The Billion-Transaction Problem Everyone Ignores (Until Now)
Episode featuring Ron Healy
Host: Kumar Dattatreyan
---
Kumar: Hi, everyone. Kumar Dattatreyan here with the Meridian Point. And today I'm really pleased to introduce you to Ron Healy, a consultant, writer, and entrepreneur who's turned regulatory complexity into his competitive advantage. Splitting his time between Dublin and Northern Italy, Ron works at the intersection of disruption, innovation, and regulation. Lots of "shuns" there in a row, helping organizations from Ireland's National Railway to Fortune 500 companies navigate change by finding hidden opportunities in compliance requirements.
He's launched EPAL Global, a startup that solves a 2.4 billion Euro problem in cross-border e-commerce by cleverly combining three different regulations into one streamlined solution. But what makes Ron unique is his philosophy. He's an anarchist with a small "a" who believes the status quo should never be assumed correct, and that agile isn't a methodologyāit's really a mindset for adapting to reality. He's here to share how everyday disruption creates innovation opportunities most people miss.
So without further ado, let me pull Ron into the stage here. Thank you so much for joining us today.
Ron: Thank you for the invite.
Kumar: So Ron, before I launch into the questions, maybe you can give us sort of a high level of how did you get here? How did you get to this place where you are now, sort of looking for opportunity in regulations?
Ron: My background is I'm a product manager, a product innovation manager now, but my background is pretty unusual for somebody who ends up in this career. Most people end up going through business analysis, product management as a sort of an obvious path. My background started in transport industry, in London Transport specifically, as a driver and then into management during a time of massive change in London Transport. And obviously change leads to opportunities for innovation. Innovation isn't always great, it isn't always right, but I did notice there were a lot of opportunities for innovation, most of which weren't taken. And that really did stick with me at that time.
I had a career change after about twelve years. I did spend, strangely enough, three years as a sign language interpreter for the Metropolitan Police in the UK, which is very different. But that was sort of an interim thing. But I had a change of career when I decided to go to college in my thirties. And then I went into the computer science industry, if you like. I've always had computers in my background since late seventies, early eighties, but for me they were always just a passing fad almost. It was something to do in my spare time. But after doing a computer science degree, after a few years after that I did a research master's, and then I became a lecturer. So that was essentially my second career. And that gave me a real opportunity to look at what can technology do.
Innovation and transformation is one thing, but technology-driven innovation and transformation opens up a whole different suite of opportunities. After about six years of that, I quit academia and became a business analyst, and then went up through the traditional route, if you likeābusiness analysis, product management, and then product innovation.
But I've always had an abiding fascination with legislation and regulation, always, ever since I was a child. I've always believed that if you understand the rules and you can apply them to your advantage, nobody can complain, particularly the regulators. And these are the guys with the big sticks. So whenever I see an opportunity to use a regulation or legislation to my advantage, that's something that I can't really turn down. So I explore the possibilities. And so that's kind of where, if you like, my set of skillsāthat's pretty unusualāregulation-driven innovation essentially comes from.
Kumar: Yeah, that's fascinating. All of your career changes, your education changes. I meet lots of people on this show like yourself that have gone through some level of change and disruption in their career, but maybe not quite to the extent that you haveāfrom a driver, to a sign language interpreter, to a business analyst, to getting your degree in computer science, to sort of then following a more traditional path to product management. That's really quite interesting.
In some ways it mirrors mine. I started in restaurants and somehow found my way into coaching and agile and leadership roles. But I do credit my experience in the restaurant business for giving me sort of a better sense of customer centricity. Product life cycles in restaurants are measured in minutes, not in hours, weeks, or months or years, you know. It's literally: customer comes into your restaurant and you have to serve them their meal, you know, and you have to do so with a smile and make sure it's of high quality and all of those things.
But anyway, so you found this sort of niche in terms of regulation, right? So you see it as an opportunity to sort of look at the regulations that are in place and how you can take advantage of them. What do most organizations miss when regulations change?
Ron: I think the first thing that happens when regulations change or are proposed to changeāwhich usually happens, you know, there's usually a lead timeābut what normally happens is organizations immediately think, "Oh, no, here we go again. There's a change being forced on us." And that's seen as a negative. My view is that's a positive. And the reason why I see that as a positive is because, well, change is forced on us. How do we take advantage of that? How do we get ahead of the game?
I've had clients in the past who looked at regulations that were five years away and built products that essentially were then the leaders when the regulations changed. And that was illuminating for me. When my earlier clients as a consultant, it was specifically for thatāfour years ahead of a regulation change. And it was a Europe-wide regulation change. So it was an opportunity to say, "Okay, what are we gonna do about this? And when everybody else is panicking, how do we sell them our product?" Because change is going to happen.
And I think that's what most organizations miss, first and foremost, is that it's not going away. You can't bury your head in the sand. So look at it as an opportunity. Get ahead, get early, and understand what does the regulation mean for your existing operations, if relevant. And that's my entry point, I guess, to most of my consultancy workāthat usually there's some regulation that has either changed or is about to change. And somebody, you know, a client will contact me and say, "Okay, what does this mean to us?"
And I wrote an article about that kind of phrase, "minimum compliant product," because for me, that's the first thing you must do. For those of us in product development, we're all familiar with minimum viable product and minimum marketable product. But if a product is not compliant, it's neither viable nor marketable. And so for me, the first thing you need to say is, "Well, is it compliant?"
A lot of products are not compliant with the regulations. Only in the last twenty-four hours, we've had X, formerly Twitter, in trouble with the European Union. That's a product that is both marketable and viable. It's not compliant. So, you know, things like that are kind of where I start. And once an organization or a product is compliant, then you can see, okay, what's the next thing I need to do to be in a competitive advantage?
Kumar: Do you see where in some cases products that are not compliant are still so successful that it doesn't really matter to the organization? Would they just pay the fine, or because of their market share and their influence, they are able to change the regulation?
Ron: Yeah. Or they just ignore the regulation. There's an example that I use somewhat humorously when I'm talking to executives about minimum compliance. It's about whether compliance needs to beāI'm sorry, whether a product needs to be compliant in all circumstances. And I use the example: I don't want my brain surgeon to be an agile brain surgeon. I don't want them to be learning on the job. I want them to have been trained, to have learned everything they need to know before they open up my skull. So there's absolutely a requirement for compliance in certain circumstances.
But in other circumstances, is it really necessary? And that's a debate. But I do think compliance should always be the starting point, and then you can decide whether it's essential or whether it's just merely necessary, or whether you can choose to ignore it. And it's a choice. And if you choose to ignore it, then that's a decision that you make consciously, not unconsciously.
And I think that's where a lot of organizations fall down. They unconsciously decide not to comply because they don't want to think about it, rather than consciously deciding, "We're not going to comply because we believe that the regulation is not fit for purpose." And that's a very different decision.
Kumar: Yeah, I agree. So you mentioned minimum compliant product. Can you talk a little bit more about that? How does it fit with MVP and MMP?
Ron: So minimum viable product, as we all know, is: does the product work? Can we build it? Is it technically feasible? Minimum marketable product is: can we sell it? Is there a market for it? Will people buy it? And minimum compliant product is: is it legal? Can we actually put it into the marketplace without falling foul of regulations?
And I think what happens is that organizations often focus on MVP and MMP and forget about MCP. And then they get into trouble. Or they over-specify MCP and build more than they need to, which costs them time and money. So it's about finding that balance. And that's why I coined the phrase "minimum compliant product"āto remind people that compliance is part of the equation, not something that you add on at the end.
Kumar: That makes a lot of sense. So you're launching EPAL Global. Can you tell us about that? What problem are you solving?
Ron: So EPAL Global is focused on cross-border e-commerce, specifically on the tax and duty calculation problem. When you ship goods across borders, particularly into the European Union, there are complex regulations around how you calculate the taxes and duties that need to be paid. And it's a two-point-four billion consignment per year problem. That's the scale of it.
And what we've done is we've cleverly combined three different regulationsāan EU regulation that requires you to calculate tax on imports, another EU regulation that specifies you need to use a "reasonable method" for calculation, and a German regulation that defines what "reasonable method" means. And I put the three regulations together and said, "Then that's the method I'm going to use in all cases." Because now I've got a standardized method.
And so EPAL Global provides a platform that allows merchants, particularly merchants in the US and the UK who are shipping into the EU, to calculate their tax and duty obligations in a compliant way without having to become experts in European tax law.
Kumar: That's brilliant. So you found this opportunity by essentially reading the regulations and figuring out how to combine them in a way that works?
Ron: Exactly. And I think that's the key thing. Most people see regulations, see a twenty-page document and think, "Oh my god, this is so difficult." I see it as an opportunity. What can I do with this? How can I apply this? And when you start looking at regulations from that perspective, you start to see opportunities that other people miss.
Kumar: So talk to me about the UK Brexit situation. How did that factor into this?
Ron: So when the UK left the European Union, many British companiesāsmall and medium-sized enterprises particularlyāsimply stopped selling into the EU because the compliance burden became too complex. They couldn't figure out how to calculate the taxes and duties. They couldn't figure out how to comply with the regulations. And so they just said, "We're not going to bother."
And that was a huge opportunity lost for those companies. And it was also a huge problem for European consumers who wanted to buy from those British companies. So we saw that as an opportunity. If we can make compliance easy, if we can make it simple for companies to understand what they need to do, then they can continue to trade. And that's what EPAL Global is all about.
Kumar: That's fantastic. So you're enabling trade that would otherwise not happen.
Ron: Exactly. And that's the key thing. We're not trying to help people avoid regulations. We're trying to help people comply with regulations in a way that's efficient and cost-effective.
Kumar: So let's talk about agile for a moment. You mentioned earlier that you don't believe agile is a methodology. Can you expand on that?
Ron: Yeah, so I think agile has become somewhat of a religion for some people. And I'm not a fan of that. I think agile is about adapting to the real world, to the environment, to the outputs, to the outcomes, to the values. It's not about following a specific set of rules or a specific framework.
I've seen organizations that are so focused on being "agile" that they forget to be effective. They're doing stand-ups and retrospectives and all the ceremonies, but they're not actually delivering value. And that's a problem.
For me, agile is whatever works at that time for that project to deliver value. And that might be Scrum, it might be Kanban, it might be waterfall, it might be something completely different. It doesn't matter what you call it. What matters is: are you delivering value? Are you adapting to reality? And if the answer is yes, then you're being agile.
Kumar: I like that. So agile is more of a mindset or a philosophy rather than a specific methodology.
Ron: Exactly. And I think that's where a lot of organizations go wrong. They think that if they implement Scrum or they implement SAFe, then they're agile. But that's not true. You can implement Scrum and still be completely inflexible. You can implement SAFe and still not be delivering value.
So for me, it's not about the framework. It's about the mindset. It's about being willing to adapt, being willing to change, being willing to say, "We tried this, it didn't work, let's try something else." That's what agile is really about.
Kumar: And you mentioned earlier that you don't want your brain surgeon to be agile. Can you explain that?
Ron: Yeah, so I use that example to illustrate that there are times when you don't want to be learning on the job. There are times when you need to have a very structured, very controlled process. And brain surgery is one of those times. I don't want my surgeon to be experimenting on me. I want them to have done it a thousand times before. I want them to know exactly what they're doing.
Similarly, if we're planning a mission to Mars, I don't want the team to be making it up as they go along. I want them to have a very detailed plan. I want them to have thought through every possible scenario. I want them to have backups and contingencies.
So there are times when waterfall, or a very structured approach, is the right approach. And there are times when agile, or a more flexible approach, is the right approach. And I think the key is knowing which approach to use when. And that's where I think a lot of organizations struggle. They think there's one right way to do things, and there isn't. It depends on the context.
Kumar: That's a great point. So agile is on a continuum, not a binary choice.
Ron: Exactly. And I think that's something that the agile community has lost sight of. There's this notion that if you're not doing Scrum, you're not agile. And that's just not true. Agile is a mindset. It's a way of thinking. It's not a specific set of practices.
Kumar: So you're currently working with Ireland's National Railway. Can you talk about that? What are you doing there?
Ron: So I'm working with IarnrĆ³d Ćireann, which is the Irish National Railway. And it's a very interesting client because they don't operate on a profit motive. They operate on a public service obligation. So the traditional business metrics don't apply. They're not trying to maximize profit. They're trying to maximize service to the public.
And that creates a very different set of challenges when it comes to innovation. Because if you can't measure success by profit, how do you measure success? And that's something that we're working through. How do you drive innovation in an organization that doesn't have a profit motive?
And what we're finding is that there are other metrics that matter. Customer satisfaction, service reliability, accessibilityāthese are all things that matter to a public service organization. And so we're focusing on those. We're looking at: how can we improve the customer experience? How can we make the trains more reliable? How can we make the stations more accessible?
And one of the things we've done, for example, is we've installed Bluetooth beacons in train stations to help blind passengers and wheelchair users navigate independently via their smartphone. Previously, they would have needed staff assistance. Now they can do it themselves. And that's a huge improvement in accessibility.
Kumar: That's fantastic. So innovation doesn't always have to be about profit. It can be about service, about accessibility, about making things better for people.
Ron: Exactly. And I think that's an important lesson. A lot of organizations think that innovation is only about making more money. But innovation can be about making things better, making things more accessible, making things more efficient. And those things are valuable even if they don't directly translate to profit.
Kumar: So you call yourself an anarchist with a small "a." What does that mean?
Ron: So it means that I believe the status quo should never be assumed to be correct. Just because something has always been done a certain way doesn't mean it's the right way. And I think organizations fall into that trap all the time. They say, "Well, this is how we've always done it," and they never question it.
For me, everything should be questioned. Every process, every procedure, every policyāeverything should be up for debate. And if you can't justify why you're doing something, then maybe you shouldn't be doing it.
And I think that's where innovation comes from. It comes from questioning the status quo. It comes from saying, "Why do we do it this way? Could we do it differently? Could we do it better?" And if you're not asking those questions, then you're not going to innovate.
Kumar: That's great advice. So you're always questioning, always looking for opportunities to do things differently.
Ron: Exactly. And I think that's the key to staying relevant in a changing world. If you're not willing to question the status quo, if you're not willing to adapt, then you're going to get left behind.
Kumar: So let's talk about your writing. You've written some interesting articles. Can you tell us about a couple of them?
Ron: Sure. So one of my favorite articles is called "Even My Wardrobe is Agile." And it's about how I organize my wardrobe. And the principle is that the most valuable thing is next. So the clothes that I wear most often are the easiest to access. And the clothes that I wear less often are further back in the wardrobe. And it's a very simple principle, but it applies to so many things.
In product management, the most valuable feature should be next. In project management, the most valuable task should be next. It's about prioritizing based on value. And I think that's what agile is really aboutādelivering the most value as quickly as possible.
And I use the wardrobe example because it's something that everyone can relate to. Everyone has a wardrobe. Everyone organizes their clothes in some way. And it makes the concept of agile much more accessible.
Kumar: I love that. So you're making agile accessible by using everyday examples.
Ron: Exactly. And I think that's important. I think the agile community has become too insular, too focused on jargon and frameworks. And we need to make it more accessible to people who aren't agile practitioners. We need to make it relevant to their everyday lives.
Kumar: That's great. So what's another article you've written?
Ron: Another one is called "If a Picture Paints a Thousand Words, What If I Only Have One Thing to Say?" And it's about the over-reliance on visual communication. Everyone talks about how important it is to use visuals, to use diagrams, to use charts. And I don't disagree with that. But sometimes you don't need a picture. Sometimes you just need one sentence.
And I think organizations often over-complicate things. They create these elaborate diagrams and flowcharts when really all they need to say is one thing. And so the article is about the importance of simplicity, of saying what you mean in the clearest, most direct way possible.
Kumar: That's a great point. Sometimes less is more.
Ron: Exactly. And I think that's true in so many areas of business. We over-complicate things. We add layers of complexity when what we really need is simplicity.
Kumar: So you mentioned that you've worked in innovation labs. Can you tell us a story about that?
Ron: Sure. So one of the things that pops into my mind at the moment is in a previous client, when we were creating an innovation lab from scratch for a very large pension fund accounting firmāvery large worldwide name. Building an innovation lab in a very conservative environment. People were afraid to, as you'd expect in an innovation lab, afraid to try things.
So one of the first things I did is I created a status on Jira calledāand the status was "It's Ron's Fault." And so it just became kind of a joke, right? It doesn't matter whose fault it is. Put it down on me. Let's move on. So that became a joke. Whenever anything went wrong anywhere in the business, it's Ron's fault.
But it did make the whole acceptance of things are going to go wrongāthey can put it somewhere. They can put it somewhere and not have to think about it.
Kumar: Yeah, I like that. You definitely left your mark there. I don't know if they're still using that, butā
Ron: I have no idea. They probably blame somebody else now.
Kumar: Yeah, probably. That's interesting. I should try that.
All right, we're going to move into some lightning round questions and then maybe a final sort of wrap-up question. And then maybe if there's anything I didn't ask that you'd like to share, we can go into that. So let's start. These are quick, meant to be quick, fun little answers, right? So, coffee or tea? What's your beverage of choice?
Ron: Italian coffee.
Kumar: Okay. Like cappuccino or justā
Ron: No, straight black Italian coffee.
Kumar: Ah, okay. Very nice. Complete the sentence: The most overrated agile practice isāand then why?
Ron: Scaled Agile Framework. Because it's oversold. Not because it's wrong, but just it's oversold.
Kumar: Okay. All right. What's the next big regulatory change that's going to create massive disruption and opportunity?
Ron: Well, for me, in my world, it's going to be how customs regulations are going to change in the near future. There's going to be customs duties on digital products in the near future. And also marketplaces are going to be liable for collecting and distributing those duties. For me, that's a huge opportunity coming.
For most everyday people, I'd say it's regulations driven to drive AI compliance and so on.
Kumar: Yeah, we never got to AI, but maybe that'll be the last question. What's the single decision or experience that helped shape how you approach innovation work today?
Ron: Oh geez, that's a good question. Deciding to go to college when I was in my early thirties. I didn't finishāthey didn't go to college, you know, when I finished high school, secondary school in Ireland. And the opportunity came in Ireland because we introduced free education at third level, and particularly for people who hadn't had the opportunity earlier.
When I decided to go to college, it completely opened up my eyes to, first of all, how much I already knew because I'd been in the real world. And secondly, how much could be innovated using technology.
Kumar: Very interesting. That's another thing you and I share, except I didn't actually go back and finish. I never finished.
Ron: There's always time. There's always time.
Kumar: Yeah, I'm only sixty. So I still have time.
Ron: When I was lecturing, some of my students were in their eighties.
Kumar: Oh, wow. That's amazing. That's great. All right. One more. What's one daily habit or practice that keeps you seeing opportunities that maybe others miss?
Ron: I've never assumed that what's out there is right. So you mentioned at the start of the conversation that the status quoāfor me, it should always be questioned. It doesn't matter what it is. If you have a thought in your head that's like, "Why is this this way?" Explore it. Explore it. Just explore it for two or three minutes. And if the question still nags a day or two or three later, that's an opportunity for an innovation to be considered. It doesn't necessarily mean it has to become something, but it's worth exploring.
Kumar: Yeah. Yeah, that's great. Love the advice. All right. Final question. We are all being disrupted more and more so by AI. And you mentioned AI regulations, governing AI. What are your thoughts there? And people are talking about AI taking over all the jobs. And of course, it's going to create some. What's going on in your mind about this?
Ron: AI is a tool. It's a technology and it's a tool. When the industrial revolution happened, everybody said it will kill jobs, and it did, but it replaced them with other jobs. When the internet came along, everybody said it will kill jobs, and it did, and it replaced them with other jobs. When electricity came along, everybody said it will kill jobs, and it did, and it replaced them with other jobs. When the motor car came along, it replaced horse-drawn carriages.
So this is the world we live in. It's constant evolution. I think it's a spiral rather than a circle. Every innovation and revolution gets faster and shorter. So for me, it's not about what is AI going to do. It's really about what can we do with AI that we couldn't previously do.
I use AI all the time, but I use it in a controlled manner. Like with the internet, I don't search for something on the internet and assume it's correct. Yeah. Similar to AI. It generates something. I don't assume it's correct. It's a starting point.
Kumar: So that's good advice. I think more people should think of it that way. Although, you know, there are people that think that the singularity is just a few years away, or some people think it's a decade away. Some people think we'll never achieve it. But the pace of development in large language models and other, you know, sort of technologies that allow for AIāit is really changing so rapidly. I mean, it has changed so much just in the last year. So Iāit just makes me wonder and gives me pause.
Ron: As long ago, when I was teaching, I taught a course called Advanced Concepts in Software Engineering and Computer Science. And it combined nanotechnology, biochemical computing, artificial generalized intelligenceāand I can't remember what it all was. It was four different concepts. And essentially, if you combine those four concepts, all of which are real now, it's essentially capable of being a life form.
Yeah. That's a whole different set of questions in your mind. If these things can becomeāself-replication was the fourth one. If these things can become self-replicating conscious life forms, then we have a problem. But until then, we don't.
Kumar: Yeah. I guess we'll see how things go. More change.
Ron: Yeah, exactly. More change.
Kumar: Anything that you'd like to share that I haven't asked you?
Ron: No, I mean the obvious is if anybody has an interest in EPAL Global, they can contact me directly. epalglobal.comācheck out the website or YouTube. I would maybe, for the sake of those who are interestedāmerchants in the US in particular, who are shipping into the EU, or want toāEPAL is essentially, we work on a freemium model. And I'm a great believer in giving people something that they can try a lot before they decide whether it's suitable for them.
So we're covering the cost of the fees for the first ten thousand euros worth of transactions for anybody who signs up in the near future. That will stop after a while. Not sure when, but it essentially gives people, you know, weeks or months to try it for free.
Kumar: That's fantastic. Yeah, I think all the details I shared in the show notes on the various platforms. So if you have any questions for Ron, just please don't hesitate to reach out to him. He's on LinkedIn, he's of courseāyou can get his attention by visiting his website, and I'm sure you can ask him questions and he'll be happy to answer.
Ron: Absolutely. Absolutely.
Kumar: All right. Well, thank you so much for being on the show, Ron. Really a pleasure to speak with you. We'll have to have you back on maybe in a year or sooner to see how things are going with EPAL Global.
Ron: Or see what else has changed.
Kumar: Or what else has changed. Yeah. All right. Thanks so much. Thanks for watching, everyone. See you next week. Bye.
---
END OF TRANSCRIPT
