything else that you would like to add to our discussion?

Bjarne Sandager Nielsen
Yes, I’d like to touch on something we’ve discussed briefly—sustainability and purpose. Many companies have traditionally viewed sustainability as a cost, something they had to implement due to legislation or to achieve emission reductions. They often viewed it as a mandatory obligation, similar to carbon reporting, rather than an opportunity.

However, a shift is necessary. If companies view sustainability not as a burden but as a business advantage, they can position themselves more effectively in the market. We took this approach at LM Wind when we decided to go carbon neutral. Instead of seeing it as something forced upon us, we turned it into a strategic advantage – we played offense rather than defense

We didn’t just want the perception of a “green” company—we wanted sustainability to be good business. The most effective way to reduce your emissions is to lower your energy consumption. To achieve this, we implemented a targeted investment program that focused on lowering energy usage, with every investment having a payback period of less than a year.

This approach enabled us to achieve two objectives: we achieved carbon neutrality, and we positively impacted our bottom line. This mindset can have a similar effect across many businesses and sectors. Sustainability doesn’t just have to be a value-driven conversation—it can also be a business discussion.

If sustainability is treated purely as a value discussion, it’s at risk of being abandoned when financial pressures arise, such as changes in ownership or soaring interest rates. However, companies have significantly more control over their future if sustainability is viewed as an opportunity to drive savings or generate positive business outcomes.

Margaret Jaouadi
And the final question, what do you most look forward to in this new role?

Bjarne Sandager Nielsen
The most exciting aspect is the opportunity to see things from the other side of the table. It’s a new world opening up for me—one I experienced multiple times, but from a different perspective. I’ve always been on the execution side, directly involved in running businesses, but now I’ll engage in a more strategic and oversight role.

A parallel to that is why I decided to step down at 60. I have served on several supervisory boards, and I enjoy that way of working, so I wanted to shift my focus toward precisely that. The board’s role is more about inspiration, governance, challenge, and motivation, whereas the management team executes. As one of the professors at INSEAD once said, it’s like visiting someone in a tent: “nose in, but feet out.”

It’s a fascinating perspective, especially after 30 years of hands-on execution. Instead of leading the charge, I’ll evaluate and reflect on the bigger picture. In my previous roles, I spent a significant time making hiring decisions, determining the company’s needs, and identifying the ideal candidate for each position. Now, I’ll do that alongside others, sharing the benefits of my expertise and fresh perspective. I am eager to collaborate on the first C-suite engagement with Pacific International Executive Search’s team.

You can connect with Bjarne Sandager Nielsen on LinkedIn or message him at bjarne.nielsen@pacific-international.com