A wider technology remit, with clearer limits

Mandate

Make technology changes and computing services support accountable professional work

Outcomes

• Separated application release from engineering benchmark acceptance
• Retained local routes for four unsupported remote tasks
• Made shared computing priorities a practice-owned decision
• Held eight imported measurements pending unit confirmation

Decisions in context

Becoming CIO in January 2022 widened my responsibility from running technology services to explaining the commitments those services create for the practice. Thirty-nine staff work through four leads within₹ 8.6 crore FY2026–27 operating expense and a separate₹ 2.7 crore programme. The company employs 510 people and records₹ 194 crore FY26 revenue. I report to Iqbal; Sonal retains technical-practice authority. My upgrade approval exposed the difference between an application that opened files and an environment the practice had accepted for its work. Later decisions examined remote interaction, shared computation and units at an interface. These cases made me more demanding about the scope of a technology claim without suggesting that I could make the engineering judgement myself. I have no statutory directorship and no personal shareholding. The outside contribution I am considering would require a different mode of work: questioning management's evidence collectively while leaving execution and professional acceptance with their proper owners.

Reason for the move

Continuing as CIO while examining where a first external mandate could fit

Mandate

Coordinate workplace computing, applications and investment sequencing for the advisory practice

Outcomes

• Joined workplace support and application operations into one responsibility
• Examined specialist exceptions before proposing uniform platforms
• Brought continuing support cost into investment discussions

Decisions in context

The head-of-IT role began in July 2016 with twenty-five colleagues through three leads and₹ 4.9 crore annual expense. Jezqavi had 330 employees and₹ 112 crore revenue for FY ending March 2017. My remit connected workplace computing, applications and the sequence in which we could change them. I valued consistency because a manageable estate made support easier, but practice colleagues taught me to examine what a proposed standard removed as well as what it simplified. A specialist working condition could matter even when it appeared inconvenient from an infrastructure perspective. I became more involved in explaining those choices to operating leadership and in keeping their continuing cost visible. The role prepared me for enterprise technology responsibility, though it did not prevent my later error in approving an upgrade too narrowly. That experience is part of the chronology because progression in seniority does not make earlier lessons automatic in every new decision.

Reason for the move

Promoted to CIO in January 2022

Mandate

Connect application support with the professional uses for which systems were adopted

Outcomes

• Worked with technical owners on application acceptance questions
• Preserved professional responsibility outside the support workflow
• Explained dependencies between system changes and practice review

Decisions in context

I joined Jezqavi in September 2011 because I wanted to work closer to the continuing use of the systems I supported. The company employed 172 people and recorded₹ 48 crore revenue for FY ending March 2012. Thirteen applications colleagues worked through two leads with₹ 1.8 crore annual expense. The professional setting changed the questions I asked about a successful release. Engineers could rely on an application without transferring responsibility for their conclusions to its support team. My function therefore needed to preserve a dependable environment and involve the practice in decisions that affected its work. I learned to distinguish a support explanation from an engineering interpretation and to make the boundary useful rather than evasive. The later head-of-IT appointment extended that discipline to workplace services and investment sequencing, with more responsibility for the choices between a common platform and a justified specialist arrangement.

Reason for the move

Promoted to head of IT as the practice expanded

Mandate

Make connections between applications preserve the business meaning needed by receiving users

Outcomes

• Assigned unresolved field interpretations to business owners
• Explained the effect of interface assumptions before release
• Managed delivery work without inventing source meaning in code

Decisions in context

From June 2005 I managed eleven integration colleagues through two leads with₹ 76 lakh annual expense. Pezvori had 166 employees and₹ 27 crore revenue for FY ending March 2006. I learned that an interface could transmit a value exactly while leaving the receiving user uncertain about its meaning. A developer could offer a plausible default, but that was not a substitute for a business owner's decision. The management task was to connect the people able to resolve the uncertainty and preserve their answer in a working agreement. Delivery pressure sometimes encouraged us to reduce acceptance to the movement of fields, which was the part easiest to demonstrate. I began asking what the next team would need to do with those fields after our project finished. Joining Jezqavi later gave me a continuing responsibility for that next stage, within a practice whose professional use made the consequences of an unsupported assumption more concrete.

Reason for the move

Moved to Jezqavi for continuing enterprise applications responsibility

Mandate

Investigate document movement and explain receiving users' questions under supervision

Outcomes

• Learned the distinction between successful transfer and usable content
• Recorded interpretation questions for the responsible business owner
• Built application-support practice within a supervised team

Decisions in context

After completing computing at Nevqami Institute of Computing in June 1999, I began at Pezvori the following month. The business employed seventy-eight people and reported₹ 9.8 crore revenue for FY ending March 2000. I worked within a seven-person applications group, without reports or spending authority. My early assignments involved documents that had moved successfully between systems yet still prompted questions from the receiving user. Sometimes the difficulty was technical; sometimes the file did not say what the next person needed to know. Supervisors helped me distinguish those problems rather than treat every enquiry as a software defect. I learned to record an uncertainty and find its owner instead of filling it with a plausible interpretation. The later management role made me responsible for helping other colleagues apply that discipline across projects, while keeping the delivery commitment understandable to clients and the people who would maintain the connection after implementation.

Reason for the move

Promoted to systems integration manager