Nirmal Vaqreshi · Chief Human Resources Officer · India
I would contribute questions about whether a company's career promises can actually be used. A vacancy can be advertised internally while a manager prevents an eligible colleague from reaching assessment. A grading structure can appear consistent while its meaning changes with the incumbent. A progression route can reward technical expertise only by asking the person to manage others. Those are organisational choices that deserve scrutiny at the appropriate level. An outside board should ask management how the process works, which outcomes remain incomplete and what resources are needed. It should not become the panel deciding individual transfers or technical assessments. My experience includes revisiting a manager-permission rule I had supported, which helps me examine policy effects without assuming that a well-intended design is sufficient. The receiving board would also need appropriate employment, financial and technical advice; my people leadership does not replace those specialist responsibilities.
| Capacity | Committees |
|---|---|
| Ready to join | Workforce capability and succession · People policy and organisational development |
I would consider one non-executive appointment where industrial people experience complements an established board and an experienced chair. The company should want a clearer account of workforce capability and career commitments, with executive management accountable for delivery. I would initially contribute as a member of an appropriate people or succession discussion, after completing the relevant preparation, rather than claim readiness to chair because I hold a CHRO title. I have no statutory service today, and my invited presentations do not change that fact. The appointment process should examine the receiving company's needs and the relationships that may affect my contribution. I would want to understand how directors obtain specialist advice and how the chair keeps oversight separate from individual personnel decisions. A suitable role would value an informed question about opportunity without asking me to become another line manager.
Presented to the Board or a committee
Invited workforce capability and people-plan discussions
April 2021–present
Presents career access, role-evaluation and development proposals as CHRO; no statutory seat or committee membership.
Nine eligible colleagues could not interview because their current managers would not release them. I would ask a board whether management has separated access to an opportunity from the operating plan needed after selection. The response should respect staffing and technical requirements without leaving an indefinite refusal invisible. In our case seven applicants were selected, five moved and two still required a transition at the review date. That last distinction matters to oversight. Directors should know whether a policy announcement changed the employee's practical position and who owns the remaining work. I would not ask the board to choose a start date for a particular technician. I would ask whether management can explain the competing needs, fund the transition and report the result honestly, including the parts that remain unfinished after a programme is described as launched.
Fourteen role evaluations had been influenced by personal tenure. The review left nine bands unchanged and changed five after examining the work. I would ask directors how management keeps job evaluation, individual contribution and remuneration decisions distinct while respecting existing commitments. A familiar employee's experience may deserve recognition, but it should not make the role description impossible to explain to a successor or an internal applicant. Our exercise did not reduce existing pay automatically or settle every contractual question. The additional annual provision and individual review were part of the decision. Oversight should examine the coherence of the structure and the process for consequences, rather than use a revised grade as a shortcut to a pay action or assume that an analytical exercise has answered all questions affecting the employee.
I would begin with the workforce model and the decisions the board already considers material. Through arrangements agreed with the chair and management, I would learn how roles are defined, how employees reach development opportunities and how technical capability is assessed. I would review an example of an internal move from application through handover, using appropriate confidentiality and avoiding unnecessary personal details. The purpose would be to understand the system, not to reopen an individual's case from the boardroom. Twenty-four proposed days must cover induction, preparation, meetings and travel, with an agreed approach to unexpected demands. I would seek feedback on whether my questions help directors understand management's account or draw us into execution. A useful first-year contribution might clarify one recurring people commitment and the evidence by which the board judges whether it has become workable.
My current role involves employee information, pay structures, development decisions and the company's workforce plans. Those records must remain with Pelqethi and cannot become material for another board's deliberations. Before an outside appointment, I would disclose relationships involving our owners, industrial investor, customers, suppliers, advisers and competing manufacturers. Lack of a shareholding does not remove employment duties or the possibility of a conflict. The receiving organisation should obtain appropriate advice on eligibility, independence and committee participation, including whether repeated exclusions would make the contribution ineffective. I would not use a prospective seat to recruit from another employer or obtain its remuneration data for our own planning. The calendar also needs scrutiny when either business faces a difficult workforce issue. I would decline an arrangement that cannot protect confidentiality, provide useful participation and coexist with the responsibilities I already hold.
I am an employed CHRO without equity or a statutory board seat. A prospective outside appointment needs its own assessment of commercial relationships, eligibility and independence.
IICA Independent Directors’ Databank: Not yet registered
Governance preparation and registration for a prospective outside role are not complete. Executive board presentations are not a substitute for director service or the receiving company's assessment.