Chief Technology Officer
India
Practice / Perspective

I accepted the certificate before examining the measurement need

Miriam Qormeli / Published perspectives
No.	The idea	Subject / reading
01	A certificate can answer a different question from the customer	Measurement evidence and product claims 6 min read
02	Laboratory hours do not turn themselves into years of service	Reliability evidence and investment 6 min read
03	The disturbances missing from a convincing demonstration	Product evaluation and technical judgement 5 min read

The practitioner

Miriam Qormeli

The calibration record was genuine within our fictional case, and that made my original judgement harder to revisit. I had treated a properly documented reference as though it settled whether the instrument could support the customer's intended decision. The quality review asked a different question: was the uncertainty and behaviour of the proposed measurement suitable for that purpose? I knew the distinction as an engineer. As a technical executive facing a release timetable, I had failed to insist that the distinction remain visible. That experience changed the way I read a product proposal before endorsing it.

Open to Board appointments

Start a conversation

01 / Assessing measurement fitness beyond a certificate
02 / Keeping endurance evidence within its tested scope
03 / Examining the events an instrument fails to capture
04 / Qualifying component changes in the proposed product

An instrument-making business: 410 employees; ₹208 crore company revenue for FY ending March 2026
A defined technical remit: 68 R&D colleagues; Five heads, ₹14.6 crore FY2026–27 expense and separate ₹6.2 crore laboratory capital
Measurement to product judgement: 29 years; Five appointments from July 1997; CTO since January 2022

I accepted the certificate before examining the measurement need

I am Miriam Qormeli, CTO of the fictional Dazqavi Measurement Systems in Nagpur. I once supported release on the strength of a calibration record without requiring a sufficient account of fitness for the intended measurement. The provenance mattered, but it did not answer every question about uncertainty and use. A review of twenty-four qualification results supported eighteen for the stated purpose and left six indeterminate. We retained the ₹64 lakh review expense and held the affected release while qualified engineering and quality owners examined the remaining evidence. The original approval was mine to explain.

I began in calibration engineering in July 1997 and joined Dazqavi in September 2009. Since January 2022 I have led its technical function. The company employs 410 people and recorded ₹208 crore FY26 revenue. My remit covers sixty-eight research and engineering colleagues through five heads, ₹14.6 crore FY2026–27 operating expense and a separate ₹6.2 crore approved laboratory-capital programme. CEO Sandeep Lorzethi leads the business; Noor Zemqavi retains the quality function's independent voice. I hold neither a statutory board seat nor personal equity, and our instruments do not give us authority to operate a customer's electrical system.

The other decisions here concern the claims people wanted to draw from a test. Seven hundred and twenty laboratory hours did not become five years of product life by presentation. Capturing a brief disturbance in a defined bench exercise did not establish complete coverage in customer conditions. A component with a familiar nominal rating still needed qualification in the proposed assembly. These are stories about how a technical leader handles a commercial request without making the evidence say more than it does. The narrower conclusion sometimes cost time and money; I have retained both in the account.

Provenance and suitability needed separate answers

Eighteen of twenty-four qualification results supported the stated purpose; six remained indeterminate after a ₹64 lakh review. Release stayed conditional on the unresolved evidence.

A duration in the laboratory was not a service-life claim

Thirty-two of thirty-six prototypes completed a 720-hour exercise; four stopped. The ₹1.1 crore validation programme did not establish a five-year field-life promise.

The missed events remained part of the result

A defined eighty-event bench exercise improved from sixty-one captures to seventy-three after ₹73 lakh work. Seven misses remained; customer-wide coverage was not established.

Current focus

Making the measurement purpose, test boundary and unresolved result visible in every proposed product claim.

Conversations I welcome

One first board contribution on technical evidence and product responsibility, subject to consent, independence review and adequate preparation.

Beyond the page

The record behind the perspective.

Formation

Bachelor of Engineering in InstrumentationZerqathi Instrumentation College · 1997

Miriam explained why her earlier release support needed to change. She kept the unresolved findings and the cost in front of us instead of asking the business to accept a more reassuring description of the same evidence.

Sandeep LorzethiCEO, Dazqavi Measurement Systems; fictional colleague

The full record ↗

Contact

One first board contribution on technical evidence and product responsibility, subject to consent, independence review and adequate preparation.

Board appointments

Write to Miriam Contact page

A certificate can answer a different question from the customer

Laboratory hours do not turn themselves into years of service

The disturbances missing from a convincing demonstration