My contribution to a board
I could help a board examine whether a service company’s promises, economic model and operating capacity describe the same business. My experience begins with resident enquiries and extends through community management, regional leadership and responsibility for the whole company. That progression helps me see how a commercial decision can become an everyday difficulty for a customer or colleague several months later.
The nine-property proposal is a practical example. The board needed to understand why a larger managed portfolio could be unattractive under the service terms offered. Site payroll reimbursements did not provide additional margin for the central work, and the specified direct cost exceeded the proposed management fee. I would ask similar questions of another service business: which obligations are included, which resources support them and where the economics depend on work that has not been funded. The answer should inform the decision before growth is announced.
I also bring experience of changing the boundary of a business. Our renovation-contracting exit was not an immediate earnings improvement, and I wanted the board to approve it with that consequence visible. Directors should be able to distinguish a strategic choice from a short-term savings claim. I would be useful on a committee examining service quality, customer experience or management capability. I would not arrive claiming property-investment expertise that belongs to asset owners, or financial-audit expertise simply because I have led a company. My contribution is rooted in how a contracted service becomes actual work and how leaders know whether it has been delivered.
Judgement in practice
01Recognising the bid expense without allowing it to decide the contract
We had spent US$84,000 preparing the nine-property proposal when the service economics became clear. The effort made withdrawal uncomfortable, but it did not alter the annual cost of the promise. I asked the team to separate the sunk bid expense from the future obligations and to explore a revised scope with the owner. When that alternative was not accepted, we declined the mandate. On a board I would ask whether prior effort or a hoped-for future relationship is doing work that the current proposal cannot support. That question should be asked respectfully: the commercial team’s investment may have been reasonable at the time. The lesson is to improve the next decision, not to pretend that a difficult outcome proves the people who pursued the opportunity lacked judgement.
02Keeping the adverse earnings effect in a strategic exit
The contracting activity contributed US$310,000 before overhead, while only US$190,000 of annual overhead was avoidable. The recurring comparison therefore showed a US$120,000 reduction in earnings before other changes, alongside US$380,000 transition expenditure. We still chose to exit because the business required an operating model we did not want to develop. I would bring that distinction to another board: a sound strategic argument can coexist with a near-term financial cost. Directors should hear both before approving the decision. I would also ask about obligations to customers and colleagues, including what remains after the announcement. Completing projects and arranging eight internal moves and four departures were part of the decision, not administrative details to be left outside the board’s understanding.
My first year on a board
I would first learn how the company describes its service to a customer and how that promise becomes a budget, a staffing model and an operating report. With the chair’s agreement, I would follow a small number of examples through those stages, including a case that remained unresolved. The purpose would be to understand where a board question could improve the decision, rather than start by requesting a new scorecard.
My first-year contribution should be connected to a board priority such as contract quality, customer experience or the development of managers. I would ask management what it needs from the board and what authority it already holds. A director should not become an alternative service manager who receives every difficult customer call. I would use the agreed governance channels to examine patterns, resources and choices, while leaving individual operating decisions with the people appointed and qualified to make them.
Conflicts and their management
Our business works with property owners, maintenance providers, contractors and other service organisations. A proposed board role could overlap with those relationships even if it sits outside residential management. I would disclose relevant interests and assess whether the overlap would prevent me from contributing to the board’s central work. I would not accept a role whose main purpose was to create access to Dovrienne’s contracts or clients.
Twenty days per year is an initial indication of possible capacity, subject to employer agreement and the proposed board’s actual expectations. Preparation, travel and unexpected work matter as much as the scheduled meetings. I would want the chair to explain how the board handles a major service failure, a strategic change or a leadership transition before assuming that the commitment is manageable. If my executive duties or the company’s relationships changed, the outside appointment would need to be reviewed. Clear boundaries should make the contribution useful, rather than serve as a formal declaration that nobody revisits.
My independence statement
My Dovrienne directorship is executive service. An outside appointment would require a separate review of ownership, commercial connections and the independence criteria that apply to that company.
Committee contribution
Chair and member readiness| Capacity | Committees |
|---|
| Ready to join | Service quality and customer experience · People, capability and succession |
|---|
Capacity and preferences
- Time available
- 20 days per year
- Current directorships
- 1
- Sectors
- Residential and community services · Contracted facilities services · People-intensive business services
- Company type
- Privately held service company with an engaged chair and clear management accountability
- Company stage
- Growing beyond founder-led relationships or reconsidering adjacent activities
The seat I am pursuing
I would consider a service company that is growing beyond a small group of founder relationships and needs to make its operating promises more explicit. The business could serve residents, commercial customers or organisations with recurring facilities needs. The relevant connection is a dependence on people, local judgement and contract economics, not a requirement that it manages homes. I would look for a board that wants to hear about unfinished customer work as well as commercial progress. A seat intended primarily for asset transactions or specialist property valuation would be a different remit from the contribution I can substantiate.
Governance learning and readiness
IICA Independent Directors’ Databank: Not yet registered
My appointment record is American and does not include Indian Independent Directors’ Databank registration. A cross-border proposal would need appropriate local advice and an assessment of the requirements before I accepted it.
- Company-board induction on appointment in January 2019.
- Continuing chair-led reviews of service obligations, shareholder responsibilities and strategic exits.
Board and committee exposure
Served as a director
Dovrienne Residential Services
Company board, executive appointment
January 2019–present
Serves as CEO and executive director, contributing to business scope, operating resources and contract decisions.
Presented to the Board or a committee
Dovrienne Residential Services
Operating-model and service-capacity reviews
2014–2018
Attended invited board discussions as COO; did not hold a director seat in that appointment.