From preserving a question to revising the organisation’s answer

Mandate

Make the reasoning and practical conditions of people decisions clear

Outcomes

• Separated relocation willingness from specialist capability
• Funded local development alongside a more honest succession account
• Established a distinct decision owner for performance-rating reviews

Decisions in context

I became CHRO in April 2021 and now work through three heads with twenty-one colleagues. The ₹3.9 crore function expense is separate from the insurer’s ₹67 crore group employee expense. I report to the CEO and join board discussions when invited, without a statutory appointment. The succession work asked managers to hear what the named specialists were willing to do before treating them as available coverage. The performance-review work asked a different question about who should reconsider a decision. Both required additional capacity and a less convenient account of unfinished work. I coordinate with operating leaders and professional advisers rather than treat people policy as authority over every consequence. The role has made me responsible for the confidence conveyed by our reporting categories, including when a concise label says more than the underlying discussion has established.

Reason for the move

Current appointment; considering a mandate that welcomes examination of employment-process assumptions

Concurrent appointment

Executive CHRO role only; no statutory directorship

Mandate

Explain how reward and development decisions relate to the actual work

Outcomes

• Reconsidered my previous-salary offer shortcut
• Helped assess eighteen unissued proposals through role evidence
• Kept offer revision separate from changes to existing contractual pay

Decisions in context

Sixteen colleagues worked within ₹2.7 crore annual expense when I led reward and development. The appointment included the pay-offer rule I later withdrew. A fixed percentage above previous salary had seemed consistent and easy for managers to use. Two otherwise comparable proposals made its weakness visible: the calculation preserved different histories without explaining the value of the new work. I took responsibility for supporting the shortcut and worked with finance, hiring managers and advisers on a fuller review. The correction concerned unissued proposals and did not authorise reductions to existing employees’ pay. It required us to explain the proposed position within an evaluated role range, rather than hide the judgement inside a formula. Promotion to CHRO widened my remit, but that experience remained a reminder to question the organisational convenience of a rule I favoured.

Reason for the move

Promoted to lead the wider people agenda as CHRO

Mandate

Understand the professional work before defining employment and development processes around it

Outcomes

• Distinguished development from technical authorisation
• Worked with operating owners on role expectations
• Connected people-service questions with specialist responsibilities

Decisions in context

The insurer appointment required me to learn work whose technical responsibilities were outside HR. Ten colleagues operated within ₹1.4 crore annual function expense. A development plan could prepare someone for a role, but it did not itself confer authority to make a claims or underwriting decision. I worked with the relevant owners to keep employment, selection and professional permission distinct. That learning influenced how I later read succession charts: readiness needed a definition rather than an assumed universal meaning. The role also brought me closer to managers trying to maintain service while developing people. Their practical concerns mattered, although they did not settle every question about opportunity or employee choice. Moving into reward and development gave me a wider chance to examine how apparently consistent processes shaped those decisions and what evidence managers needed to explain them.

Reason for the move

Promoted to lead reward design and employee development

Mandate

Provide dependable people service while examining what each process actually establishes

Outcomes

• Clarified routes for unresolved employment questions
• Distinguished explaining a rule from defending every assumption inside it
• Helped managers identify the evidence relevant to a personnel decision

Decisions in context

I managed seven colleagues within ₹58 lakh annual function expense. Our team organised the people-service route, while authorised managers retained appointment and pay decisions. I learned that procedural reliability and sound reasoning were related but different responsibilities. An employee could provide the requested record and still face a decision whose purpose had not been explained. I asked colleagues to identify what the process needed to establish and to refer questions beyond their authority rather than improvise an answer. The work made me attentive to the unnecessary personal detail an organisation might request simply because a form had always included it. Joining Terqlavi later offered a more specialised environment in which to apply that discipline. I wanted to understand how people processes supported professional work, while continuing to question assumptions that made administration convenient at the employee’s expense.

Reason for the move

Joined a general insurer to develop people-partnering experience in a specialised enterprise

Mandate

Preserve the employee’s question when the available form does not resolve it

Outcomes

• Maintained records under supervision
• Directed employment questions to responsible owners
• Learned the limits of administrative closure

Decisions in context

I began in June 1997 after completing psychology studies the previous month. Five of us supported personnel records and helped colleagues find the right owner for employment questions. I had no authority to decide salary, appoint staff or interpret employment law. The work taught me to distinguish an administratively complete record from a concern that had actually been considered. Sometimes the person had followed every instruction and still did not understand the reasoning behind the next step. I could preserve that question and bring it to the personnel manager, rather than close the record with an answer beyond my competence. That modest responsibility shaped my later interest in how processes define people. Leading the service team eventually meant helping colleagues exercise the same care while giving managers a dependable account of what remained unresolved.

Reason for the move

Promoted to manage the people-service team