My contribution to a board
I would bring practical experience of how a software company's public promise becomes a funded operating obligation. A board may see a product launch, customer count or contract value without seeing the maintenance and user conditions behind it. I can help directors ask for that missing connection. My contribution would be strongest alongside financial, legal and sector expertise rather than as a substitute for them. I have one executive directorship and understand that an external non-executive appointment requires a different discipline. I would not become the company's informal product manager or claim to represent all disabled users. I would ask how management obtains evidence, makes trade-offs and corrects commitments when the evidence changes. A useful board discussion should leave accountability clearer and the decision better informed, without creating a parallel operating team around one director's preferred method.
My first year on a board
For an external seat, I would start by learning how the company earns revenue and what customers reasonably understand its products to do. With the chair, I would arrange discussions with product, customer-service, finance and commercial leaders and examine a few representative commitments. I would read existing assurance and complaint material before asking for new reports. My early questions would test whether directors and management share the same understanding of an obligation, not whether the company uses my employer's processes. I would seek feedback on where my operating experience helps and where it risks becoming too detailed. Twenty days is a proposed annual allowance including preparation and induction, subject to consent and the actual board calendar. A significant transaction or incident could require more time, so the appointment discussion would need to address that possibility before either side relies on my availability.
Conflicts and their management
Tervaqi sells software, works with partners and purchases specialist technology services. An external company could be a customer, supplier, reseller or competitor even where its main sector appears different. I would disclose those relationships and my employment and financial interests before receiving sensitive material. I would not bring customer research, product roadmaps or contract terms from my employer into another boardroom. Nor would I use a board appointment to create a sales route for our products. Advice on independence and any required exclusions should relate to the actual company and role. If the conflicts repeatedly prevented me from considering its core product or commercial decisions, I would regard that as a reason not to accept the seat. My current directorship and unfinished proficiency preparation must remain visible in the assessment rather than be hidden behind a general statement that I am board-ready.
My independence statement
I am an executive director of my employer, not independent there. Any external appointment would require assessment of employment, share interests and commercial relationships for the particular company.
Judgement in practice
01A product correction belongs in the investment and revenue discussion
The export case required ₹63 lakh and delayed ₹1.1 crore of planned upgrades. A board needed to understand both the user barrier and the commercial consequence. I would ask management to distinguish repair of an existing promise from development of a new feature, explain the users affected and describe the evidence that would support completion. The board should also know what remains unsupported after the correction. It should not infer universal accessibility from a successful demonstration or require directors to approve individual technical changes. My own experience is useful because the decision involved a near-term sacrifice that could not honestly be labelled a certain financial return. Oversight should make that trade-off explicit and ensure that the approved response has an accountable owner, resources and a clear route for reporting material changes.
02Contract value is incomplete without the future work it buys
The reseller proposal showed how a large sale could include an obligation with no practical end point. In an oversight role, I would ask which assumptions about duration, demand and supported versions are necessary for the proposed economics to hold. Qualified legal and financial input should inform that account. A board does not need to negotiate every service clause, but it should understand when an agreement changes the company's risk or capacity materially. I would also ask management to describe the opportunity lost by narrowing the terms. The ₹1.7 crore alternative was a smaller sale, not a disguised saving of the difference from ₹4.2 crore. That distinction matters when directors assess whether the company has made a sound choice or merely found a reassuring way to describe a disappointing result.
Committee contribution
Chair and member readiness| Capacity | Committees |
|---|
| Ready to join | Product and technology oversight committee where constituted · Risk committee with a software or service-obligation remit |
|---|
Capacity and preferences
- Time available
- 20 days per year
- Current directorships
- 1
- Sectors
- Workplace software · Digital learning tools · Professional technology services outside competing relationships
- Company type
- Unlisted product business with an experienced chair and a clear separation of executive and non-executive roles
- Company stage
- Moving from founder-led product decisions toward a broader leadership and governance structure
The seat I am pursuing
I would consider one non-executive appointment in a product or professional-technology business whose board wants a stronger connection between user evidence and commercial commitments. The company should have an experienced chair, access to specialist advice and a clear expectation of the contribution sought. I would prefer a committee-member role before assuming chair responsibility in an unfamiliar setting. The appointment should support collective oversight, not depend on me personally approving accessibility claims or solving product problems. I would complete the preparation and eligibility work relevant to the seat before accepting it. An appropriate company would value questions about whose task is supported, what the promise costs to maintain and how evidence reaches the board. I would decline a role whose calendar or conflicts made those responsibilities incompatible with my continuing executive obligations.
Board and committee exposure
Served as a director
Tervaqi Accessibility Systems
Board of directors; executive director
April 2021–present
Formal executive-director appointment alongside CEO responsibilities; presents operating plans, product investment and material commercial proposals. No independent-director status claimed.
Governance learning and readiness
IICA Independent Directors’ Databank: Registered
Registered with the IICA Independent Directors' Databank; relevant proficiency preparation is in progress. Registration is not presented as completed eligibility assessment or an exemption.
- Director induction with the company secretary following the 2021 appointment
- Continuing study of non-executive oversight and conflicts alongside databank preparation