Help directors examine the promise without becoming its engineers
My contribution to a board
I would help a board examine the inference between a technical observation and the commitment management wants to make. A valid record, a completed test or a familiar component can be useful evidence without supporting every proposed claim. My experience includes challenging those inferences and correcting one that I had personally accepted. I would want directors to understand the material limits, costs and unresolved findings before choosing among management's options. I have no statutory board experience, so executive presentations are the extent of my current exposure. I would rely on complementary directors and professional advisers for expertise I do not possess. The contribution I seek is to improve scrutiny of the proposition, not to become a second technical executive who directs laboratory work. Management and qualified engineering and quality owners should remain clearly accountable for the product and its release.
Judgement in practice
01
Owning the gap between my approval and the measurement purpose
I supported a release before requiring a sufficient account of whether the measurement was fit for the intended use. The ₹64 lakh review supported eighteen of twenty-four qualification results and left six indeterminate. The affected release stayed held. I would bring the board the earlier approval, the quality team's challenge and the remaining uncertainty, rather than describe the correction as a completed success. Directors should ask whether management has connected the proposed customer promise with the relevant evidence and whether the people reviewing it can disagree with senior sponsors. They should understand the cost and commercial consequence while leaving the technical assessment with qualified owners. My personal error is part of the governance lesson because a strong review must remain effective after an executive has already expressed confidence.
02
Removing a lifetime statement that the endurance exercise did not establish
Thirty-two of thirty-six prototypes completed a planned 720-hour exercise and four stopped. The ₹1.1 crore programme supplied development observations, but it did not establish the proposed five-year field-life statement. I asked for that statement to be removed pending an appropriate evidential basis. A board can examine how management moves from a precise technical result to a broader commercial conclusion without trying to become the reliability team. The stopped samples and test conditions should remain visible, and further work should have a defined decision purpose. Funding an investigation does not entitle management to its preferred outcome. I would ask whether the company has an honest account of the proposition it can support now, the cost of pursuing a different one and the commitments already made to customers.
03
Keeping failed assemblies inside the purchasing decision
An alternative component was attractive for delivery, but thirty of forty-eight assessed assemblies met the declared criteria and eighteen did not. We spent ₹86 lakh on qualification and did not approve the proposed substitution for release. The result concerned our assessed product and conditions, not every possible use of the supplier's component. For a board, I would examine whether purchasing opportunities are being reported as ready benefits before the relevant technical decision is complete. Procurement terms, engineering qualification and quality release inform one another but remain distinct responsibilities. Directors should see the cost and the options for further work without being invited to approve a technical shortcut. A candidate can be worth investigating while still being unready for the proposed commitment.
My first year on a board
My first year would begin with understanding how the company earns revenue, how its products are used and which promises matter most to customers. Through the chair's agreed arrangements, I would examine a small number of completed and reconsidered development decisions, including the evidence that reached directors and the material that remained with technical owners. I would ask how the board hears independent quality challenge and how management reports an indeterminate result. I would also need preparation in financial reporting, collective duties and the company's applicable obligations beyond my existing speciality. I would not collect private design files simply to demonstrate technical involvement. After the first annual cycle, I would ask whether my questions improved the board's decisions or merely drew it deeper into engineering detail. The useful contribution should make accountability clearer and preserve executive responsibility for delivery, rather than add another personal approval step.
Conflicts and their management
Dazqavi's family investor, growth fund, customers and component suppliers may have connections with a prospective company. I would identify those relationships and seek Sandeep's consent before exchanging confidential material. The absence of personal equity does not eliminate employment interests, commercial relationships or access to private designs. A role that repeatedly required withdrawal from central product decisions could be unsuitable even if individual conflicts could be disclosed. Applicable Companies Act independence conditions, SEBI LODR requirements where relevant, committee duties and directorship limits need competent assessment for the actual appointment. Twenty-four provisional days must include induction, reading, meetings, travel and unexpected demands. Databank registration is recorded, but assessment preparation remains unfinished. I would not carry supplier qualification records, customer findings or confidential product evidence from my employer into another boardroom. Those boundaries should be established before professional interest is described as an appointment commitment.
My independence statement
Any independence statement would depend on the proposed company's actual relationships and the applicable appointment conditions. My continuing employment and technical access remain relevant despite having no personal equity in Dazqavi.
Board and committee exposure
Presented to the Board or a committee
Dazqavi Measurement Systems
Product qualification and technical-investment discussions
January 2022–present
Presents through the CEO on product evidence, development expense and proposed claims; no statutory seat, committee appointment or director's vote.