It's now my pleasure to hand over to Jamie DuBray, Vice President of Investor Relations. Please go ahead when you're ready.
Thank you. Good morning and welcome to KBR's special investor webcast. Joining me today are Stuart Bradie, President and Chief Executive Officer, and Mark Sopp, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. Stuart and Mark will discuss today's announcement regarding our segment realignment and executive leadership appointments in support of advancing KBR's strategic direction. Please note that we will not be answering any questions related to 2024 financial performance or 2025 guidance today. We will cover these items on our Q4 and full-year earnings call in February. Today's investor presentation is available on the investor section of our website at kbr.com. This discussion includes forward-looking statements reflecting KBR's views about future events and their potential impact on performance, as outlined on slide two.
These matters involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ significantly from these forward-looking statements, as discussed in our most recent Form 10-K and other filings available on our website. This discussion also includes Non-GAAP financial measures that the company believes to be useful metrics for investors. I will now turn the call over to Stuart.
Thank you, Jamie. Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us today, and let me wish you all a Happy New Year. I'm on slide four. During 2024, all around the world, our team of teams lived by our values and executed with excellence, delivering leading, differentiated solutions for our customers in areas of global importance. As a result, KBR is very well positioned going into 2025. We added to our industry-best safety and sustainability performance and our continued commitment to being the best company for our people and delivering for our customers globally. It is easy to see how at KBR we're doing things that matter. Now, during this past year, we made meaningful progress on executing our profitable growth strategy and positioning KBR for continued success, so for example, we enhanced our commercial footprint by adding over 75 additional sales personnel.
We centralized business development for large project pursuits and increased commercial acumen throughout the organization with quite comprehensive training, and we advanced our major projects portfolio. Plaquemines has begun to produce LNG, representing an industry benchmark for speed to market. KBR and our partner, Technip , were selected for the Lake Charles LNG transformation project. Through the year, we delivered seven new ammonia licenses across green, blue, and gray production processes, and in HomeSafe, systems testing for interstate moves was successful, and domestic moves have started clearing the way for the ramp of domestic moves. We expanded our capabilities, as you know, with the acquisition of LinQuest, a leading provider of advanced engineering, data analytics, and digital capabilities for national security and military space missions. With the integration substantially completed, the strategic benefits we're actually achieving today are above our initial expectations.
We executed our segment realignment, implemented cost reduction actions, and announced executive leadership updates, which we'll discuss in detail today. Through the year, we have proactively communicated with our investors to highlight KBR's unique value proposition, some of the key events being our STS Primer webcast in March, which provided an in-depth look at our Sustainable Technology Solutions segment to help investors understand the market drivers, the margin contribution, and the growth factors of this business. And at our investor day in May, we highlighted our core capabilities and differentiated skill sets all across the organization. We shared our digital strategy and discussed growth initiatives for KBR to reach its full potential. And at that event, we also introduced our new long-term financial targets through to 2027. We're also pleased to be recognized for our sustainability leadership and strong corporate culture.
A selected few of our accolades include being named among America's Best Large Employers and World's Top Female-Friendly Employers by Forbes, being recognized as a gold-level Military Friendly employer, and among America's Greenest Companies by Newsweek. 2024 was also a second year of achieving a triple-A MSCI rating, reflecting our strong commitment to managing sustainability risks and opportunities, and as a reminder, 37% of KBR's revenue is enabling sustainability. Now on to slide five. At our core, KBR is a high-end, technically enabled services and technology company with a strong bedrock of engineering, science, and digital capabilities that we deploy in attractive markets globally. These markets are across national security and space, specialty chemicals, energy, and critical infrastructure. All serve globally and increasingly digital. We have successfully transformed KBR to be a more resilient technology and engineering solutions provider aligned to strong secular growth trends. Our strategy is working.
Excluding the episodic impacts of the humanitarian-oriented Operations Allies Welcome Program, OAW, between 2020 and 2023, we have generated double-digit adjusted EBITDA growth for three consecutive years and, importantly, increased our adjusted EBITDA margin by 200 basis points over the same period, and even during this period of heightened growth investment, we generated over $1.25 billion of cumulative free cash flow with a conversion rate of circa 95%. Our differentiated expertise, digital innovation, and focus on sustainability makes us a preferred partner to governments and commercial customers all around the world. On to slide six. To maintain our growth trajectory, it's really important that we must continue advancing. In support of our strategic execution in the second quarter of last year, we announced we would realign our business, and we have completed this work at the end of 2024.
As part of this realignment, which will begin in 2025, we renamed Government Solutions to Mission Technology Solutions. Now, the name Mission Tech was chosen as this better reflects its delivery of high-technology services and solutions to mission-essential programs in government and increasingly commercial end markets, again on a global basis. We eliminated the Government Services International organization and integrated the elements of that business into Mission Tech and Sustainable Tech, and this reduced cost and created meaningful synergy opportunities that we'll discuss in a moment. We also instituted various team realignment actions, which I will discuss in more detail shortly. On to slide seven. This high-level organizational chart shows the key changes in fairly simple terms. Our prior structure is on the left, and the realigned structure is on the right. Our operating segments are now Mission Tech and Sustainable Tech.
Eliminating the Government International business unit, we shifted most elements of that business, consisting of Frazer-Nash Consultancy and the international defense portfolio, both of which have far more commercial end markets, into the Defense and Intel business unit of Mission Tech. And the critical infrastructure business, also formerly of Government International, is now part of Sustainable Tech. On to slide eight. Now, there are three main strategic benefits of a streamlined portfolio. Firstly, these moves better align our capabilities and, importantly, our talent to our customers and end markets. Secondly, these actions enable greater cross-business connectivity, which is already opening up a larger pipeline of opportunities. And thirdly, these moves achieve cost savings and a better cost basis, which will enable cost competitiveness, fuel growth investment, and support our profitability goals as we continue to scale. Now, importantly, we're already seeing the benefits. Let's drill down to each.
I'm on slide nine. The first benefit is better alignment of capabilities and talent to our customers and end markets. Getting the right teams together, delivering the most value to customers with fewer organizational barriers enhances our competitiveness. A customer-focused organization drives customer intimacy, responsiveness, and agility to meet changing needs. Some of the specific actions we have taken toward that end include, within the Defense and Intel, we aligned our air, space, and intel customers under a single SVP to support customer focus on developing next-generation platforms. For example, by having an integrated team, we can now help our customers connect space data direct to the decision-makers in efforts to enable interoperability of Joint All-Domain Command and Control JADC2 systems.
Now, as a contractor of choice, we bring insights from across the array of air, space, and intel customers that not only support mission success, but increases our stickiness and capture of greater market share. We aligned our U.K. and Australia defense teams with our U.S. Army, Navy, and Maritime teams to increase focus on the growing needs of our customers, so for example, by creating internal centers of excellence, we are helping our customers make strategic choices in INDOPACOM to better serve the larger AUKUS and increasingly strategic Pacific defense initiatives. Now, also, within the Army and Navy portfolios, we've aligned both our systems engineering capability and our live virtual and constructive training capabilities to create more value for our customers.
For example, our alignment now has our highly qualified Apache and Chinook pilots who are providing tactical training to our international partners, aligned directly with our teams focused on the future of Army rotary wing systems. Having that operational focus aligned to the same customer that is developing the future systems allows us to provide greater insights to our Army customers for systems, tactics, and mission needs. This is the epitome of domain expertise. In Huntsville, Alabama, we have combined our Army electronic warfare, radio frequency systems, and our Army directed energy programs under a single business leader, which really takes advantage of the product-oriented expertise and specialty prototyping capabilities we acquired with LinQuest. Within our Readiness and Sustainment business, we moved away from a project-focused to a customer-focused approach.
We're already seeing some direct benefits by expanding our adjacent customers, as we've seen with the recent wins with the U.S. Department of State in Iraq. We've expanded our India execution center, enhancing capabilities to deliver complete ammonia technology packages, proprietary equipment, and support engineering for energy security and sustainability projects. This has improved capacity in a cost-focused environment and leverages India's digital expertise. For example, we've created digital models for ammonia plants that speed up investment decisions, saving both time and money. Our team in India now exceeds 2,000 people and has grown double digits in 2024. Now on to slide 10, moving on to the second benefit, which is increasing business connectivity and opening a larger pipeline to additional opportunities. As we move to reduce complexity and break down silos, we have been able to deploy technology-focused capabilities from across KBR to address defined customer needs.
This expanding pipeline of opportunities has shown up within each customer folio to increase our presence in key end markets. We have identified an additional circa $10 billion of cross-business unit type pursuits that combine the customer intimacy of our science and intel customers with our digital asset management capabilities resident in Readiness and Sustainment. As an example, we have a clear focus on cross-selling our global logistics capabilities to multiple customers, including the National Science Foundation and the National Reconnaissance Office. Within specific geographies, such as Dayton, Ohio, at Air Force Materiel Command, we aligned all local business operations under a single division leader who is accountable for increasing our presence there. For example, now AFRL and NASIC, two critical customers, will have far better access to our newly combined LinQuest and KBR digital teams.
Further, the streamlined approach allows us to expand various types of contract vehicles across similar national security growth lines. Within our Science and Space business, we consolidated all of our health-related efforts to drive greater focus on scaling our human performance pipeline. And this was evidenced by a recent win on the Defense Health Agency's Medical Q-C oded Support and Services contract, which will start to bid task orders in 2025. Within the U.K., our Frazer-Nash and U.K. defense businesses are now better aligned, positioning us for growth across defense and nuclear. A good example being the combination of our nuclear safety assurance expertise with our major programs such as Sellafield. Finally, we moved the infrastructure business in the Middle East and Australia into Sustainable Tech. The business models and risk profile are similar, and this has created clear synergy, particularly as we localize direct management.
This will enable more seamless program execution and more cost-effective delivery via leveraging significant in-country capability and our India execution center. For example, in locations like Saudi Arabia and Abu Dhabi, marquee projects like Diriyah Gate in Saudi are now in Sustainable Tech, and this has increased market focus as well as delivery assurance, and these are already paying dividends as we're seeing further opportunities in Diriyah itself and the broader Saudi market. I will now pass it over to Mark to cover the third benefit, cost savings. Mark.
Great. Thank you, Stuart, and good day, everyone. I'll pick up on slide 12. As part of the realignment, we have taken meaningful cost actions, which will help us be more efficient, competitive, and responsive to our customers' budget priorities while also contributing to the delivery of our long-term targets as we continue to scale.
Let me share a few points on the core of these efforts. First up, as Stuart said, we eliminated the Government Solutions International organization to gain greater efficiency and also eliminate redundant costs. In addition, we initiated an enterprise-wide zero-based budgeting approach, which removed substantial costs in both the corporate organization and in business operations. We also reviewed spans and layers of management, consolidating operating divisions wherever it made sense. As one example, as Stuart mentioned earlier, and in relation to our increased new business pipeline, we combined multiple sales groups into a single enterprise growth team, eliminating some management overhead and allowing more resources to be deployed to larger, broader strategic bids. In terms of leveraging digital systems, we drove efficiency by implementing automation and AI into an increasing number of our workflows.
Through our ERP and digitization efforts, we automated billing and procure-to-pay processes, lowering costs and improving speed, and we're using AI for accounting and reporting applications. There's certainly much more to do on this front, but we have good foundational systems, and we're confident we can continue to see improvements as we bump up in economies of scale in the future. We also ensured that where it made sense, we moved the necessary functional support into the segments themselves, making them more self-sufficient. And finally, at the corporate level, we have maintained key functions such as tax, treasury, benefits, IT, and compliance for maximum efficiency, agility, and control. So, in summary, the realignment and cost management actions will generate $30 million in annualized savings. In a cost-reimbursable world, not all of this drops to the bottom line, as you know.
However, we will derive several benefits, including enhanced competitiveness and more investment in growth initiatives, particularly business development. Those benefits together provide meaningful support for delivery on our long-term targets. Okay, over to slide 13. This slide doesn't say much, but back to the broader realignment topic. This does not take effect until fiscal year 2025. But when it does, the elimination of Government Solutions International and its reallocation into Mission Tech and Sustainable Tech will move about $300 million of annualized revenue into Sustainable Tech. So, a $300 million shift to STS. To aid investors in understanding our historical performance in the context of the new organization, we are providing a supplemental schedule with recast segment information going back to 2022 by quarter, together with today's release.
Hopefully, that helps you all out, and we'll update that information through Q4 2024 when we report those earnings next month in February. Over to slide 14. We are reiterating our 2027 long-term financial targets for KBR and also for Mission Tech and Sustainable Tech segments. Specifically, we expect for KBR on a consolidated level, revenues of $11.5 billion+ , adjusted EBITDA of $1.15 billion+ , adjusted EBITDA margin of 10%-11%, and operating cash flow of $700 million+ . For Mission Tech, a revenue compounded annual growth rate of 11%-15% over this period of time and adjusted EBITDA margin of 9%-10%. And for Sustainable Tech, revenue compounded annual growth rate of 11%-15% with adjusted EBITDA margin of approximately 20%. With our realignment work now completed, we enter 2025 in more streamlined and optimized organization.
We have a laser focus on executing a strong 2025 and achieving our 2027 targets and, of course, maximizing shareholder value over the long term. Okay, and with that, I'll now turn it back to Stuart.
Thanks, Mark. And on to slide 15. Last month, we announced key executive appointments to facilitate continued strong execution and enable creative value creation. And I'd like to walk through these leadership changes. Firstly, our Board Chair, General Lester Lyles, announced his retirement effective May 2025. Les has been an invaluable Director during his tenure and especially as our Chair for the past six years. He has been instrumental in guiding KBR's transformation into a global diversified technology solutions leader, and we thank him for his many years of dedicated service. He has personally been a good friend, and I'm grateful for his leadership.
The board appointed myself chair upon Les' retirement, and I'm truly honored by their confidence in me. We will be appointing an independent lead director prior to our annual meeting of stockholders in May. Additionally, I'm excited to announce that Byron Bright has been named Chief Operating Officer for KBR, also effective May 2025. Byron will be responsible for driving business and operational performance across the organization. And this change will ensure an effective span of control and operational focus. As COO, Byron will lead both the Mission Tech and Sustainable Tech businesses, with Jay Ibrahim, President of Sustainable Tech, reporting directly to Byron. Now, other Mission Tech leadership appointments will be made prior to May. With these announcements, not surprisingly, I guess, we've received some questions on succession. So let me be clear.
I remain committed to serving as our President and CEO and have no plans to retire at this juncture. KBR has doubled in size in recent years and has a strong growth outlook. Byron's appointment as COO is an indication of the organization's maturity and the opportunity to drive operational excellence at scale. Byron will ensure we have focused operational oversight to continue to win the right work, deliver corporate strategic initiatives, and ensure we drive consistent P&L execution. He has demonstrated exceptional leadership in his current role, and I am confident in Byron's ability to lead all operations across KBR. Now on to slide 16, and I'll finish with some key takeaways. Now, as 2025 gets underway, we believe our business model provides unique resiliency.
We are starting the year with a very healthy percentage of work under contract, very little concentration risk, little recompete risk, and with an organization that is more lean and agile. We expect that our 2027 growth and margin targets remain firmly in sight. The deliberate moves we have announced will ensure that our capabilities and talent are best aligned with our customers, helping us to remain cost competitive and offer differentiation on a greater scale. These actions have sharpened our execution capabilities and expanded our profitable growth opportunities, supporting our progress towards achieving our strategic objectives. Finally, these efforts align with our vision to continue moving up market and enhance our ability to manage, develop, motivate, and retain a high-end workforce, ultimately delivering attractive returns over time.
And with that, I would be very remiss if I didn't take the opportunity to thank our 37,000 employees all around the world for their dedication and passion for executing with excellence in support of our customers. It is indeed a very exciting time at KBR. So with that, we're happy to take your questions, and I'll now pass the call back to the operator. Thank you.
Thank you. We will now start today's Q&A session. If you would like to ask a question today, please press star followed by one on your telephone keypad. And if you wish to withdraw your question, then it is star followed by two. As a reminder, please only ask one question and one follow-up. Our first question today comes from Brent Thielman from D.A. Davidson. Your line is now open. Please go ahead.
Hey, great. Thanks. Good morning. Stuart, I was curious on the STS segment specifically, what sort of cross-selling or business development opportunities you're seeing as a result of the sort of realigning this critical infrastructure component into that business group?
Yeah, thank you. Thank you. Good question. I think we tried to cover that a bit in the prepared remarks by a specific example. I mean, historically, we've run our business, and it's been run from the U.K. with most of the activity in the Middle East.
As a consequence of shifting the focus and the leadership into the Middle East and actually leveraging our significant and long-standing in-country capability in those markets and our relationships and our standing with customers there, we're starting to see the aperture open up with significant new opportunities, mostly in the project management environment, which we do a lot of in STS already, as you know, with PMC contracts, predominantly again in the Middle East. We're seeing, as you know, quite a level of investment in the Saudi market, particularly in infrastructure, with not only sort of marquee projects like Diriyah Gate, but also in places like NEOM. We've just seen them win the World Cup. If you recall, we did the Qatar Highways project management for all the infrastructure associated with the World Cup in Qatar.
So we're seeing quite a lot of activity coming through, and I think there's more to come through 2025 and beyond.
Okay, great. And then, Mark, the $30 million in expected annual cost savings, I didn't catch the comment, not all of that drops to the bottom line. But should we expect this can sort of be immediately realized in 2025, or does it kind of that full run rate start into next year? Just your thoughts around the timing of that.
A great question, Brent. I would say that we have taken those actions, and they are fully benefiting the company in 2025. How that manifests into the P&L in 2025 will depend on a lot of factors. I did mention the cost-reimbursable piece, how much we reinvest into business development, things like that. And of course, we'll talk about guidance in 2025 in our call in February.
But I want to be very clear that the actions are done and the full benefit from those are in place today. So it's really a question of how the benefits are deployed, and we'll talk more about that in February. But they're all good relative to growth, agility, price competitiveness, if that is something that we feel is important to do over time. I think some of this will drop to the bottom line, as you'd expect. And we'll talk about it in the context of annual guidance and when those times come.
Very good. Thank you.
Our next question today comes from Andrew Kaplowitz from Citigroup. Your line is now open. Please go ahead.
Good morning, everyone. Thanks for the call.
Morning, Andrew.
Stuart, I thought morning. Stuart, I thought one of the more interesting parts of your press release yesterday was in your ending comments, where you said that the structural changes communicated today provide us greater strategic flexibility as we continue to build strength and scale across the organization. Usually, when we hear greater strategic flexibility, we think a higher probability of significant portfolio management, including in your case, more M&A, a larger breakup, sale of STS. Am I interpreting your words correctly? And if I am, what are your updated thoughts regarding if and when it might be the right time for bigger strategic change?
Yes. No, it's a very, very good question. I guess we expected that sort of question, particularly in the context of recent Wall Street Journal articles.
I think what I'd like to say initially, we've repositioned the business, and this restructuring is really the right thing to do going into 2025, and we really want to bed that down. This is sort of phase one of that process, and we really want to see that play out. I do think we've got some uncertainty with the new administration coming in. We've got a fantastic business model that's highly, highly resilient, but we do want to see where the market goes in terms of budget allocations and administration priorities. And we also want to see really the color of money, in a sense, around what happens in the energy market, which is people are very positive about that, but we'd like to see that come to fruition. And obviously, there's some upside to KBR as that progresses.
But in terms of what we do from a strategic valuation perspective, that's something that we do every single year. We've got a very robust strategy process. We've laid that out to the market before. We look at strategic alternatives and growth factors as part of that. We actually review it annually with the board. But we feel the path we're on today is the right path. And we do think that will maximize shareholder value over the longer term right now. Will we look at strategic options into the future? Of course, we will. That's something we do, as I said, every single year and more than once. And we will continue to do that. And there could be different paths into the future, but we think we're on the right course today.
Very helpful. And then, Mark, I know you answered the last question. You don't want to really talk about 2025 now, but it's not remiss on us. You did obviously support the 2027 guidance with the actions that you've taken and the $30 million. What about 2025 in the context of does it give a higher probability that you can do your 11%-15% revenue growth? You can hit your margin targets in 2025. Are you comfortable with consensus as it stands now? Any comments you could give us? Because again, everything was about 2027, but in order to get to 2027, you got to go through 2025.
Yes, Andy. Look, I think everything we're doing each day is targeted to benefit our performance, both short-term, medium-term, and long-term. So we're very deliberate about our long-term targets and the steps it takes to get there. It's a variety of portfolio moves, key hires, repositioning the end markets, and cost structure. And so this will continue. And so I think that, yes, what we have just done should help us in 2025. We absolutely expect that. And as we progress to 2027, and I think I should leave it at that because we'll have a very robust discussion on all the elements of our 2025 plan as bolstered by recent wins in a little over a month.
Appreciate the color, guys.
Our next question today comes from Jerry Revich from Goldman Sachs. Your line is now open. Please proceed with your question.
Yes, hi. Good morning, everyone. And Stuart and Byron, congratulations.
Thank you, Jerry.
Stuart, I'm wondering if we could just expand on the business mix conversation that you just had.
One of the challenges for STS, given the growth profile and the margin profile, it's pretty tough to find comps for that business. How much does that factor into the conversation that you had earlier and that you're continually having with the board on thinking about potential, some of the parts value, and what are some of the potential strategies that you folks can look at to essentially derive the appropriate value for that business? Have you had, if you choose to move down that path, are you seeing good incoming interest on that part of the portfolio?
Yeah, good question, Jerry. Thank you very much. I think there are many considerations around looking at values of breakup opportunity. They include healthy end markets.
I think scale is a big factor and how the businesses and the additional cost and distraction that would actually happen as a consequence of any strategic actions like that. There are issues around the fact that as a smaller subscale company, STS would have challenges around funding and things for large projects, and the current structure we're in today really allows us to be choosy, which I think is ideally in shareholders' interest because it allows us to take projects that make sense for our risk profile and ensure future earnings potential, and so it also, I think, that really timing is very critical. You'd want both businesses to be performing really, really well, and we're a very sort of not just from an STS comp perspective. You're quite right. There is no pure comp in the market.
So it makes it very, very difficult to just point to someone and say, "That's where you should trade." There's no one in the market like a Sustainable Tech standalone business. If you wanted to comp there, it's difficult. So I think we have to assess all of those. We've got outside advisors, as you would expect, that help us with that assessment. And we've been working with them for a number of years, and we'll continue to do so as we look forward. But I'll come back to what I said before. We think we're on the right path today. We think our model is highly resilient and in the best interest of shareholders. There's a lot of things that we'd like to understand. We'd like to really understand, as I said, the new administration's sort of budgetary allocations. We do think we're very well positioned.
Well over 60% of our EBITDA actually is derived from non-U.S. government. That's a key stat, I think, in today's market. And we're very well positioned in markets like military space, intelligence, and defense operability and things like that. So I really feel we're very much at the tip of the spear from the mission side, hence the name Mission Tech. And I do think there is a lot of buoyancy in the Sustainable Tech and international markets. And so, yeah, so highly resilient.
And Stuart and Mark, can you just talk about what opportunities you're seeing from a capital deployment standpoint? You mentioned good visibility on your earnings and cash flow and contract coverage in 2025. Lots of uncertainty on the strategic side, like you mentioned, Stuart.
How interesting is M&A to you versus greater interest in buyback given the pullback in the stock relative to the size of your U.S. government exposure? Can you just talk about how you're thinking about allocating the cash flow in 2025, given those parameters?
Yes, Jerry. It's a timely question. Given all the recent things going on in the world, I would say that heretofore, we've had a very balanced capital allocation strategy. You've seen that with opportunistic M&A. LinQuest being a great example. We're super excited about how that is working out. At the same time, we have done quite a bit of buybacks over time. I think we're over 2% of market cap through Q3 or trailing 12 through Q3, that is. I think that exceeds our peer group. And so we're certainly endorsing our value proposition from that perspective with buybacks.
We pay an attractive dividend as well, and our payout ratio is right in line with peers. And some don't even pay a dividend. So we really believe in that as well. So it's very balanced. Right now, with LinQuest integration still ongoing and going really well, our greater proportional focus would be on buybacks and debt reduction. We exited Q3 with a leverage ratio of 2.6. It's certainly accretive and attractive to knock down debt and execute buybacks at prices we're at today. And so you can expect to have both of those activities going forward with a little less emphasis on M&A right now because of the recent transaction with LinQuest.
Thank you.
Our next question comes from Sangita Jain from KeyBanc. Your line is now open. Please go ahead.
Thank you so much. Good morning. So if I can ask on the M&A front, you're renaming the segment Mission Technology Solutions from Government Solutions. Is that a sign that the restructuring is not done and that you could keep looking at high-grading this segment, maybe through attrition of some of your lower margin portions of this segment?
So no, again, good question. As Mark said, and I think I also said as well, the restructuring is complete as of 2024. We want to see that bedded in and progress and realize the synergies and the upside and the cost savings through 2025 and beyond. So to be clear, that is complete. In terms of portfolio shaping going forward, we continually look at that as part of our strategic process.
I think through the transformation of KBR historically, I think we've been very clear about moving up market, moving into cleaner, technically differentiated and technology areas. We have done so acquisitively and organically, and we'll continue to do that. In terms of, is this done? Yes, it is done.
Great. Another question. It looks like you're moving about $200 million of revenue from GS to STS. I was under the impression it was going to be higher, maybe $500 million-$600 million. Was I wrong in thinking that, or did your thinking change as you were going through this process?
Yeah, I don't know where you got your numbers because I don't think we publicly disclosed what we were doing in terms of values. It was an iterative process, however. We wanted to make sure we got it right.
I'm sure we thought one thing, and then perhaps as we dug in a little bit, we decided to go a different direction for good, solid synergy reasons and span of control reasons, but yeah, I think we have not changed course dramatically. That is for sure. I think we've been pretty considerate in the way that we've thought this through. It makes perfect sense from in terms of customer focus, market focus, and realizing synergies, and I think hopefully we did a good job explaining the upside of those synergies and cost savings through this webcast.
Great. Appreciate it, Stuart. Thank you.
Our next question today comes from Tobey Sommer from Truist Securities. Your line is now open. Please go ahead.
Hey, good morning, everyone. This is Jasper Bibb on for Tobey. I was just hoping you could expand on the potential revenue synergy opportunities with infrastructure moving from, I guess, what's now Mission to the STS segment. And just to clarify, are the customers in that infrastructure business still primarily government, or is that piece more commercial? Thank you.
The contracts are definitely. Thank you. Good question. It's quite difficult to distinguish, particularly in the Middle East, what's a government customer and what's not, because most of the customers are actually owned by national interests, as you're aware. The contracts themselves are very similar to what we do in the Sustainable Tech business. I tried to explain that a little bit in my prepared remarks, but to be clear, the commercial basis is very similar. The contract structures are very similar in terms of project management contracts, and the risk profile is similar.
And so we have a clear understanding of how to manage those projects, both from an execution and a risk management perspective. In terms of the level of activity, I did cover that off, I think, in another question, but just to reiterate, the level of capital spend in the Middle East, and we'll use Saudi as an example, is substantial, hundreds of billions of dollars in new developments from marquee cities to new stadiums to national infrastructure to support all that, like road developments, etc. And that also plays in, I think, the connectivity from a customer base. Most of those customers are linked in some way at a national level and often funded by things like PIF and other entities that are around really sort of the national funding bodies that invest in a broad variety of areas.
We can take advantage through those relationships across the whole Sustainable Tech portfolio. So it's a very, very exciting shift for us. It opens an aperture to a very sizable new market. We will be selective, as we always are, in what we go after because we want to make sure there's quality of earnings, not just volume. And we'll continue to do that with the right discipline. But it's an exciting shift. Our people in country are very, very excited about the additions to the portfolio that they now are driving. We've added more strength of management into some of those areas just to ensure that we realize the value over time. But more to come, obviously, as we progress that through 2025 and 2026.
Makes sense. That's it for us, and thank you. Thanks.
As a reminder, if you would like to ask a question today, please press star followed by one. Our next question comes from Avi Jaroslawicz from UBS. Your line is now now open. Please go ahead.
Hi, good morning, guys. I'm for [audio distortion]. So just want to circle back on the synergies. I know you've discussed already both the benefits of having STS as part of a larger portfolio, easy bonding, and some of the synergies within the segment. But how should we think about the synergies between STS and MTS after this realignment?
So again, a very, very good question. I think I would start off by saying that the whole driver for the structural change was to realize additional synergies and line up customers with capability and talent. And I think we're seeing the benefits of that today. We did talk about making the segments more self-sufficient.
You shouldn't read anything into that other than it's exactly the right thing to do. They're both scaling, and it makes far more sense from a sort of cost-benefit and really actionable support basis to have those capabilities sit inside the segments. So we do think that's exactly the right thing to do. But in terms of synergy between the segments going forward, we've got very strong. We tried to show that in the very last slide. Really, the capabilities that we are looking at digitally are very common across both portfolios. We still see a significant movement in talent between those portfolios. And as we start to look at things like we've just talked about in terms of the infrastructure opportunities in Saudi, we would not have those opportunities without actually the capabilities that we have in the in-country presence.
And that's why we realigned those portions of Government International into STS. And when we start to think about opportunities, which may or may not happen, but if you look at things like Ukraine, if hopefully that conflict is resolved, the opportunity in sort of going in to look at the broader Ukrainian rebuilding opportunity will be a direct synergy across both capabilities that exist in both segments. And so again, that whole prominence of our business in the U.K. defense sector with government, for example, really allows us to take our Sustainable Tech solutions into those markets. So I think there's still significant opportunities. But what we tried to do through this structural realignment was to make sure that we're realizing the synergy inside the segments themselves to the maximum possible extent and drive efficiency and less complexity as a consequence.
Got it. That makes sense. And then, Stuart, I appreciate that you noted your commitment to staying around on KBR. But how is your role going to be changing now that you've appointed a COO? And what makes now the right time to appoint a COO?
Yeah, I think as we started to go through our strategic process this year and we started to look at the scale that we've managed to achieve, while also enhancing margins, by the way, over that time, which is important around quality of earnings, it became clear that we've doubled in size, I think, over the last four years. With that, as organizations mature, we start to look at span of control. We really start to look at how we can really ensure we're driving strong P&L accountability and operational performance.
And as we look at strategic objectives to reposition the business over the longer term, it's essential that we realize execution of those initiatives. And people do get sucked into the day-to-day because we are focused on delivering for customers. So we really wanted to make sure there was attention to making sure that we're doing things that would benefit tomorrow as well as benefit today. And so hence the decision to put Byron into that role. How my role will change? I think initially not hugely, but it will allow more time, I believe, to really look at the strategic future of KBR to make sure that we're really focusing on high-level customer engagements and making sure that we're doing all the things we should do.
If you think about what we've done here, we've really tried to get to be agile and look around corners a little bit and get in front of the market with all the cost initiatives and the repositioning of the business for what we believe is a very resilient solution, even with the incoming administration and whatever uncertainty lies there, we still think we're very well positioned. And so I think I'll be spending more time thinking about tomorrow, which is exactly what I think I should be doing, and Byron spending more time thinking about today, if you like. So I think it really is a span of control solution that makes perfect sense for where we are and our evolution. And as we continue to scale, I think you'll see the benefits of that.
Certainly makes sense to me. Thanks for taking the question.
Thank you.
Our final question today comes from Michael Dudas from Vertical Research. Your line is now open. Please go ahead.
Good morning, Jamie, Mark, Stuart.
Morning, Mike.
Hi, Michael.
Stuart, as Mission Tech has the new charge of running their business, maybe you could share a little bit about how they look at non-U.S. government, other government client base in this realm of trying to expand the aperture and drive those technology solutions to commercial customers. Obviously, space is a logical, which we've talked about in the past, but are there other areas, and that can be very contributable to the organic growth rate in the Mission Tech business as maybe some of that flows away from U.S. federal government agency and government business.
Thanks, Mike. Yeah, very good question. I think our international footprint is very much a key differentiator for KBR. We've talked about that often.
I think the way we've realigned the business to really sort of create centers of excellence to realize the synergy and the capabilities that are becoming, I guess, more open to opportunities as the Five Eyes become closer together in this changing world. And certainly, I think we're very well positioned, particularly opposite, I guess, the near-peer threats of China and Iran and Russia to a lesser extent in the PACOM, obviously. But as you start to look at those developments over time, I think the connectivity that we've created will really give us significant opportunities. And we've already seen some of that, as you know, with where we're positioned in AUKUS. We've already seen that with actually our IP in Iron Stallion, which is commercially available.
We've got a classified version, of course, but commercially available that we see the U.K. and the Australian governments have acquired that to look at what's happening in space. So I do think that also we've got a very strong consulting capability with Frazer-Nash in the U.K., which, again, you're all aware of. That does a lot of work in the government sector, but also in the energy sector, particularly around sustainable solutions and energy transition work, which is still very prominent in the international environment, particularly in Europe. So again, I think our capability sets and our connectivity there will actually play dividends across both of our segments. And then in commercial space, I think we are probably the leader in human space flight. There is far more interest globally in space and sending astronauts from various countries up into space.
We play a key role in that. I think we will see more of that as we go into the future. Whether that comes through NASA or through commercial space, we actually think it doesn't. Our capability can be deployed to either. Who the billpayer is is kind of irrelevant. I think the opportunity set is continuing to grow.
Excellent, Stuart. Thank you.
That concludes the Q&A portion of today's call. I'll now hand back over to Stuart Bradie for closing remarks.
Thank you, Drew. In closing, I'd like to reemphasize KBR's investment thesis as we have taken steps to improve our business even further. KBR is well positioned in attractive growing end markets. We have domain expertise and commercial acumen, very important to deliver advanced solutions for both government and commercial customers globally.
And our depth of experience in both sectors is a key differentiator. Our business model, we've talked about this through this call and through the Q&A, is resilient and is diversified to take advantage of global and local marketplace dynamics while managing risk and volatility. We have a low capital intensity model, and this is coupled with a disciplined balance sheet management and strong execution. And this delivers consistent, attractive returns for our shareholders and will continue to do so over time. So thank you again for joining us in today's call. Thank you again for your interest in KBR, and we look forward to updating you again in our Q4 call in February. Thank you very much.
Thank you all for your participation. That concludes today's call, and you may now disconnect your line.