Presented to the Board or a committee
Zerqavni Life Assurance
Invited operating and policy-service reviews
April 2021–present
Explains COO recommendations, service expense and unresolved cases; no statutory appointment or committee vote.
Bina Qelvrani · Chief Operating Officer · India
Ask where the customer obligation continues
My contribution to a board
I would help directors ask whether an apparently completed service has actually reached the outcome the company is reporting. My operating experience includes a payment account I accepted too quickly, instruction changes that needed separate verification and a programme whose new access routes still left cases unfinished. I would bring that attention to the evidence behind a status, together with an understanding of the capacity required for follow-up. The board should know where the obligation continues and which professional owner can decide the next action. It should not become the team reconciling individual payments or assessing a customer’s contract. My contribution would therefore focus on the quality of the operating account and the resources behind it. I would need to learn the receiving company’s own service economics, reporting arrangements and legal responsibilities rather than assume that an insurer’s process can simply be copied into another enterprise.
Board and committee exposure
Reported to a committee
Zerqavni Life Assurance
Operating-control papers through the COO
April 2014–March 2021
Prepared service accounts and supported responses as head of operations; management exposure only.
Committee contribution
| Capacity | Committees |
|---|---|
| Ready to join | Operational risk and customer-service discussions · Technology-enabled service and control oversight |
Capacity and preferences
- Time available
- 26 days per year
- Current directorships
- 0
- Sectors
- Insurance and continuing payment services · Enterprises with recurring customer obligations
- Company type
- A company with distinct professional authority and a chair who asks how service commitments are evidenced
- Company stage
- Improving the account of unresolved service work or changing customer-access routes
The seat I am pursuing
I would consider one non-executive contribution where the board wants clearer oversight of continuing customer obligations and operating controls. An experienced chair should explain how that perspective complements the financial, legal and technical skills already represented. Preparation, registration where relevant and an appointment-specific assessment must precede any commitment; I have no statutory board service to claim. I would initially contribute to operational-risk, customer-service or technology-enabled control discussions under established arrangements. I would not offer to chair a statutory committee without the further experience and assessment that responsibility needs. The role should allow questions about unresolved service work without turning the board into an escalation desk for individual customers. I would avoid an appointment framed as access to my insurer’s partners or as temporary operating cover. The purpose is better collective judgement about the service promise and the evidence that it is being carried.
Judgement in practice
A completed file still contained unresolved customer outcomes
The 24,000 instruction file had been transmitted, but the bank-return evidence separated confirmed credit from returns and pending status. I would ask a board what its completion measure establishes and which unresolved population remains outside the headline. A high overall completion proportion does not eliminate the obligation to the remaining people. Equally, an uncertain payment should not automatically be repeated just to clear the report. In my case we corrected the account and funded reconciliation through authorised owners. The oversight lesson is to understand the next action and its control, rather than demand a convenient zero-exception status. Directors can ask for that clarity without approving individual transfers or treating every missing confirmation as evidence of a loss.
An alternative channel did not complete every verification
The selected programme completed seventy-four cases remotely and thirty-two through visits, while fourteen needed further work. I would ask directors whether management has distinguished availability of a new route from completion of the required customer step. The remaining cases need a responsible owner, resources and an appropriate account of the contractual consequences. Difficulty using one channel does not establish a person’s health, intent or entitlement. Our programme kept professional assessment separate from the operating work of arranging assistance. The board question concerns whether the service model provides a credible route for the obligation, including exceptions. It should not encourage a declaration of universal access from a selected programme or substitute directors’ preferences for the company’s authorised verification requirements.
My first year on a board
I would begin by learning how the company follows a service commitment from the initial instruction to the evidence of its outcome. Through an agreed induction, I would examine one recurring process and one changed customer-access route, focusing on how unresolved cases are reported to management and directors. I would ask which responsibilities sit with operating teams, finance, technology and external partners, and where professional disagreement can alter the next step. Twenty-six annual days would need to cover reading, visits, meetings and unusual demands rather than only scheduled attendance. I would seek feedback from the chair on whether my questions improve the collective view or drift into case management. The first-year contribution should attach to a genuine board priority and help clarify the obligation left after the headline, while management retains responsibility for the detailed service response.
Conflicts and their management
My current role provides access to payment operations, customer records, service arrangements, technology plans and the interests of two corporate investors and the employee vehicle. My 0.2 percent beneficial holding within that vehicle is a financial interest to disclose alongside employment. A proposed outside role would need examination of relationships with insurers, payment banks, service providers, technology suppliers and investors. I would set out those connections before confidential papers were shared and seek a specific assessment of eligibility, independence and committee requirements. I would not move private customer or bank details into another organisation or use its plans to improve our negotiating position. Recusal may address a discrete item, but repeated exclusion from the service and control agenda could make the intended contribution ineffective. Employer permission, the meeting calendar and exceptional operating demands also need resolution. I would refuse a role that depends on protected customer knowledge or expects informal authority over payment decisions outside the agreed appointment.
My independence statement
Employment and a 0.2% beneficial interest through the employee vehicle require specific assessment. I do not claim independence from the insurer or automatic suitability for another board.
Governance learning and readiness
IICA Independent Directors’ Databank: Not yet registered
Preparation and registration for a possible independent appointment are incomplete. No exemption, proficiency pass or existing statutory experience is asserted.
- Learning to examine service obligations collectively without taking over operating case work
- Preparing to assess appointment requirements, customer-information boundaries and relationships involving payment partners and investors