How to Hire a Transmission Project Director or Senior Project Manager (HV Substations and Overhead Line)

Hiring a Transmission Project Director in the UK in 2026 is one of the most operationally consequential decisions a Great Grid Partnership contractor, DNO, or asset owner makes. The candidate pool at 132kV–400kV with verified NEC4 close-out authority and concurrent portfolio accountability is estimated below 500 individuals nationally. All seven Great Grid Partnership contractors, SSEN Transmission, SSE, and their HVDC framework partners are sourcing from that same population simultaneously. Briefing at programme mobilisation is already too late.

This guide covers exactly what a Transmission Project Director does, how to write a brief that attracts the right candidates, what the interview process should test, what the market pays in 2026, and how LSP Renewables structures the search to give clients the best possible outcome in the tightest specialist market the UK has seen.

Key Takeaways

• The IEA Building the Future Transmission Grid 2025 estimates the global grid workforce must grow by 1.5 million by 2030. In the UK, Ofgem's £24bn RIIO-T3 settlement covers 80 transmission projects, all competing for the same Director-level talent.
• Over 90% of European transmission system operators reported skills shortages directly delaying projects in 2025, per ENTSO-E data cited by EuroEngineerJobs 2026. This is the environment LSP is recruiting into on every Director search.
• Average time-to-hire for a Transmission Project Director on an ASTI framework programme runs 60–90 working days from brief to offer acceptance, per LSP Renewables placement data 2025–2026.
• Brief quality failure - writing a Director-level job description that reads as a large SPM role - extends time-to-hire by 3–4 weeks on average and produces longlists of candidates who cannot perform the commercial authority function the role requires.
• Counter-offer within 48 hours of resignation is now standard at Director level, not exceptional. LSP qualifies motivation before presentation to reduce fall-through rates.

What a Transmission Project Director Actually Does

A Transmission Project Director holds end-to-end delivery accountability for a portfolio of concurrent high-voltage substation and overhead line packages from FEED through energisation. The role operates at 132kV–400kV across EPC, EPCM, and framework delivery structures for DNOs, TNOs, and Great Grid Partnership contractors. At Director level, this means personal sign-off authority on NEC4 Compensation Event settlements above agreed delegation thresholds, CDM Principal Contractor duties across the portfolio, and direct client interface at programme director or framework manager level - not at project manager level.

The distinction matters because it defines who can actually do the job. A Senior Project Manager manages one large or complex project. A Project Director manages the people who manage the projects, holds the commercial position across multiple packages simultaneously, and is personally exposed to the regulatory, safety, and financial consequences if any package fails.

What does a Transmission Project Director do on a daily basis?

Daily responsibilities centre on three areas. First, programme performance governance: reviewing Primavera P6 or MS Project data against contracted milestones, identifying SPI/CPI drift, and determining whether an Early Warning notice is required under NEC4 within contractual timescale. Second, client interface management at programme director level: structured communications covering programme status, commercial position, and risk narrative for an audience that includes DNO or TNO programme directors and Ofgem-regulated asset owners. Third, CDM Principal Contractor obligations across all active packages: reviewing RAMS submissions, permit-to-work logs, and incident reports to ensure the Director's personal statutory duties are met.

Weekly, the Director chairs a cross-package resource review to identify and resolve conflicts between commissioning engineers, outage windows, and shared design resource across concurrent substation and OHL packages. Compensation Event assessments and quotations within delegated authority are reviewed and approved; those above threshold are escalated to the commercial director with a position recommendation. The client programme director receives a commercial report covering earned value, forecast cost at completion, variation register, and programme recovery status.

Monthly, the Director produces a board-level programme report for the executive sponsor, conducts the DNO outage window planning review to confirm energisation milestones for the coming quarter, and reviews the programme team resource plan 90+ days ahead to identify emerging gaps and brief specialist recruiters before vacancies become critical.

What separates a Project Director from a Senior Project Manager in HV delivery?

The separation comes down to three specific capabilities, none of which appear reliably on CVs without direct questioning. First, NEC4 CE close-out authority: a Director settles Compensation Events personally above a delegation threshold without referring to a Commercial Manager for approval. An SPM administers the CE process and refers. Second, portfolio scope: a Director holds accountability for three to six concurrent packages simultaneously with multiple SPMs reporting to them. An SPM manages one project or package and reports upward. Third, client interface level: a Director interfaces at programme director or framework manager level, not at project manager level. The practical consequence is that a Director must translate complex programme dynamics into commercially coherent narrative for an audience that may not be engineers.

The litmus test that distinguishes the two at interview: "What is the largest CE you personally settled without escalation, and what was your delegation authority threshold?" A Director answers immediately with a specific figure. An SPM either gives a figure well below Director threshold or admits they needed sign-off.

The 5 Hard Skills a Transmission Project Director Must Have

Every Director-level brief LSP receives specifies these five skills in some form. The difference between a brief that attracts the right candidates and one that doesn't is how specifically each is defined.

1. NEC3/NEC4 Contract Management - full lifecycle

NEC4 contract management at Director level means more than familiarity with the contract structure. It means personal authority to administer and close out Compensation Events under Clause 60.1, 60.6, and X2, including negotiation of disputed assessments under Clause 65. Director candidates must have held this authority personally on programmes above £10m capital value. Candidates who have administered CEs under a Commercial Manager's sign-off authority are operating at SPM level, regardless of their job title.

2. SAP/AP Authorisation (132kV–400kV)

Senior Authorised Person or Authorised Person status at the correct transmission voltage level is a hard gate for HV construction and outage management roles. Voltage level is not interchangeable: SAP at 33kV does not qualify a candidate for a 400kV programme. LSP confirms authorisation status, voltage level, authorising body, and currency directly with candidates before presentation. Briefs that list SAP as a desirable rather than mandatory generate longlists who cannot perform the safety-critical function the role requires.

3. Primavera P6 / MS Project - EVM governance

Director-level candidates are expected to govern P6 programmes, not just produce them. Earned value management proficiency - specifically Schedule Performance Index, Cost Performance Index, and To-Complete Performance Index - is the baseline for commercial reporting to client programme directors at GGP. The ability to read an SPI trending below 0.85 and translate that into a programme recovery narrative before the client raises it is the practical capability being tested.

4. CDM Regulations 2015 - Principal Contractor duties

CDM Principal Contractor duty at Director level means personal accountability for the Construction Phase Plan, pre-construction information pack, F10 submission to HSE, and site safety governance across all active packages. Candidates who have awareness of CDM obligations without having held the PC duty personally cannot carry the statutory accountability the role requires on ASTI framework programmes.

5. EPC/EPCM Programme Delivery - FEED to energisation at 132kV–400kV

End-to-end delivery accountability across AIS/GIS substations, transformers, busbars, earthing systems, civil and structural scope, and OHL structure design and sag-tension coordination. Project values above £30m at Director level. Black and Veatch's Director specification requires "$50m+ contract negotiation experience" - the UK equivalent threshold for GGP framework roles runs at approximately £30m–£50m combined portfolio value.

The 5 Soft Skills That Decide Whether a Director Succeeds or Fails

Technical qualifications get candidates to interview. These five capabilities decide whether a Director actually delivers on a live ASTI programme - and whether the client relationship survives the programme.

1. DNO/TNO client interface at programme level

Managing the relationship at programme director or framework manager level through periods of schedule pressure, variation, and commercial escalation. Missed outage windows on 400kV systems take months to recover. A Director who cannot read the DNO client's internal regulatory pressures - RIIO-T3 milestones, Ofgem reporting obligations, constraint payment exposure - cannot manage the interface in a way that protects either party's commercial position.

2. Supply chain performance management across concurrent packages

Managing EPC subcontractors, primary plant OEMs (transformers, switchgear, cable), and specialist subcontractors (civil, commissioning, protection testing) across three to six live packages simultaneously. This is the most frequently failed capability in Director-level interviews at LSP. Candidates confuse the complexity of a single large project with genuine portfolio accountability across concurrent packages with independent supply chains.

3. Programme recovery leadership

Diagnosing early warning signals - EVM SPI trending below 0.85, design freeze slippage, OEM delivery risk, resource conflict - before the client detects deterioration, then presenting a credible recovery programme proactively. The IEA World Energy Employment 2025 report documents that over 60% of energy companies reported labour shortages causing timeline pressure in 2025. Recovery scenarios are now routine, not exceptional. Directors who can detect them early and manage both the commercial and programme response command a premium.

4. Executive-level stakeholder communication

Presenting programme status, commercial outturn, risk register, and variation position to executive sponsors, Ofgem representatives, and DNO/TNO senior clients. This is not presentation skill - it is the ability to translate complex programme dynamics into a commercially coherent narrative for an audience that may not be engineers. Directors who frame bad news in a commercially uncontrolled way typically trigger client escalation that damages the programme relationship permanently.

5. Commercial risk negotiation under programme distress

Holding and settling NEC4 commercial positions during recovery scenarios without surrendering variation entitlement or accepting time-at-large arguments without contractual basis. The most commercially damaging Director hiring failure is a candidate who concedes variation entitlement under client pressure when the contractor has a legitimate NEC4 position, destroying programme margin at a point when recovery is most difficult.

How to Write a Transmission Project Director Brief That Works

Over 60% of the Director-level briefs LSP received in 2025 and 2026 produced longlist failures. The pattern is consistent: the brief lists SAP authorisation as a differentiator (it is a threshold), fails to specify delegated commercial authority, and doesn't define portfolio scope. The result is that qualified Directors self-select out because the brief reads as a large SPM role, and senior SPMs apply in numbers because the brief matches their profile. The shortlist fails at the commercial authority question at interview.

What to specify to attract the right candidates

A brief that attracts Director-grade candidates specifies: the number of concurrent packages or combined programme value the role is accountable for; the delegated CE settlement authority threshold (the financial value the Director can settle without escalation); the client interface level (programme director or framework manager, not "stakeholder management"); and the voltage level and technology scope (AIS, GIS, OHL, cable, converter - these are not interchangeable in candidate terms).

Replace "NEC4 experience required" with "holds personal authority to settle NEC4 Compensation Event disputes above £X without Commercial Manager sign-off." Replace "stakeholder management skills" with "direct interface with DNO/TNO programme director across outage window negotiation and commercial escalation." The specificity doesn't narrow the pool - it filters it correctly.

LSP provides a written brief consultation before any Director search commences. This takes approximately one hour and reduces average time-to-hire by 3–4 weeks by producing a brief that the right candidates recognise as being written for them, not for someone one grade below.

Interview Questions and What Good Answers Look Like

The five questions below test the five capabilities that separate Directors from senior SPMs. Each question is designed to be unanswerable in a compelling way by a candidate who doesn't have the actual experience it tests. Use all five in sequence.

Q1: Take me through the most complex NEC4 Compensation Event you personally settled. What was the event, what was the dispute, what did you settle for, and how long did it take to close?

What a good answer looks like: The candidate names the programme and contract value immediately. They identify the CE category (Clause 60.1 instructed variation, X2 schedule change, 60.6 notification failure) and describe the initial contractor position and the client's counter-position. They explain the mechanism of disagreement - quantification method, programme impact evidence, forecast Defined Cost dispute - and the negotiation approach. They quote the actual settlement amount and acknowledge where ground was conceded and why. Strong candidates demonstrate understanding of what happens if the dispute escalates to adjudication under Clause 90 and why they structured the settlement to avoid that outcome.

Red flags: "I managed CEs on a daily basis" without ability to name a specific one. Answer describes the EW and quotation process but stops at the assessment without close-out. The Commercial Manager handled the negotiation. Candidate cannot recall the CE category or confuses compensation events with variations under NEC2. "Significant" value referenced without a figure.

Q2: Describe the largest portfolio of concurrent HV packages you have personally held overall accountability for. How many packages, what combined value, what was your governance structure, and give me a specific example of a resource conflict between packages that you resolved.

What a good answer looks like: The candidate specifies the number of concurrent packages (Director-ready: 3+, ideally 5+) and gives a combined capital value (Director-ready: £30m+). They describe the governance mechanism they designed: weekly cross-package resource review, shared risk register, portfolio-level commercial reporting cadence, and escalation protocol to the client programme director. They name a specific resource conflict - commissioning engineer pool required simultaneously on two packages, outage window clash between substation A and OHL route B - and describe the resolution approach and commercial outcome. Strong candidates describe a governance structure they designed, not one they inherited.

Red flags: One large, complex single project described as a portfolio. Portfolio scope is a claimed title rather than described accountability. No resource conflict example. Governance described as attendance at the client's framework meetings. Candidate cannot give combined capital value. Complexity conflated with portfolio breadth.

Q3: Walk me through the first 90 days on a 400kV substation programme - contract award through pre-construction mobilisation. What are your first ten actions and in what order?

What a good answer looks like: 1. Commercial baseline review - programme against contract. 2. Governance and reporting structure established - reporting lines and escalation paths. 3. Key appointments confirmed - Design Manager, Commercial Manager, HSE Manager, CDM Coordinator. 4. Pre-construction information pack initiated with Principal Designer. 5. CDM F10 submitted to HSE. 6. DNO outage window dialogue opened at programme director level - 90 days is not too early. 7. Supply chain pre-qualification commenced - primary plant OEMs, civil contractor, commissioning specialist. 8. Design programme established with FEED-to-IFC milestones and design freeze dates. 9. Client programme director relationship structured - reporting cadence and escalation protocol. 10. Risk register built with commercial and programme risk owners assigned. Strong candidates complete this list in under three minutes without prompting.

Red flags: Goes straight to procurement or construction. CDM F10 appears in week 8 or later. No DNO outage window contact in the first 90 days. Supply chain pre-qualification begins only after design is complete. Risk register is generic rather than programme-specific.

Q4: Give me a specific example where you identified a programme was at risk of missing an energisation milestone before the client became aware. What was the leading indicator, what did you do, and what was the commercial outcome?

What a good answer looks like: The candidate names the programme and milestone. They identify the specific leading indicator: design freeze slippage three weeks ahead of schedule, EVM SPI below 0.85 for two consecutive periods, OEM delivery risk flagged in the risk register but not escalated to client, or a resource gap identified during pre-construction programme review. They describe the action taken before client detection: internal recovery programme drafted, proactive client communication structured as a risk notification under NEC4, supply chain re-sequenced. The commercial outcome: Extension of Time claimed under CE, programme delivered within the revised baseline, no liquidated damages incurred. Strong candidates demonstrate they managed the distinction between informing the client and losing the commercial position - they did both.

Red flags: Recovery was reactive, triggered by a client question. The candidate describes solving a problem the client already identified. Answer focuses on team motivation during recovery rather than commercial and programme mechanics. No NEC4 CE mechanism used in the recovery. Candidate cannot name the specific leading indicator.

Q5: Six months into an ASTI framework programme, your lead SPM resigns. The energisation window is in 14 weeks. Walk me through every step of your response in the first 48 hours.

What a good answer looks like: Hours 1–4: Internal coverage assessment - which team members can step up, which packages can be safely deprioritised without DNO impact. Hours 4–8: Call a specialist T&D recruiter with a warm candidate pipeline - not a job board. A Director without a pre-existing recruiter relationship at this moment has already failed the planning test. Hours 8–16: Proactive call to the DNO outage window manager giving early warning - not waiting for the programme impact to become visible. Hours 16–24: Supply chain brief on package prioritisation if resource reallocation is needed. Hours 24–48: Contract the replacement SPM or agree a secondment - a Director who cannot mobilise a qualified replacement within 10 working days on a retained recruiter relationship has a structural gap in their risk management. Strong candidates name the recruiter relationship explicitly.

Red flags: First action is to post on LinkedIn. No mention of proactive DNO communication. No pre-existing recruiter relationship. Internal coverage assessment not completed before external search. Candidate says they would manage it themselves - this indicates 14 weeks to energisation will be seriously at risk.

The 3 Recruitment Obstacles and How LSP Addresses Each

Obstacle 1: Simultaneous Great Grid Partnership competition

All seven Great Grid Partnership contractors - Laing O'Rourke, Murphy, Morgan Sindall Infrastructure, Morrison Energy Services, Omexom Taylor Woodrow, WSP, and AECOM Arup JV - plus SSEN Transmission and SSE framework teams are sourcing Director-level T&D project management from the same candidate population in 2026. The IEA Building the Future Transmission Grid 2025 report identifies skilled labour as a supply-chain constraint co-equal with materials, cable, and transformers. PwC's Green Jobs Barometer identifies a UK green skills gap of approximately 200,000 workers, with grid and HV professions among the most acute categories. Over 90% of European TSOs reported skill shortages directly delaying projects in 2025 per ENTSO-E data.

The reality: The active Director-level T&D project management population in the UK at 132kV–400kV is estimated below 500 individuals nationally. All seven GGP contractors plus SSEN and SSE framework teams are sourcing from this group simultaneously from the same Birmingham colocation hub.

LSP's approach: Pipeline recruitment - not reactive vacancy-filling. LSP identifies and relationship-manages Director-level candidates between active vacancies, not cold when a search opens. Searches briefed 6–12 months before programme mobilisation are completed before competitor searches begin. Retained engagement locks candidate exclusivity before the open market is engaged.

The outcome: LSP shortlists are presented before competing approaches have reached the candidate pool. Counter-offer risk is materially reduced because the approach is made before the candidate has entered active search mode.

Obstacle 2: Counter-offer frequency and retention pressure

£110,000–£145,000 permanent candidates and £650–£850 per day outside IR35 candidates are receiving retention offers from current employers within 48 hours of resignation. The APM Salary and Market Trends Survey 2025 records a 10% average salary increase across the profession, with energy and utilities the highest-paying sector at £62,500 average - well below the T&D Director band, confirming this cohort is in a premium retention tier. The IEA World Energy Employment 2025 confirms 2.4 experienced energy workers nearing retirement for every new entrant under 25, meaning employers know replacement is slow and expensive and have strong financial incentive to counter-offer at Director level.

The reality: Counter-offer within 48 hours of resignation is standard at Director level. Candidates motivated primarily by financial uplift accept counter-offers at rates that make them a poor investment for the hiring client.

LSP's approach: Motivation qualification before shortlisting. LSP assesses the specific driver for each candidate's willingness to consider a move before they are presented. Financial motivation alone is flagged as counter-offer risk. Candidates moving for programme quality, career development, or employer stability convert at materially higher rates. Offer coaching and counter-offer conversation support is standard on all retained Director placements.

The outcome: Clients receive a motivation-qualified shortlist, not an availability-qualified one. LSP-managed Director placements have lower fall-through rates from counter-offer than open-market hires at equivalent seniority.

Obstacle 3: Brief quality failure

LSP analysis of T&D Director briefs received in 2025 and 2026 shows over 60% list SAP authorisation as a Director differentiator (it is an SPM threshold), fail to specify delegated commercial authority, and don't define portfolio scope. The consequence: qualified Directors self-select out; senior SPMs populate the longlist; the shortlist fails at the CE authority question at interview. Time-to-hire extension from brief quality failure averages 3–4 weeks. The IEA Building the Future Transmission Grid 2025 explicitly identifies skilled labour as a programme cost driver - every week of extended search has a quantifiable impact on the programme.

The reality: A brief written at SPM level produces an SPM longlist and misses Directors entirely. This is the most preventable recruitment failure LSP sees at Director level.

LSP's approach: Written brief consultation before any search commences. LSP separates threshold requirements from genuine Director-level differentiators and rewrites the role specification in capability language: "holds delegated authority to settle CE disputes above £X without escalation" rather than "NEC4 experience required."

The outcome: Longlist quality improves in the first shortlisting round. The search timeline reduces by 3–4 weeks. Candidates presented are assessable against the role requirements.

How LSP Recruits Transmission Project Directors: 7 Steps

We structure every Director-level T&D search in seven stages. The sequence matters - compressing or skipping any stage typically extends the overall timeline rather than reducing it.

Step 1: Brief consultation. We review the role specification before going to market, separate threshold requirements from Director-level differentiators, and produce a rewritten brief in capability language. This takes approximately one hour and prevents the 3–4 week extension that brief quality failure causes.

Step 2: Market assessment. Before candidate engagement begins, we provide: the current availability profile of Directors matching the brief; which GGP contractors are actively searching for the same profile and at what commercial package; a time-to-hire forecast calibrated against current market conditions; and salary and day rate parameters benchmarked against placements made in the previous 90 days.

Step 3: Retained search mandate. Director-level T&D candidates are almost entirely passive. They do not respond to job boards and do not engage with cold approaches from recruiters they don't know. We engage them through established relationships maintained between active vacancies. A contingency model does not justify the research investment this requires.

Step 4: Candidate pipeline mapping. We identify the full population of candidates who match the brief before engagement begins. This distinguishes who is available from who is suitable and allows us to present motivation-qualified candidates rather than availability-qualified candidates.

Step 5: Motivation qualification. We assess the specific driver for each candidate's willingness to consider a move. Financial motivation alone is flagged as counter-offer risk before presentation. A written motivation assessment accompanies each shortlisted candidate.

Step 6: Named reserve. On programmes above £30m, we identify and hold a second-choice Director candidate through the offer and notice period process. The IEA World Energy Employment 2025 identifies grid professions as among the steepest demographic challenge sectors, with retirements outnumbering new entrants at a ratio of 1.4:1. Candidate fall-through after offer acceptance is an operationally material risk. Clients with a named reserve recover in 2–3 weeks. Clients restarting from scratch lose 6–10 weeks.

Step 7: Offer and notice period management. We manage the full offer process including package negotiation, counter-offer coaching conversation, and notice period risk assessment. At Director level, these are the three points at which an unmanaged process most frequently loses a placement that a managed process completes.

How Much a Transmission Project Director Earns in 2026

Project Directors at 132kV–400kV earn £110,000–£145,000 permanently in the UK in 2026, with outside IR35 contract day rates of £650–£850. HVDC specialist Directors command £750–£1,000 per day given the acute supply constraint in that specific discipline. Regional variation is material: London and South East rates run £120,000–£155,000 permanently; Birmingham GGP hub rates run £110,000–£145,000; Scotland EGL corridor rates run £108,000–£140,000.

A full breakdown of salary tables, contract vs permanent analysis, and benefits benchmarking appears in our 2026 T&D salary guide. The overview of how EPC contract risk allocation affects candidate selection is covered in depth in our analysis of how EPC contract risk allocation changes the type of candidates you should hire. For context on typical hiring timelines in the HV disciplines that sit below Director level, our analysis of how long it takes to hire protection and control engineers for high-voltage projects sets out the market dynamics that apply across the T&D discipline.

LSP's transmission and distribution recruitment team places Project Directors, Senior Project Managers, and Programme Directors across National Grid ET, SSEN Transmission, SSE, and the Great Grid Partnership EPC supply chain.

Frequently Asked Questions

How long does it take to recruit a Transmission Project Director?

Average time-to-hire for a T&D Project Director on an ASTI framework programme runs 60–90 working days from brief to offer acceptance per LSP Renewables placement data 2025–2026. Brief quality failure adds 3–4 weeks. Searches briefed 6–12 months before programme mobilisation consistently complete before the programme mobilisation date. Searches briefed at mobilisation frequently do not.

What is the difference between a Transmission Project Director and a Senior Project Manager?

A Transmission Project Director holds delegated NEC4 CE settlement authority above a defined financial threshold, manages a portfolio of 3–6 concurrent substation or OHL packages with multiple SPMs reporting to them, and interfaces with the client at programme director or framework manager level. A Senior Project Manager manages one project or package, reports into a Director, and does not hold independent CE close-out authority above SPM-level thresholds.

Does LSP Renewables place Transmission Project Directors on contract as well as permanent?

Yes. LSP places Transmission Project Directors on permanent, fixed-term, and outside IR35 contract bases. Outside IR35 contract is the dominant placement type on ASTI framework programmes given the commercial structure GGP contractors use for senior project leadership. We provide IR35 status assessments and manage the full contract compliance process. Day rates for Project Directors run £650–£850 outside IR35; HVDC specialist Directors command £750–£1,000.

Should I use a retained or contingency search for a Transmission Project Director?

Retained search is the correct model at Director level. The candidate population is passive, nationally known, and consistently in simultaneous demand from multiple framework contractors. A contingency model does not allocate the research investment required to identify and approach passive Director-level candidates who are not responding to job boards. Retained engagement with LSP also provides motivation qualification, market assessment, and named reserve management - none of which contingency models include.

What qualifications does a Transmission Project Director need?

A BEng or MEng in electrical engineering or a closely related discipline is standard, though equivalent HNC plus extensive HV delivery experience is accepted at some EPC contractors. SAP authorisation at the relevant voltage level (132kV–400kV) is mandatory for construction roles. NEC4 commercial knowledge is increasingly expected. APM Chartered Project Professional status adds £10,000–£15,000 to base salary and is valued particularly in asset owner and consultancy roles.

Ready to brief a Transmission Project Director vacancy?

Our transmission and distribution recruitment team places Project Directors, Senior Project Managers, and Programme Directors across National Grid ET, SSEN Transmission, SSE, and the Great Grid Partnership EPC supply chain. We also offer retained search and selection specifically structured for Director-level T&D searches.