The Business Systems People

Client

An AS9100-certified aerospace organisation evaluating future Part 21 Subpart G capability.

Results at a glance

• Two strategic routes assessed
• Regulatory and acquisition risks clarified
• Leadership blind spots identified
• Board-level decision supported
• Acquisition route selected
• Structured approval roadmap recommended

The challenge

The organisation approached us with a direct question:

“Can you help us understand how to obtain Part 21 Subpart G approval?”

It was considering two possible routes:

1. Building a new Part 21 Subpart G capability from the ground up
2. Acquiring an organisation that already held the relevant approval

The company had previously engaged another consultancy, but the advice received had been unclear and inconsistent.

A senior leader who had worked with us before recommended The Business Systems People.

Why this required strategic clarity

The organisation was familiar with AS9100 and ISO 9001.

However, Part 21 Subpart G is not simply another management-system certification. It involves specific aviation regulatory requirements, organisational capability, defined responsibilities and formal authority approval.

The leadership team needed to understand not only the documentation involved, but also the operational, legal, organisational and commercial implications of each route.

Our approach

Began with a structured diagnostic

We used a structured diagnostic session to understand:

• The organisation’s intended scope
• Existing capability
• Available resources
• Leadership expectations
• Timescales
• Potential acquisition targets
• Regulatory knowledge
• Organisational dependencies

This revealed that the possible acquisition involved businesses within a wider group and that not every member of the leadership team fully understood the implications of the proposed options.

The diagnostic surfaced issues that informal discussion had missed.

Compared both strategic routes

We prepared a detailed report comparing the two options.

The analysis considered:

• Regulatory obligations
• Capability and competence gaps
• Approval requirements
• Acquisition risk
• Integration challenges
• Organisational responsibilities
• Resource requirements
• Timescales
• Governance
• Certification and approval strategy

The purpose was not to tell leadership what it wanted to hear.

It was to give the team enough clarity to make an informed decision.

Supported the board-level discussion

Following the report, we developed a board-level presentation focused on the preferred acquisition route.

The presentation helped leaders understand that Part 21 Subpart G required a different level of regulatory precision and organisational control from the standards with which they were more familiar.

Questions increased, assumptions were challenged, and responsibilities became clearer.

The outcome

The leadership team selected the acquisition route.

The discussion moved from general interest to a more structured commitment to achieving the required capability.

We recommended that the work be managed as a leadership-driven regulatory project, with:

• Defined ownership
• A clear implementation plan
• Milestones
• Stage-gate reviews
• Evidence requirements
• Resource allocation
• Regulatory alignment
• Independent progress reviews

The organisation agreed with the proposed approach and requested ongoing review support to help maintain alignment as the work progressed.

Why it mattered

Without structured analysis, the organisation risked making a significant strategic decision based on incomplete assumptions.

The diagnostic and options report enabled leadership to understand the consequences before committing resources or progressing an acquisition.

The value was not merely in interpreting requirements.

It was in helping the organisation make the right strategic decision with its eyes open.

Key learning

Regulatory clarity cannot be delegated blindly

Senior leaders must understand the obligations and risks attached to regulatory approval.

Acquisition does not automatically transfer capability

Buying an approved organisation does not remove the need to understand scope, control, competence, integration and regulatory responsibility.

Structure exposes assumptions

A well-designed diagnostic can reveal strategic blind spots that informal meetings fail to uncover.

Approval requires leadership ownership

Regulatory capability cannot be created by the Quality department alone. It requires visible ownership across leadership, operations, engineering, competence and governance.

Considering Part 21 Subpart G approval?

We help aerospace leadership teams assess capability, compare strategic options and build structured plans that align regulatory obligations with operational reality.

“The practical way John supported the business to solve problems and put robust solutions in place was as good as anyone I have worked with in my 40-year career.” Stephen Draper