My contribution to a board
I would bring a practical understanding of how a service promise becomes a financial obligation. Insurance has taught me to examine both the wording of a commitment and the operating arrangements needed to honour it. On a board, I would use that experience to question whether a proposed growth plan depends on exceptions, scarce suppliers or information the business does not reliably hold. I would also ask who bears the cost when a decision benefits one customer group at another's expense.
My experience is strongest where claims, pricing and service meet. I have led those functions separately and carried responsibility for the whole insurer. That breadth would help me connect specialist reports without pretending to replace their authors. I would not position myself as an actuarial or audit specialist. I could contribute to risk and customer outcomes work, and potentially chair a member interests committee after a proper induction into the organisation's obligations and constituency. The appointment should use my operating judgement while retaining specialist expertise in other parts of the board.
Judgement in practice
01Protecting a future member's interests in today's renewal decision
When we reviewed renewal concessions, I asked the board to consider the members who were not represented in the complaint correspondence. A discount could retain a vocal customer while its cost was absorbed by the wider pool. That did not make every concession inappropriate. It required a clear reason and a visible funding consequence. I presented the reduction in complaints alongside lower retention so directors could judge the whole result. The board discussion changed from whether management had made customers happier to whether the institution could defend its treatment across the membership. As a non-executive director, I would look for the same missing constituency in other allocation decisions. I would ask management to identify whose interests are absent, what assumptions have been made about them and how the board can examine those assumptions without trying to run individual customer negotiations.
02Refusing to confuse purchased capacity with operating readiness
The reinsurance review required directors to choose between arrangements with different costs and practical demands. I brought the missing location evidence into that discussion even though it complicated our recommendation. The board could then see that additional premium and record correction were related but separate decisions. We accepted A$4.2 million of extra annual cost and postponed a distribution enhancement. The subsequent recovery rehearsal revealed two unassigned hand-offs, which we corrected before reporting readiness. My boardroom lesson is that a technically sophisticated paper can still omit the work needed to realise its value. In an external role, I would ask for the operating dependencies behind a recommendation and the evidence that management can meet them. I would avoid prescribing the detailed solution unless invited to contribute relevant experience, because the executive team must retain ownership of its implementation.
My first year on a board
During the first quarter, I would establish a factual understanding of the business and the board's expectations. I would read prior decisions, meet the chair and committee leads, and spend time with finance, risk and frontline service colleagues through agreed induction arrangements. I would ask which decisions have repeatedly returned to the board and why. A recurring issue may reflect changing circumstances, an unclear mandate or a recommendation whose practical assumptions were never tested.
In the following months, I would focus my contribution on a small number of questions relevant to the appointment. For a member-owned enterprise, those might concern exceptions, complaints and the allocation of cost between groups. For a service network, they might concern supplier capacity and the quality of completed work. I would agree with the chair how to bring observations back into formal discussion, rather than creating a parallel channel of instructions to management.
By the end of the first year, I would want the chair's assessment of whether my contribution had improved deliberation. I would review attendance, preparation and the usefulness of my questions, including occasions when my insurance experience had been less transferable than I expected. A successful induction should make a director more precise about both relevance and limits.
Conflicts and their management
My current executive role comes first and would be disclosed in full. I would identify potential relationships involving insurers, brokers, repair suppliers, advisers and significant commercial counterparties before accepting an external appointment. The review would include foreseeable transactions, not only relationships already active. Where a manageable matter later arose, I would follow the organisation's disclosure and recusal process and ensure the record reflected what happened.
Some conflicts would be too central or frequent for recusal to solve. I would decline a role that regularly prevented me from receiving material or contributing to the decisions for which I was appointed. I would also keep confidential knowledge from my current business out of external discussions, even where it appeared useful. The 22 days I could allocate annually would be agreed with my employer and include preparation, committees and a reasonable contingency. If the likely workload exceeded that capacity, the honest answer would be to decline rather than promise attendance I could not sustain.
My independence statement
I would disclose my executive appointment, insurance relationships, financial interests and relevant personal connections before discussing any independence classification. I would expect the appointing organisation and its advisers to assess the facts under its applicable requirements. A role that repeatedly excluded me from core decisions would not be a useful appointment for either side.
Board and committee exposure
Served as a director
Brindleharbour Mutual
Main board, executive director
July 2020–present
Accountable for enterprise plans, operating results and the implementation of board decisions.
Reported to a committee
Brindleharbour Mutual
Board risk committee
September 2015–present
Reports claims controls, supplier dependencies and operating consequences of catastrophe protection.
Presented to the Board or a committee
Brindleharbour Mutual
Board member interests committee
2022–2026
Presented renewal explanations, exception costs and retention outcomes.
Presented to the Board or a committee
Kestervane Underwriting
Board underwriting review
2012–2015
Presented the staged withdrawal of an exception-heavy property cohort.
Committee contribution
Chair and member readiness| Capacity | Committees |
|---|
| Ready to chair | Member interests or customer outcomes committee, after organisation-specific induction |
|---|
| Ready to join | Risk committee · People and remuneration committee · Operations or service quality committee |
|---|
Capacity and preferences
- Time available
- 22 days per year
- Current directorships
- 1
- Sectors
- Member-owned financial services outside direct insurance competition · Repair and service networks · Business-to-business administration services
- Company type
- Mutual, cooperative or privately held service enterprise with an established board
- Company stage
- A functioning business improving its service economics or managing a material operating transition
The seat I am pursuing
I am considering one Australian non-executive appointment in a mutual, cooperative or established service business with a credible reason to use my experience. I would be particularly interested where customer outcomes and economic discipline need to be examined together, or where a board is overseeing a significant operating transition. I am not seeking a ceremonial association or a role based mainly on introductions. Before proceeding, I would want to understand the chair's expectations, the composition of the board, the material supplied to directors and the contribution missing from current discussions. The organisation should also be comfortable with the boundaries of a serving insurance chief executive's availability. A suitable appointment would make those boundaries workable, rather than treating them as matters to resolve after acceptance.
Governance learning and readiness
IICA Independent Directors’ Databank: Not yet registered
I am not registered in the IICA Independent Directors' Databank. My current interest is an Australian appointment; any later Indian opportunity would require a separate review of the applicable process and my eligibility.
- Annual board learning sessions on insurance reserving judgement, supported by specialist briefings
- Facilitated exercises distinguishing executive recommendations from director challenge
- Review of member-complaint themes with the board member interests committee