An employee can carry a larger job for months while the organisation continues to call it development. I want managers to state the responsibility, the authority and the review date before asking somebody to step up. Fairness becomes more practical when the decision can be explained to the person doing the work.
Selected leadership work / 01
Closing the gap between acting duties and employment terms
In 2021, several branch staffing reviews referred to employees temporarily covering larger roles.
I make changes in branch responsibility visible before they become unspoken employment bargains.
I lead the people function at Kerumati Housing Finance in Madurai. Our 460 employees work across 32 branches and central teams supporting a ₹1,650 crore housing-loan portfolio at March 2026. I report to the chief executive and lead eighteen HR colleagues. My function's FY2026–27 budget is ₹3.8 crore, separate from the company's employee cost. I do not approve loans or determine customer eligibility; my responsibility is the organisation, capability and employment practices through which authorised colleagues do their work.
I began in payroll administration in 1997 and joined housing finance six years later. The most instructive conversations were often about a role description that no longer matched a person's day. A branch employee might be coordinating colleagues during a vacancy, carrying review duties without corresponding authority or waiting for a manager to release them for an internal opportunity. These were not problems a new title could solve on its own. They required a decision about the job, the employee and the work left behind.
My recent work has addressed acting assignments, access to promotion assessment and the first ninety days of employment. In each case, I have tried to make the trade-off explicit. Paying for additional responsibility costs money; releasing a strong employee for an internal move creates a vacancy; a more honest induction can expose a job that needs redesign. I do not present lower attrition as proof that every employee experience has improved. I want the record to show which people were affected, what changed and what remains unresolved.
Eighteen acting assignments reviewed
A review identified employees carrying additional branch responsibility beyond the intended period. We approved ₹22 lakh of company-funded pay adjustments and clarified the authority and end date of each assignment.
Twelve internal opportunities opened
A revised process allowed eligible colleagues to enter assessment without relying solely on their manager's nomination. Ten appointments followed; two roles remained open while candidates completed further development.
Early departures examined by cohort
Voluntary exits within ninety days were 27 of 104 joiners in one cohort and 19 of 110 in the next. We kept those counts beside changes in recruitment mix and did not claim a controlled causal result.
Current focus
I am improving the handover between recruitment promises, branch induction and the authority a new employee actually receives.
Conversations I welcome
I welcome a future CHRO remit where branch growth is outpacing role clarity, and a first board conversation focused on workforce judgement rather than recruitment introductions.
The leadership record
Trusted with consequential decisions.
Formation
Bachelor of CommerceVaruleni Commerce Institute · 1997
Josna made us decide what an acting assignment meant instead of relying on its temporary label. The payment was only one part; the written authority and review dates changed how we managed the work.
Ashwin DorevalliFictional chief operating officer, Kerumati Housing FinanceThe full record ↗
Contact
I welcome a future CHRO remit where branch growth is outpacing role clarity, and a first board conversation focused on workforce judgement rather than recruitment introductions.
