Arenla Zemqari · Chief Information Officer · India
I would help a board examine whether its digital-service measures describe the business experience they are meant to represent. Availability, closure and integration counts are useful, but each can leave an important task or responsibility outside the account. I would ask management how it tests that relationship and which unresolved conditions remain visible. The contribution would be practical rather than a promise to approve every technical design. I would rely on qualified security, legal and assurance advice where required and work with directors who bring different business experience. My own cases show the need to question a measure I had previously supported, which is relevant to oversight as well as executive work. A first appointment would also require me to learn the company's broader obligations and accept that a director's responsibility is collective, beyond the services I know best.
Presented to the Board or a committee
Board internal-technology and service-risk presentations
April 2022–present
Presents internal digital-service decisions and expenditure as CIO; holds neither a director seat nor a committee appointment.
| Capacity | Committees |
|---|---|
| Ready to join | Technology and digital-risk committee where constituted · Risk committee with an internal-services remit |
I would consider a first non-executive role in a knowledge or professional-services business that is integrating offices, improving internal systems or reassessing its digital dependence. My experience would be useful where directors want to understand how a technology report connects to the work people actually complete. I would seek committee membership under experienced leadership before considering a chair role. The nomination discussion should acknowledge that I have presented to directors but have not served as one, and that my formal preparation remains unfinished. The company should describe the expected contribution and provide access to appropriate induction and advice. I would not accept a seat merely to act as an unpaid CIO or to endorse a technology programme already decided. A suitable role would allow informed challenge, collective learning and an honest account of the time and conflicts involved.
The search review found seventeen superseded first results in a defined set of 120 queries. Thirteen could be replaced with approved guidance, while four needed to remain unresolved until their owners made a decision. In a board discussion, I would ask whether management's account distinguishes a technically returned answer from an answer the organisation is prepared to stand behind. I would also ask what happens to the employee while the decision remains open. The board should expect an accountable process, not require the technology team to invent a policy position. This example illustrates why a lower apparent completion rate can sometimes represent a more faithful service. It does not establish that withholding an answer is always preferable or that one query review proves the quality of an entire knowledge system.
The support review reopened forty-four requests that had closed while the employee's task remained unresolved. Thirty-eight were subsequently resolved and six retained named owners. A board should be able to see that remainder rather than receive a recovery claim built only from the completed group. I would ask how the chosen measure influences management behaviour and what independent task evidence is available to challenge it. The purpose is not to demand that every request remain open indefinitely. It is to distinguish administrative closure from useful recovery and ensure that the reporting does not reward the disappearance of uncertainty. Directors can ask for that distinction without becoming involved in individual support tickets or designing the service team's workflow themselves.
I would use the first year to understand the services on which the company depends and the ways management currently explains them to directors. With the chair and company secretary, I would review the committee remit, recent technology decisions and existing assurance arrangements. Selected examples of employee or customer tasks could help connect the reports with practical experience, provided access and confidentiality were properly agreed. I would listen to business owners as well as technology leaders before suggesting a new measure. My initial contribution might be a clearer question about one critical dependency, followed through to management's response. Twenty-one days is a provisional annual allowance including preparation and induction, subject to employer consent and the actual calendar. I would review additional demands for a major integration or incident and seek feedback from the chair on whether my questions support oversight without drawing me into executive service management.
Qalvuri's software customers, technology suppliers and delivery partners may overlap with a prospective company's commercial relationships. I would disclose relevant links before receiving confidential material and seek an appointment-specific assessment. My employer's unpublished test findings and internal employee records would not become evidence for another board's decisions. I would also clarify any expectation that a director seat provides informal access to our technical staff or consulting services. Those would be separate relationships needing their own review. A conflict that repeatedly excluded me from the central digital decisions could make the appointment unsuitable even if an isolated matter could be managed. Independence and eligibility need to be assessed against the actual company and interests, with qualified advice where appropriate. I would revisit that assessment when relationships changed rather than treat the first disclosure as a permanent answer.
A proposed seat would require review of my employment, personal interests and relevant customer and supplier links. My CIO position and willingness to challenge a system measure do not establish independence by themselves.
IICA Independent Directors’ Databank: Not yet registered
My board preparation has not reached databank registration or completion of any applicable proficiency requirement. I would establish the actual appointment conditions and complete the required steps without assuming an exemption.