I can help a board examine what its products tell customers and what those customers can actually do with that information. The question becomes sharper when a company adds automated features, sells to smaller customers or relies on partners who stand between it and the person using the service. I have spent twenty-six years close to people who are not technical: small-office staff, research participants, shift workers and the owners of small firms. Given a product proposal, I can ask who will understand the message, who carries the risk if they do not, and which public claim the company may be unable to support. I also bring practical experience of pricing for small customers, accessibility, privacy defaults for staff data and the oversight of automated features. I have not served as a director. Presenting to a board since 2021 and reporting to an audit and risk committee since 2024 are useful preparation, but they are not the same responsibility. I would expect to learn from an experienced chair and to keep my questions within the board's role, without trying to redesign a product from the boardroom.
Judgement in practice
01
Declining a product claim the evidence could not support
When our board discussed positioning the assistant as automated response, the commercial argument was real: a distributor contract worth about €1.2 million a year and competitors already using the phrase. My paper set out what the assistant could do, the error rate we had measured and what a small firm would experience if an automated action went wrong. The board chose the narrower claim. On another board I would ask the same three things of any automated feature: what exactly the company says it does, what measurement supports that statement and what the customer loses when it fails. Directors do not need to understand the model. They do need management to show the error rate, the complaint route and who decides when a limit should be relaxed, and to bring that evidence back as the feature changes.
02
Requiring a pricing paper to show who pays for the change
The Micro plan was approved knowing it would reduce revenue from existing customers, because the paper said so in the opening table rather than in a later variance explanation. Our chief financial officer's objection appeared in full, with his estimate beside mine. I would bring that standard to another board. When management proposes a cheaper plan, a new channel or a bundled feature, I would ask how existing customers and partners are affected, who will absorb the extra support and what evidence would show that the change had failed. A board that sees those costs at approval can judge the decision fairly later. One that discovers them through quarterly results tends to argue about the forecast instead of the choice. My own error, underestimating support volume, is the kind of assumption I would now ask management to test in advance.
My first year on a board
Before my first meeting I would ask to listen to recorded customer calls and read a sample of complaints, because those show how the company's products are experienced. I would meet the chair, the company secretary and each committee chair to learn what the board already finds difficult and where it believes its information is weak. During the first two quarters, I would say less than I expect to and keep a list of questions, then test them privately with the chair before raising them formally. I would read the risk register beside the product roadmap to see whether automated features, accessibility and customer data appear in both. By the end of the year I would hope to have contributed to one committee discussion in which the customer's view changed what directors asked for. I would request candid feedback from the chair and act on it.
Conflicts and their management
My main conflict is my employer. Calvessin competes with other security vendors, sells through about 940 IT partners, integrates with accounting software and buys model capacity from a cloud provider. I would not join the board of any of those businesses, and I would disclose to any prospective chair the full list of relationships that could touch their company. Pradomar Ventures, our largest investor, holds stakes in other software companies; I would treat its portfolio as connected. I hold share options in Calvessin, which I would disclose. Associação Arcolume has never been paid by Calvessin, and I would step out of any discussion in which either organisation considered working with a company on whose board I sat. Information from my executive role would stay there. If declared interests meant I had to leave the room for matters central to the board's work, I would withdraw rather than serve with repeated absences.
My independence statement
I am employed by Calvessin Security and hold share options there. I would not describe myself as independent of any company that competes with Calvessin, resells its service or supplies it. For any other company, I would set out those interests to the chair and company secretary and accept their assessment under the governance code that applies.
Board and committee exposure
Presented to the Board or a committee
Calvessin Security
Board of directors: product, pricing and automated-feature papers
March 2021–present
Presents product and pricing proposals each quarter as chief product officer, including the Micro plan and the assistant's scope; not a director.
Reported to a committee
Calvessin Security
Audit and risk committee: privacy and automated features
January 2024–present
Reports twice a year on staff-data defaults, the assistant's measured error rate and complaints; attends the rest of those meetings as an observer when invited.
Member of a committee
Associação Arcolume
Assistive-technology advisory committee
2022–present
Unpaid member of a five-person committee advising a Lisbon association on testing digital services with disabled users; not a member of its governing board.
Governance learning and readiness
IICA Independent Directors’ Databank: Not yet registered
The IICA Independent Directors' Databank is an Indian requirement and does not apply to the European roles I am seeking. I have not registered, and the status shown reflects that rather than an intention to register. If an Indian appointment were ever proposed, I would take advice on what applied before going further.
Since 2024 I have reported to Calvessin's audit and risk committee twice a year and observed the rest of its meetings when invited.
I am studying the general expectations European corporate-governance codes place on non-executive directors, including independence, risk oversight and board evaluation, using reading agreed with our company secretary.
I keep a record of each board paper I present, the questions directors asked and what I would now answer differently.