Imran ZevqhuriChief Technology Officer
Portrait of Imran Zevqhuri

Chief Technology Officer · India

ImranZevqhuri

Let the product claim carry its working conditions

The unloaded demonstration was convincing enough for me to support a claim about loaded use.

Open to
  • Board appointments
  • Advisory roles
  • Speaking invitations
Read the profileBegin a conversation

Let the product claim carry its working conditions

I lead technology at Zervqani Industrial Trolleys in Nagpur, with manufacturing in Wardha. We make non-powered trolleys for factory material movement, rather than patient equipment or lifting devices. The company employs 840 people and recorded ₹318 crore revenue and ₹24.7 crore operating profit for FY ending March 2026. I lead 78 engineering colleagues through six leads, with ₹13.4 crore annual expense and ₹5.6 crore separately approved development capital. I report to CEO Ritu Zeqruni; quality head Arun Vevquri reports to her separately.

In 2017 I endorsed an acoustic claim for loaded use after an unloaded demonstration. A later loaded review found nine of thirty assemblies outside the project's agreed criterion. We held 120 preproduction units before customer release, delayed the introduction ten weeks and incurred ₹48 lakh in testing and redesign. There was no field recall or reported injury in this fictional case. The failure was in the inference I had approved: evidence from one condition had become a promise about another.

My later work examined trolleys that fit a doorway but could not negotiate the intended turn, replacement wheels whose mounting geometry changed clearance, accelerated coating comparisons that could not establish years of field life and instructions that participants interpreted differently from the intended sequence. These cases are about the connection between engineering evidence and use. They retain specialist authority, programme costs and unfinished validation rather than make a wider claim than the reviewed conditions can support.

Nine assemblies challenged the loaded-use claim I had endorsed

Nine of thirty reviewed assemblies missed the project's acoustic criterion under loaded conditions. We held 120 preproduction units, delayed introduction ten weeks and incurred ₹48 lakh in correction work. The earlier unloaded demonstration did not establish the claim I had allowed it to support.

Passing the doorway did not establish the ability to make the turn

Seven of eighteen reviewed routes exposed a turning problem despite adequate folded doorway width. A ₹94 lakh route-geometry programme followed. The review concerned selected operating routes, not universal building compliance or a promise that every customer site could use the product.

Fifteen readers understood a folding sequence differently from its authors

In a thirty-six-person instruction review, fifteen misread one sequence. We funded ₹42 lakh for illustration, translation and retesting. The finding concerned the reviewed instructions and participants; it did not rank languages or establish that the revised material had already solved the problem.

Current focus

I am strengthening the link between product qualification, the configuration customers receive and the conditions under which they use it. That includes the route around a corner, the mounting geometry behind a familiar wheel size and the interpretation of an instruction. I want technical colleagues to be able to explain why evidence is relevant to a particular claim, and commercial colleagues to know which conclusions still require work before they can be published.

Conversations I welcome

I would explore a first outside board role where industrial product judgement could complement financial, commercial and people expertise. I have no statutory appointment or individual shares, but my employee-trust interest would need disclosure. My fictional IICA registration dates to April 2026, with the proficiency assessment unfinished. Twenty-three days is a provisional capacity estimate, subject to employer consent, relationship review and the actual demands of the role.

78

Engineering colleagues

Six leads within an 840-person enterprise

₹13.4 crore

Annual engineering expense

₹5.6 crore development capital separately approved

27 years

Engineering career

Design-engineer entry in July 1999

A product claim should travel with the conditions that make its evidence relevant. I once supported a loaded-use acoustic claim on the strength of an unloaded demonstration. The later review forced us to hold units and repeat work that should have been planned earlier. I now want the engineering discussion to include the route a trolley must negotiate, the configuration actually supplied and the person who must understand its instructions. A neat test result is useful only when we can explain what it represents.

Imran Zevqhuri

Chief Technology Officer

Areas of stewardship

Where accountability has been mine.

  1. IUse conditions inside product qualification
  2. IIRoute geometry beyond catalogue width
  3. IIIAssembly compatibility beyond nominal size
  4. IVEvidence-based claims and comprehensible instructions

Selected work

Decisions, and what they changed.

I

Withdrawing the loaded-use claim I had accepted from an unloaded demonstration

In 2017 I supported an acoustic claim for a trolley in loaded use after seeing an unloaded demonstration.

The full account

II

Reopening a route promise after the doorway measurement had passed

In 2022 a product discussion used folded width to support a claim about access through customer premises.

The full account

III

Qualifying the mounting offset hidden behind an unchanged wheel diameter

A 2023 replacement-wheel proposal appeared straightforward because the new wheel shared the earlier outer diameter.

The full account

In the words of others

Trusted by those who appoint.

Imran separated the useful coating-test record from the calendar claim it could not establish. The observation programme remained work to evaluate, rather than a benefit declared at approval.
Ritu ZeqruniCEO, Zervqani Industrial Trolleys; fictional colleague
He retained the configurations that failed the clearance review instead of asking a familiar wheel diameter to stand for compatibility. Qualification authority and the unfinished work stayed visible.
Arun VevquriQuality Head, Zervqani Industrial Trolleys; fictional colleague

The journal

Perspective, set down with care.

An invitation

Contact

I would explore a first outside board role where industrial product judgement could complement financial, commercial and people expertise. I have no statutory appointment or individual shares, but my employee-trust interest would need disclosure. My fictional IICA registration dates to April 2026, with the proficiency assessment unfinished. Twenty-three days is a provisional capacity estimate, subject to employer consent, relationship review and the actual demands of the role.

Open to
  • Board appointments
  • Advisory roles
  • Speaking invitations
Write to Imran

office@imranzevqhuri.example