Served as a director
Fennervale Commercial Bank
Full board, executive director
April 2021–present
I participate as the bank's chief executive and executive director; this is not an independent appointment.
Mara Veysen · Chief Executive Officer · Canada
Where I could contribute beyond my executive role
My contribution to a board
I would bring a bank operator's understanding of the promises hidden inside an apparently straightforward growth plan. I have held responsibility for credit portfolios, customer acquisition, servicing and the whole institution. That experience helps me ask whether a business can fund, deliver and control what it is proposing. It does not make me the specialist in every discussion. On a board I would use it to connect the questions being asked by finance, risk and operating colleagues, then identify where additional expertise is necessary.
I would be particularly useful when a company is becoming more complex than its informal decision system can support. The early warning is often not a dramatic loss. It may be recurring exceptions, a concentration nobody owns, or information that reaches the board only after executives have made the practical commitment. I would ask how those patterns are recorded and who has authority to change them. I would also examine whether the board's own requests create reporting work without improving decisions. Good oversight should sharpen accountability rather than establish a second management structure.
Board and committee exposure
Reported to a committee
Fennervale Commercial Bank
Board risk committee
April 2021–present
I report on funding concentration, connected credit exposure and operating resilience with the relevant executive owners.
Presented to the Board or a committee
Tarnwick Credit Group
Board credit committee
January 2011–August 2016
I presented commercial portfolio and origination proposals; I was not a director or a member of that board committee.
Committee contribution
| Capacity | Committees |
|---|---|
| Ready to chair | Risk committee, subject to the remit, sector and nomination review |
| Ready to join | Risk · Audit · Technology and operational resilience |
Capacity and preferences
- Time available
- 24 days per year
- Current directorships
- 1
- Sectors
- Financial infrastructure · Commercial services · Business payments
- Company type
- Privately held or listed mid-sized business with a chair who expects evidence-based challenge
- Company stage
- Institutionalising decision rights or preparing for a material operating expansion
The seat I am pursuing
I am seeking one external appointment where funding discipline and operating reliability are central to the board's agenda. A financial infrastructure provider or a commercial service business preparing to expand would fit that interest. I would consider joining an audit committee, bringing financial literacy and executive experience while recognising the need for specialist accounting expertise within the committee. I could consider chairing a risk committee after a careful review of its remit and the board's assessment of my suitability. I would not describe those interests as an entitlement to a particular committee position.
I can make twenty-four days a year available in an ordinary calendar, subject to employer approval, and would discuss additional demands during a transaction or incident before accepting. My current directorship count is one, attached to my executive appointment. I would want the annual calendar, expected preparation time, site visits and emergency arrangements agreed early. The right role would let me contribute independent judgement without compromising responsibilities I already hold. If those conditions are absent, I would prefer to decline the conversation rather than make an unrealistic commitment.
Judgement in practice
Making the price of funding restraint visible
In our deposit review, I brought the board an explicit estimate of the extra annual funding expense associated with diversification. It would have been easier to present a concentration reduction as an unqualified improvement. That would have concealed the decision the directors were being asked to make. Treasury and commercial colleagues held different views of customer stability, so I arranged a joint account-group review before seeking agreement on the response. The board could then distinguish a disagreement about facts from a difference in risk appetite. As an external director, I would look for the same separation. I would not require management to remove uncertainty before acting, but I would ask which uncertainty the company was choosing to carry and how the decision would be revisited if the evidence changed.
Testing an operating claim before accepting it
The payment-recovery exercise showed that a documented fallback could coexist with unclear authority and inaccessible contact information. I did not ask the technology team to produce a more reassuring presentation. I asked for observed corrections and a repeat exercise. The distinction matters for a board: management can have worked diligently on a plan without having established that the plan is usable. My contribution would be to ask what was tested, what remained outside the exercise and who independently observed the result. I would resist turning a successful rehearsal into a general assurance about every possible incident. I would also ask whether the exercise involved the people who must explain the disruption to customers, because their information needs are often different from those of the recovery engineers.
My first year on a board
I would begin by agreeing the chair's expectations and understanding why the vacancy exists. A board appointment can be described broadly while the immediate need is quite specific: a succession question, a funding decision, a weak committee process or an operating expansion. I would want that need discussed openly. During the first quarter I would read recent board and committee papers, speak with the executive owners of material risks and visit part of the business where the consequences of central decisions are visible.
I would keep a short record of questions, distinguishing matters requiring immediate escalation from those that need more context. I would avoid offering an operating redesign after one visit. By the second quarter, I would expect to understand the company's principal dependencies, how exceptions are reported and which measures directors find useful. I would then propose a small number of improvements through the appropriate committee and chair. At the end of the first year I would ask whether my contribution had improved decisions, whether I had respected the boundary with management and where my own understanding remained incomplete.
Conflicts and their management
My current executive role creates real constraints. A prospective company may borrow from our bank, compete for a customer, supply a critical service or hold information relevant to a commercial decision. I would disclose those connections before accepting a nomination and keep the disclosure current. I would also examine relationships that are indirect or likely to develop, rather than relying only on a list of existing contracts. Some situations may be managed through information restrictions and recusal; others may make the appointment unsuitable. I would seek the company's formal assessment instead of treating my willingness to abstain as a complete answer.
If a conflict arose during service, I would tell the chair and company secretary promptly, avoid receiving material I should not see and follow the agreed process for discussion and decision. I would keep a record of the issue and its treatment. Where repeated exclusions prevented me from contributing to a substantial part of the board's work, I would reconsider whether remaining in the role served the company. A title is not a sufficient reason to retain a seat that I cannot discharge properly.
My independence statement
I would disclose my executive employment, banking relationships, personal interests and relevant past appointments before a nomination proceeds. I do not assume that experience outside an organisation makes me independent of it. The appointing company and its advisers must assess the applicable requirements and the facts of the proposed role.
Governance learning and readiness
IICA Independent Directors’ Databank: Not yet registered
I have not registered with India's Independent Directors' Databank. My present search is Canada-focused; any future India appointment would require a separate review of the applicable eligibility and registration requirements.
- Board-led scenario reviews of funding and operational dependencies
- Externally facilitated conflict-disclosure workshops commissioned by my current bank
- Reading and discussion of public bank failure analyses, with no claim of a separate governance qualification