A service operator approaching board responsibility
My contribution to a board
I would bring a service operator's understanding of what sits behind a receivables performance report. A director may see fewer overdue accounts and reasonably ask whether the improvement reflects payment, correction, reclassification or removal from the measured population. I can help management make those distinctions without turning the board into an accounts department. My contribution is strongest where commercial promises depend on dispersed client evidence and where staff incentives may favour an easy closure over an accurate explanation. I would connect those observations to contract economics, staffing decisions and the quality of management information. I have presented regularly to our board but have not served as a statutory director, and I would enter a first appointment with that limitation clearly stated. I would not offer myself as an audit committee chair or as a substitute for specialist legal, credit or technology expertise. The useful role is a colleague who can test how a service really works and recognise when an executive answer needs further examination.
Judgement in practice
01
An attractive fee with an unreliable definition
When the proposed contingent contract treated any balance reduction as success, I could have argued that the client had freely chosen the terms. Instead, I brought twenty account histories into the decision. They made the incentive visible: a correction to an unsupported charge might earn us a fee even though it was not money collected through our efforts. I recommended a smaller diagnostic assignment and disclosed the commercial opportunity forgone. For a board, the relevant judgement is not that contingent fees are always unsuitable. It is whether the chosen measure rewards the behaviour the enterprise wants and whether directors can understand its exceptions. I would ask management to demonstrate several outcomes before approving a material incentive arrangement. I would also revisit the measure after implementation, because staff can respond to a contract in ways that were not obvious when it was signed.
02
Keeping a client departure inside the decision record
The repricing exercise produced three renewals and one exit. It would have been easy to present the retained clients' contribution improvement as the whole result. I included the lost account, the handover cost and the vacancies we had chosen to fill. That fuller account helped the board distinguish better contract economics from simple portfolio shrinkage. It also prevented the operations team from being blamed later for a revenue decline that followed an explicit executive decision. In another company, I would ask whether the board receives both the intended benefit and the displaced cost of a change. The question applies beyond repricing: an automation programme can leave a more expensive residual queue, and a tighter acceptance policy can concentrate revenue in fewer clients. Directors need that complete picture without demanding that every decision be reversible or painless.
My first year on a board
I would begin by understanding how the board receives evidence about service promises, client concentration and the work that exceptions generate. I would read a sample of contracts with the relevant executive and company secretary, then follow several anonymised accounts through the operating process with management's agreement. The purpose would be to learn which decisions belong to the client, which belong to the company and how uncertainty reaches the board. I would avoid issuing instructions to delivery staff or building a private reporting channel around the chief executive. During the first two meeting cycles, I would listen carefully to the finance, commercial and people perspectives on the same issue. Later, I would ask for a small number of decision-focused measures where the existing board pack obscures responsibility. I would agree an induction plan, record gaps in my understanding and review my contribution with the chair. My twenty-four-day annual capacity includes preparation and planned visits; an emerging crisis could require a fresh capacity discussion rather than an assumption that meeting attendance is the entire commitment.
Conflicts and their management
My current employer serves several business sellers, and those connections could overlap with a prospective board's clients, suppliers or investors. Before accepting access to sensitive papers, I would provide enough information for the company secretary to assess those relationships without improperly disclosing client details. My executive shareholding would be included in that review. Where a manageable matter arises later, I would declare it early, follow the board's agreed handling and avoid taking part in a decision from which I should withdraw. Some relationships may make an appointment unsuitable altogether. I would also review employer consent and the practical effect of an external commitment on my present team. Independence under the Companies Act, applicable listed-company requirements and committee eligibility are matters for proper company-specific assessment. A friendly relationship with a chair or an absence of current directorships does not settle them. I would keep the assessment current when commercial relationships or personal circumstances change.
My independence statement
I would disclose my executive role, shareholding and client connections before any nomination discussion. The prospective company and its advisers must assess independence and eligibility; I cannot establish either by describing my intentions.
Board and committee exposure
Presented to the Board or a committee
Vazrenki Receivables Services
Full board
April 2020–present
Present enterprise budgets, contract exceptions, service economics and succession plans as chief executive; no statutory director appointment.
Reported to a committee
Vazrenki Receivables Services
Board service-risk working group
2022–present
Report unresolved client authority, case reopening and contract-boundary issues to a non-statutory board working group.
Governance learning and readiness
IICA Independent Directors’ Databank: Not yet registered
I have not registered with the IICA Independent Directors' Databank and make no claim of an assessment pass or exemption. Any contemplated independent appointment requires the applicable registration and assessment position to be checked.
Reviewed board papers with the company secretary to distinguish executive recommendations from director decisions
Undertaken internal workshops on conflicts, contract authority and the evidence needed for board challenge