Presented to the Board or a committee
Vezqalni Animation Works
Board finance and commitment reviews
April 2021–present
Presents financial forecasts as CFO through the CEO; no statutory directorship.
Suvendu Qezronthi · Chief Financial Officer · India
What still has to be delivered before this is affordable?
My contribution to a board
I could help directors ask which future obligation a reassuring financial number leaves outside the discussion. My experience includes accepting a project margin before the remaining-work estimate had been properly challenged, then correcting that account at a cost. It also includes distinguishing customer advances from discretionary spending capacity and allocated internal costs from expenditure that could actually stop. I would first understand the receiving company’s proposition, professional assurance and management delegations. The contribution should help directors examine the assumption behind a commitment without turning the board into a production-finance department. I would ask who owns the remaining estimate, what changed after challenge and which decision the revised account supports. A clear financial paper should make room for an operating colleague to disagree before the enterprise relies on a subtotal whose precision exceeds the evidence beneath it.
Committee contribution
| Capacity | Committees |
|---|---|
| Ready to join | Project economics and enterprise-risk discussions · Financial planning oversight where constituted and appropriate |
Capacity and preferences
- Time available
- 23 days per year
- Current directorships
- 0
- Sectors
- Commissioned creative and professional services · Project enterprises with substantial advance-funded delivery
- Company type
- A private services enterprise whose board expects financial assumptions to be challenged by operating owners
- Company stage
- Revising project estimates or testing new spending against existing delivery commitments
The seat I am pursuing
I would explore a first non-executive role where a chair wants directors to understand the work and obligations behind the financial account. Governance learning and appointment-specific assessment must precede acceptance; executive presentations do not establish statutory board experience. Initial contribution could involve project economics, enterprise risk or planning discussions with established governance, legal and financial skills already present. I am not offering to chair a statutory committee. The chair should describe the recurring commitment the board struggles to examine and the assurance it receives from management and qualified professionals. I could help where colleagues are willing to reopen an attractive comparison, record the cost of a correction and distinguish a funded obligation from an opportunity that only appears affordable because its remaining work has not yet been made visible.
Governance learning and readiness
IICA Independent Directors’ Databank: Not yet registered
Governance preparation and any registration relevant to the proposed role remain unfinished. This account records preparation still to complete and makes no claim to a governance assessment result.
- Preparing to examine financial commitments from a non-executive position
- Learning how collective oversight differs from running a project-finance review
Board and committee exposure
Reported to a committee
Vezqalni Animation Works
Financial review through the CFO
April 2016–March 2021
Reported the corrected production estimate and separate review expense as Financial Controller.
Judgement in practice
Historical cost precision did not validate the unfinished-work forecast
The animation paper contained ₹1.1 crore incurred cost and an unsupported view of the remaining commitment. Once production estimated a further ₹1.2 crore, the expected whole cost became ₹2.3 crore against a ₹2.4 crore fee. I would ask directors how management tests the forward-looking part of a financial paper and how a challenge reaches the approval process. The corrected ₹10 lakh subtotal before central costs was not whole-company profit, and a separate ₹17 lakh process review had its own expense. My earlier approval belongs in the account because the weakness was not merely an operating surprise. Oversight should make it possible to revise a familiar margin before the work is finished, while qualified production and accounting owners retain their decisions.
The bank balance did not discharge the commissioned work
Twelve crore of an ₹18 crore cash balance came from customer advances, with ₹9 crore forecast delivery outflow attached to the commissioned work. I would ask a board how that relationship appears when management proposes another programme. The analysis should not imply that the residual is automatically free cash or that a management forecast determines revenue recognition. Other obligations and qualified reporting judgements still matter. Deferring ₹3 crore of the ₹7 crore proposal created a smaller decision to assess; it did not establish a realised return. Directors need to understand which existing promise will consume the resources behind an apparent opportunity, and whether management has given that promise enough weight before seeking authority to spend on something else.
My first year on a board
I would begin with one material project portfolio and follow how its remaining-work estimates enter the financial plan. Through the chair’s agreed process, I would meet production, commercial, finance and assurance owners to understand who can challenge a forecast and how the board learns that an earlier account has changed. I would examine a corrected estimate beside a successful commission, because both reveal how the enterprise handles assumptions before they become results. The proposed twenty-three annual days must include preparation and exceptional demands alongside executive work. I would ask the chair whether my questions improve collective understanding or draw directors into costing individual tasks. A useful first-year contribution could leave one recurring approval with a clearer account of the obligation still ahead, the owner of that forecast and the consequence of changing it before further funds are committed. I would review that contribution with the chair after the first planning cycle, using an actual changed decision rather than meeting attendance as the test.
Conflicts and their management
My CFO role provides access to private project fees, production estimates, client advances and supplier proposals. I would disclose employer, investor, customer, production-partner and adviser relationships before receiving protected material from another enterprise. The receiving company needs its own eligibility and independence review even though I have no equity, and my employer must consent to a workable outside commitment. I would not use a client’s unpublished production plan or a supplier’s private quote to improve another board’s negotiation. Recusal may address a particular item, but recurring exclusion from the central project or financial agenda could make the appointment unsuitable. Capacity must allow for a substantial forecast correction or production commitment requiring executive attention. I would decline a seat expecting privileged client access, professional opinions I am not qualified to give or an informal finance-management service delivered around the company’s accountable team.
My independence statement
Employer, fund, client, production-partner and professional-adviser relationships need assessment for the particular appointment. I hold no equity, but do not treat that as advance proof of independence.