This one was a long time in the making...Ann and I have been connected through shared networks for a while but as she is incredibly busy leading a major business transformation currently it took some time to get connected. It was worth the wait though- Ann was super honest and provided some great insights as well as practical solutions to some of the challenges (and opportunities) women have in Operations roles. I hope you enjoy reading is as much as I did.
What inspired you to pursue a career in supply chain, particularly your technical specialism?
I was first inspired by the idea that engineering could improve lives at scale. I loved Leonardo da Vinci because he showed that art and science are two sides of the same curiosity: both are about understanding how the world works and imagining how to make it better.
My route into supply chain began more practically: I originally thought I wanted to be a pharmacist (once I realised I might not become the next Leonardo da Vinci or Indiana Jones!) and I started working in a pharmacy when I was 14 to understand the “actual” job. Around that time, a natural disaster struck Brazil and I remember watching bulk medicines being flown in by helicopter to save thousands of lives at once and I saw impact in action.
That image embedded in my brain and it showed me that care is not only delivered one-to-one, it is also delivered through the systems that make essential products safely, reliably and at scale, then get them to the people who need them, when and where they need them. The pandemic reinforced the same lesson very powerfully: the right product, in the right place, at the right time can be life-changing. Technical supply chains matter because it is not simply about moving things from A to B, done well they protect our health, food, hygiene, safety, resilience and quality of life. It is where strategy becomes reality and where technical decisions have immediate human impact.
I have always been fascinated by how complex systems work: how products are made, where bottlenecks sit, how flow improves and how assets, people, data and decisions come together to deliver for customers. My technical specialism is translating engineering depth into operational performance through manufacturing transformation, capital delivery, continuous improvement and sustainable operations. In practical terms, I help complex factories run safely and effectively while improving quality, increasing resilience, reducing waste, cutting energy use and making operations more reliable. I have been lucky enough to have also worked across Future Factory, emerging technology implementation and decarbonisation, including Unilever transformation journeys recognised through WEF Lighthouse status. I work across processes, people and data to help products be made Right First Time in time for customers.
At heart, I became an engineer because I wanted to improve people’s quality of life at scale and I later realised I wanted to invent the future, help prevent and ideally reverse climate damage and impacting supply chains became the place where I could actually do that.
What advice would you give to any young women considering a career in supply chain?
I would say: absolutely go for it, and please do not underestimate how exciting supply chain can be or how much difference you can make!
It is not just trucks, warehouses or spreadsheets - although I have been known to enjoy driving an FLT when needed! It is factories, laboratories, planning rooms, digital control towers, sustainability programmes, engineering projects, procurement, logistics, automation, quality, data, crisis response and leadership. It is one of the few careers where you can understand how a business really works and make a visible difference every day.
My advice would be practical:
- Be curious about how things work.
- Learn the fundamentals: process flow, safety, quality, cost, service, reliability, data, supplier risk and customer value
- Every skill builds on another, even when it doesn't feel important at the time
- Get close to the operation: spend time with operators, engineers, planners, suppliers, customers, drivers and people on the production floor
- Supply chain is a living system, not a spreadsheet. The more you understand the reality the better your decisions will be, and the more you work with people and engage them, the quicker you will hit targets
- Build technical and digital confidence early. AI, analytics, automation, cyber security, digital twins and connected factories are becoming core supply chain skills, not optional extras. You don't need to know everything on day one, but technical credibility will help give you confidence, choices and influence.
- Learn from people who do very different jobs. Some of the best ideas come from unexpected places. Listen carefully, ask questions and stay open to perspectives outside your own function.
- Do not wait until you feel ready. Confidence grows from trying, not from knowing everything. Put your hand up, take the stretch role and back yourself. Some of the best learning happens when you are on the edge of what you think you can do.
- Find mentors, sponsors and allies. Mentors advise you. Sponsors say your name in rooms you are not in. Allies challenge system that exclude people. Careers are rarely built in isolation and the right support can make a real difference.
- Most importantly- do not shrink yourself! Know your subject, be prepared but do not feel you have to copy someone else's style. Be authentic. Calm judgement, empathy, consistency and kindness are powerful leadership skills- sometimes under estimated until there is a crisis!
Where do you see the industry going in five years and what skills will be most important?
Over the next five years, I think supply chain will move further from being seen as a cost or delivery function into becoming a strategic operating system for resilience, growth, sustainability and customer trust.
Efficiency will still matter, but it will not be enough. The strongest supply chains will be intelligent, transparent, low carbon, digitally-enabled and designed to withstand disruption. They will need to respond to geopolitical volatility, climate shocks, cyber risk, supplier fragility, changing regulation and rising customer expectations while still delivering commercially.
We will see much greater use of AI supported planning, digital twins, simulation, predictive maintenance, automated quality inspection, energy analytics, connected factories and smarter decision systems. At the same time, there will be stronger focus on circularity, responsible sourcing, carbon, water, waste, biodiversity and end-to-end visibility from raw material to customer: look up green block chain for a glimpse of that.
However, I do not think the future of supply chain is simply digital. It must remain technical, human and responsible at its core. Technology will accelerate decisions, but people will still decide whether those decisions are ethical, practical and valuable.
The most important skills will be a blend of technical and human capability: systems thinking, AI and data literacy, climate and sustainability literacy, operational excellence, cyber and risk awareness, supplier collaboration, commercial judgement and change leadership.
For me, the future belongs to supply chain leaders who can connect the factory floor with the boardroom. They will understand process, infrastructure, people, data and purpose. They will be comfortable with technology, but not blinded by it. They will know how to improve flow, reduce waste, strengthen resilience and bring people with them through change.
The best supply chains will not simply move products; they will protect trust, improve lives, reduce environmental impact and help businesses thrive in a much more uncertain world.
Were you offered support or mentorship as a woman in this space, and what impact did it have on you?
Yes, I have had excellent mentors, sponsors, role models, teachers and allies, although that support was not always formal, structured or found where I expected it.
One of the biggest lessons I have learnt is that delivery matters, but visibility and sponsorship matter too. Strong performance can open doors, but sponsors help ensure the right people know which doors you are ready to walk through.
Early in my career, the graduate pathway I had signed up to was not in place, so I created another route by moving companies and building my own networks. That taught me to back my judgement, advocate for myself and recognise when it was time to find the next challenge.
It also shaped my belief that visibility matters. People cannot aspire to roles they cannot see or understand careers that are never made relatable. That is why I invest time in making engineering more accessible through STEM Ambassador schools work, LinkedIn, UN Women UK and WES.
For me, engineering needs to be visible and findable: online, in classrooms and through real career stories. It is food systems, healthcare, climate action, digital technology, manufacturing, infrastructure and care at scale. At Unilever, I co-founded a global Women in Supply Chain network because we could not find all the mentors, sponsors and advocates we needed in one place. It grew to more than 1,000 members at launch alone, proving there was real demand for connection, visibility and support.
I also learnt how powerful it is to be backed for new opportunities inside an organisation. Sarah Loftus and the Unilever engineering team saw my passion for sustainability, emerging technology and factory transformation. They knew the work I had already delivered, from piloting new technology to turning around factory performance, and sponsored me into global digital transformation across 130 sites. In return, I delivered a project that had been stalled for two years in just two months. That opportunity changed the direction of my career.
It taught me the difference between mentorship and sponsorship. Mentors help you reflect, understand the unwritten rules and build confidence. Sponsors put your name forward, back your potential and create access to stretch opportunities. Both matter, but sponsorship can change the trajectory of a career.
I have also been shaped by outstanding leaders. Hanneke Faber and Jennifer Han showed me that powerful leadership does not have to be distant. It can be ambitious, commercially sharp, technically curious, deeply human and relatable. Male allies and teachers made a real difference too, helping me understand new technology more deeply when they were the experts and those areas were still new to me. Sometimes allyship is simply someone taking the time to explain the system, share context, invite you into the conversation and build confidence.
The greatest impact of mentorship and sponsorship was not confidence alone. It shaped how I think about leadership, collaboration and responsibility. It made me determined to become the kind of leader I sometimes needed earlier in my career: someone who gives honest feedback, shares knowledge, opens doors and helps others step into bigger rooms before they feel completely ready.
Good sponsorship leaves a legacy. It does not only help one person progress. It builds stronger leaders, better organisations and a responsibility to make the path clearer, fairer and more generous for others.
Have you noticed a shift in how companies support women in supply chain? What still needs to change?
Yes, I have seen a shift. There is far more awareness now around diversity, inclusion, mentoring, flexible working, female talent pipelines, allyship and visible role models than when I started. I’m not always the first or only woman in the room. More companies understand that women in supply chain are not a nice-to-have. They are essential to innovation, resilience, decision quality, customer trust and long-term business performance.
But I would describe it as progress with warning signs, not transformation.
The language has improved, but the lived experience is still uneven. Too much support remains programme-based rather than outcome-based. A company can have networks, mentoring schemes and inclusion campaigns, but if women are not being sponsored into operational roles, retained through mid-career pressure points, promoted transparently and represented in senior decision making, then the system is still leaking talent.
What still needs to change is access to the roles that build power, credibility and progression: factories, engineering projects, transformation programmes, planning leadership, procurement leadership, logistics networks, crisis response, site leadership and P&L accountability. Too often, women are supported into enabling roles but not always sponsored into the operational roles that lead to the top.
Companies also need to remove practical barriers. That means PPE that fits properly, suitable facilities, realistic travel expectations, fair flexibility for site-based careers, transparent promotion criteria, pay equity, menopause and caring support and leaders who understand how bias affects opportunity allocation. Life changes happen to everyone, not only women, and everyone benefits from a more equitable system.
The mid-career issue especially worries me. In supply chain and engineering, this is often the point when women have built deep technical and operational capability, but are also facing the greatest pressure from travel, family, health, caring responsibilities and senior role expectations. If organisations lose women at this stage, they are not just losing individuals, they are losing future site leaders, supply chain directors, COOs and transformation leaders. That matters because engineering is central to the UK’s future economy, security and resilience. To quote EngineeringUK, around 6.4 million people work in engineering and technology in the UK, and around 1 in 4 UK job adverts relate to engineering. The sector shapes our infrastructure, energy systems, manufacturing, digital systems, transport, health, public safety and climate response. Yet only 16.9% of that workforce are women. That shows diversity remains structurally weak in a sector with such significant influence on society. The retention challenge is just as serious: the average age at which women leave the engineering profession is reported as 43. That points to a mid-career systems problem, not simply an early pipeline problem.
We cannot focus only on attracting girls and young women into engineering if we are losing experienced women just as they are ready to step into senior technical, operational and leadership roles. Demand for engineers is rising faster than capability is being built, which makes inclusion, retention and practical skills development strategic priorities, not optional extras.
So yes, support has improved but the next phase has to be about accountability, retention and power. Companies need to ask whether women have equitable access to technical stretch roles, whether they are being sponsored for operational and P&L roles, whether pay and promotion decisions are transparent and whether senior leaders are measured on retention, progression and inclusion.
In the best companies, I have seen support that helps women cope with the system. What we really need is to do the work that changes the system. Support should not just help women survive in supply chain, it should make sure they are seen, stretched, sponsored, fairly rewarded and able to thrive.
What barriers have you faced as a woman in the industry? How did you push through them?
Yes, I have faced barriers, large and small, they have not always been obvious or dramatic. Often, they have been cumulative: being one of very few women in technical or operational spaces, having to prove credibility quickly and repeatedly and balancing expectations around being confident but not too confident, collaborative but still decisive, technical but still likeable.
There is also a difference between being invited into the room and being genuinely heard in the room. I have experienced moments where women were present, but not always given equal weight in the decision. I have also had the experience of speaking first, only for the idea to be credited to a male colleague later. That can be draining, especially in environments where technical authority, informal networks and sponsorship still shape who gets visibility and opportunity.
I pushed through by focusing on substance. I built technical credibility, stayed close to the operation and delivered results. I learnt to anchor my contribution in safety, quality, cost, service, people, data and purpose. In supply chain and manufacturing, credibility comes from understanding the system: the process, the plant, the constraints, the people and the customer impact.
I have also stayed low ego and curious enough to keep learning. The world is changing quickly, and technical leadership requires the humility to keep your ear to the ground, listen to people closest to the work and adapt as technology, operations and expectations evolve.
I have faced career setbacks too. Earlier in my career, I experienced redundancy after putting huge energy into my role, saving the business millions, when the company restructured. At the time, it felt like a major setback because it was hard to separate my sense of purpose from the role itself. Looking back, it became one of the most valuable turning points of my career.
It gave me space to pause, reflect and rediscover what truly motivated me: using engineering to make a positive impact. I invested in learning, built new networks and said yes to opportunities that stretched me. I even used my redundancy money to move with my husband to New Zealand, turning uncertainty into an adventure. That taught me that resilience is not only about bouncing back, it is about bouncing forward and using change as a catalyst for growth.
Over time, I also learnt not to wait for permission. When a pathway did not exist, I looked for another one. When I felt excluded, I found allies. When something was described as difficult, I started asking: what would need to be true for this to work?
I have always been motivated by complex, ambiguous environments. My strengths are around strategy, impact, self-assurance, arranging moving parts and connecting with people. Those qualities have helped me navigate difficult situations, but I have also had to learn to slow down, bring people with me and make space for quieter voices. I did not need to copy someone else’s leadership style to succeed. I could lead with clarity, care, curiosity and courage while still being technically strong, commercially grounded and delivery focused.
So yes, there have been barriers. But they have also made me more intentional, more resilient and more committed to helping other women progress.
At the same time, I do not think the answer should simply be for women to keep pushing through. Organisations need to remove the barriers structurally through sponsorship, fair progression, flexible role design, transparent promotion criteria and real accountability. The goal should not be for every woman to become exceptional at navigating barriers. The goal should be to build an industry where everyone, including women, can thrive.
Personally, what do you think companies could do to attract more women into technical functions of supply chain?
Companies need to make technical supply chain more visible, more accessible and more human. Too many young women still hear supply chain and imagine trucks, warehouses or spreadsheets which doesn’t spark excitement in everyone. They do not always see what it really can be: factories, laboratories, control rooms, digital twins, automation, robotics, sustainable materials, quality systems, decarbonisation, crisis response and global problem solving.
The first thing companies should do is show the real work. Show women leading plants, engineering projects, planning teams, procurement negotiations, logistics networks, digital transformation and sustainability programmes. Show the hard hats, the data, the production lines, the customer impact and the purpose behind the work.
Second, companies need to create more routes in. Not everyone enters through the same door. Technical supply chain needs apprenticeships, graduate schemes, returner routes, career switch pathways, site placements, work experience and mid career conversion opportunities. The route into technical leadership should not depend on knowing the right language or having the perfect linear CV.
Third, companies must give women early access to operational stretch roles. It is not enough to attract women into support or enabling functions. They need experience in factories, engineering projects, planning, procurement, logistics, supplier risk, quality, transformation, crisis response and P&L accountability. Those are the roles that build credibility and lead to senior leadership.
Fourth, companies need to fix the practical barriers. That means PPE designed for women, suitable facilities, safe site environments, realistic travel expectations, flexible shift patterns where possible, transparent promotion criteria and leaders who understand how bias affects who gets offered opportunities.
Fifth, mentoring and sponsorship need to be built into progression, not treated as optional extras. Mentors help women learn the system. Sponsors help them move through it. Women need people who will put them forward, speak their name in succession conversations and back them before they feel completely ready.
Finally, companies should connect technical supply chain to purpose. Many young women care deeply about climate, health, food systems, ethics, technology and social impact. Supply chain is one of the most powerful places to work on all of those things. It is where products are made, resources are used, waste is reduced, carbon is cut, suppliers are influenced and customers are served.
Companies will attract more women when they stop presenting supply chain as a back office function and start showing it for what it really is: a place where engineering, data, sustainability, commercial judgement and human leadership come together. The issue is not that women lack interest. It is that too many companies still fail to make the opportunity visible, the pathway credible and the environment inclusive enough for women to see themselves building a long term career there.
Is there a stereotype about women in technical or operations roles that you would like to break?
Yes. The stereotype I would most like to break is the idea that women in technical and operations roles are somehow less technical, less commercially tough or less suited to high pressure environments. There is still, in some places, a narrow image of what technical credibility looks like where confidence trumps capability. It can be associated with the loudest voice in the room, the most traditional leadership style or the person who appear most naturally at home in a factory, warehouse, engineering review or crisis meeting.
I would challenge that completely. Technical credibility does not come from shouting loudest. It comes from understanding the system, asking the right questions, making evidence-based decisions, staying calm under pressure and consistently delivering results. Some of the strongest operational leaders I have worked with are not the loudest people in the room. They are the people who can see the whole system, connect the detail, build trust and make good decisions when it matters.
I would also challenge the idea that women need to become harder, louder or less human to be taken seriously. You can be collaborative and still be decisive. You can care about people and still hold boundaries and high standards. You can lead with emotional intelligence and still be technically strong.
For me, this matters because modern supply chain and operations need exactly that blend: engineering depth, commercial judgement, systems thinking, resilience, accountability and human leadership. Women are not in technical and operations roles to soften the function: we are there to strengthen it. The stereotype I want to break is that technical leadership has one look, one voice or one style. It does not and ecosystems without diversity of thought are echo chambers. Women belong in technical and operations spaces because we bring capability, judgement, resilience and results, not because we fit an outdated mould.
Are there unique strengths that women can bring to supply chain that can go under recognised?
I would be careful about saying any group (including women) bring the same strengths, because women are not one personality type and people are all unique. That said, I do think some strengths that women often develop, practise or are expected to carry can be under recognised in supply chain.
For me, the biggest one is the ability to connect and see the whole system: people, process, suppliers, customers, risk and long term impact. Supply chain problems are rarely isolated. A planning issue might connect to supplier reliability, asset performance, factory constraints, data quality, inventory policy or customer behaviour. The ability to join those dots is not a soft skill, it is systems intelligence.
I also think women often bring strong relationship based influence. Supply chain rarely works through hierarchy alone. You have to build trust across planning, procurement, manufacturing, engineering, logistics, quality, finance, suppliers and customers. Getting things done through influence, not just authority, is incredibly valuable.
Another under recognised strength is practical empathy. By that I mean understanding how decisions affect the people closest to the work: operators, planners, engineers, drivers, suppliers and customers. A plan can look perfect on a spreadsheet and fail completely in real life. Leaders who listen carefully to the operation and provide safe spaces for people to speak up, often make better informed, safer and more sustainable decisions.
Women can also bring inclusive problem solving: noticing who is missing from the conversation, what perspective is being lost and what risk is not being surfaced. That matters in complex supply chains because weak signals are often visible long before a crisis happens.
In my own career, one of the most important under recognised skills has been translation and I don’t mean just language skills! Translating strategy into factory reality. Translating technical complexity into clear decisions. Translating sustainability goals into engineering practice. Translating data into behaviour change.
That ability to connect the technical, human and strategic parts of supply chain is powerful. It helps organisations move from firefighting to control, from ambition to action and from siloed decisions to better system outcomes.
So yes, I do think women can bring strengths that are under recognised, but I would frame them as leadership strengths rather than gendered traits: systems thinking, collaboration, resilience, operational empathy, long term judgement and the ability to bring people with you through change. Those capabilities deserve to be recognised as core to excellent supply chain leadership, not as nice to have qualities sitting quietly in the background.
What does true inclusion mean to you, not just diversity but inclusion?
Diversity is about who is represented. Inclusion is about who is heard, valued, trusted and able to shape the outcome. True inclusion means people are not just invited into the room, they can speak honestly, challenge safely and contribute fully without having to become someone else to succeed. It means difference is not only tolerated, but genuinely valued and used to make better decisions.
For me, inclusion has five tests: voice, power, belonging, access and design.
1. Can people speak honestly?
2. Can their input change the decision?
3. Can they succeed without pretending to be someone else?
4. Do they get the same opportunities, sponsorship and visibility?
5. Are systems built for different people from the start?
In technical supply chain, inclusion is also a performance issue. If people do not feel safe to raise concerns, quality, safety and reliability suffer. If teams are too similar, blind spots grow. If decisions are made without the people closest to the work, change fails.
That is why true inclusion is not a poster, policy or campaign but the daily experience of work: who gets listened to, who gets developed, who gets stretch roles, who is forgiven for mistakes and who is trusted with the future. For me personally, inclusion means being able to lead with care, clarity, curiosity and courage while still being recognised as technically strong, commercially grounded and operationally capable. It means not being put in the people person box when what I am actually doing is reading the system, surfacing risk, building alignment and making change land.
Diversity is being counted in the system where as inclusion is being able to influence the system. The acid test is are people staying, growing, progressing and able to do their best work without becoming someone else? If the answer is no, the organisation may have diversity, but it does not yet have true inclusion.
Are there any communities or networks that you have worked with that you would recommend to other women in STEM or supply chain functions?
Yes, absolutely. I do believe in service as you get back in abundance what you put in. I would personally recommend WES, WISE and BOOM and LEAD Network, and I would also encourage women to build their own communities where they cannot find what they need. I did this before I found most of the networks just mentioned!
WES, the Women’s Engineering Society, is brilliant for women engineers and allies. It creates visibility, connection, mentoring and professional support across engineering careers. It is especially valuable because it gives women access to a wider technical community beyond their own organisation. Full disclosure, I am a trustee here so get in touch if you want to get involved!
WISE is also important for women in STEM and for organisations that want to improve representation and inclusion in a practical way. It helps make STEM careers more visible and supports employers who want to create better pathways for women to enter, stay and progress.
For supply chain specifically, I would strongly recommend LEAD Network, particularly its Supply Chain Chapter and Digital Chapter as well as country chapters. LEAD is very relevant for women in FMCG, retail, consumer goods, supply chain and digital transformation. BOOM Global Network focused on women where supply chain professionals connect, grow and transform organisations through more inclusive supply chains. It is for women who want a network that speaks directly to supply chain, operations, logistics and leadership and connects you with real people facing the same challenges in real time.
Do not wait for someone else to build the perfect network. If you need mentors, sponsors, advocates or peers, start with what you can influence. Create a small group, a breakfast circle, a lunch and learn, a technical talk, a mentoring pod, a Teams community or a site visit. I have done this many times but most powerfully at Unilever. We created a Women in Supply Chain network because we could not find all the mentors, sponsors and advocates we needed in one place. It became global and grew to around 1,000 members at launch which proved there had been a real thirst and need for it. This lead to the Chief Supply Chain Officer approaching us to be interviewed rather than the other way around! It also later inspired Unilever’s Womenkind network at the most senior levels of the business.
Building a network is not just support work, it is leadership in action. You learn how to influence, convene, communicate, organise, engage senior stakeholders and bring people together. You also attract others who care about the same change. So my advice would be: join the networks that already exist, use them fully and contribute actively but where there is a gap, create what you wish someone had created for you – be the change. Sometimes the most powerful thing you can do is not just find your seat at the table but build a bigger table and bring your community.