My contribution to a board
I could help directors examine what the enterprise has invited a customer to believe. A service proposition often combines several stages into a short promise, and the board may see the final message without seeing where its scope has widened. In my own record, two working days of installation became a forty-eight-hour fleet-rebrand claim that I approved. The subsequent correction taught me to ask which clock, activity and completion point the customer is likely to hear. I would bring similar questions to a network description, a visual portfolio or a report of digital orders. The purpose would be to identify a material enterprise commitment, not to have directors write advertising copy. I would also ask what cost management has accepted to correct an inaccurate account and what evidence supports any claimed commercial benefit. Clearer language is valuable, but I would not present it as proof of higher revenue or restored trust without a basis for that conclusion. My contribution would sit alongside operating, financial, legal and other perspectives rather than replace them.
Judgement in practice
01Keeping the partner relationship visible in the public network
The ten-location network included seven company-run sites and three partner-run sites. A broad description made that distinction difficult for a buyer to see. I supported a ₹36 lakh communication and accountability programme, while the authorised commercial and contract owners retained their decisions. A director could ask whether management's public description implies a relationship the enterprise does not actually hold, who is answerable at each stage and what the correction requires. The answer should not assume that a partner provides inferior work. The relevant issue is whether the customer can understand the arrangement and whether the enterprise has made a commitment it can explain. I would keep the programme cost in that account without inventing a measured improvement in trust or conversion.
02Reading the fleet quarter without rewriting the whole contract
The forty-eight-vehicle programme became cohorts of fourteen, eighteen and sixteen because only fourteen vehicles were available in the first quarter. Billing of ₹62 lakh belonged to that quarter, while ₹96 lakh had described an earlier full-quarter proposal. I would ask directors to preserve the different meanings of those figures. Their difference is not automatically a permanent revenue loss or a profit effect, and the later cohorts must not be reported as completed merely because they are scheduled. The customer accepted a mixed-livery transition, which was a commercial choice with an operating reason. A board could examine the assumptions, accepted consequences and next decisions without taking over the vehicle schedule or asking the CMO to approve technical work outside his remit.
My first year on a board
I would begin by learning how the company makes and fulfils its most consequential customer promises. Through arrangements agreed with the chair, I would ask management to trace selected propositions from approval through delivery and reporting. I would want to hear from the people responsible for the handover, the partner relationship and the evidence used in public claims, as well as from marketing. The purpose would be to understand where the enterprise's commitments sit, not to import Zeqnarmi's procedures into a different business. I would learn the board's access arrangements and the point at which a question should return to management for investigation. I would also examine how a correction reaches directors when a campaign is already in the market. My provisional twenty-two days would need to accommodate preparation, induction and unscheduled issues; a serious capacity discussion with the chair and my employer would come before acceptance. A useful first year would leave me able to distinguish a message that merely needs clearer wording from a promise whose operating or financial basis requires board attention.
Conflicts and their management
A prospective company could use Zeqnarmi's graphics services, compete with it, introduce work through a dealer relationship or share a partner or agency. I would identify those connections early and discuss whether restrictions, recusal or declining the opportunity were appropriate. I would not transfer customer artwork, unpublished portfolio permissions, order histories or confidential commercial terms into another company's deliberations. My experience of how a proposition can mislead is transferable; the underlying customer material is not automatically available to illustrate it. There is also a time conflict to consider. A live campaign correction or major customer transition in my executive role could require attention outside planned meetings. The prospective board should understand that possibility when assessing capacity. I would revisit both relationships and time demands as circumstances changed, rather than treat disclosure as a document completed only at the start of an appointment.
My independence statement
I have no personal equity in Zeqnarmi and am not a beneficiary of its employee ownership trust. That fact alone would not establish independence for a proposed directorship. I would disclose relevant relationships involving the prospective company, my employer, owners, customers, agencies, partners and connected individuals. The applicable framework and actual circumstances would require a current assessment through the company's proper process, with qualified guidance where needed. I would update the account when relationships or responsibilities changed rather than rely indefinitely on the original review.
Board and committee exposure
Presented to the Board or a committee
Zeqnarmi Fleet Graphics
Executive presentations on service propositions, portfolio evidence and marketing programme commitments
2014–present
Presented the withdrawn fleet-rebrand claim, location descriptions, portfolio review and phased customer programme. These presentations were executive exposure, not statutory board membership.
Committee contribution
Chair and member readiness| Capacity | Committees |
|---|
| Ready to join | A strategy, customer or risk committee after examining its charter and membership conditions |
|---|
Capacity and preferences
- Time available
- 22 days per year
- Current directorships
- 0
- Sectors
- Commercial service enterprises with complex customer handovers · Regional mobility suppliers with company and partner delivery · Business services where visual evidence carries a material sales claim
- Company type
- An established service company willing to question the scope and evidence of its customer promise
- Company stage
- A business extending its service network or revising its commercial proposition
The seat I am pursuing
I am exploring a first statutory company-board contribution in an established commercial-service business where customer promises and delivery relationships matter to strategy. A customer, strategy or risk committee could be relevant after its actual responsibilities and membership conditions are examined. I am not presenting myself as an experienced committee chair. The enterprise should provide proper induction and allow directors to understand adverse evidence, including an attractive proposition that management has had to narrow. My databank registration and assessment pass are preparation steps, not an entitlement to a seat or a substitute for reviewing independence and suitability. I would seek a collective governance role with clear access to management through agreed channels. The attraction is to improve the questions asked about the enterprise's commitments, rather than become an informal second marketing chief who approves campaigns outside the executive structure. The opportunity must be credible for the company and realistic alongside my existing responsibility.
Governance learning and readiness
IICA Independent Directors’ Databank: Registered
I registered in the IICA Independent Directors' Databank in August 2025 and passed the proficiency self-assessment in March 2026. I claim no exemption. These fictional preparation facts do not establish eligibility, independence or appointment to a particular company. I hold no statutory company directorship. The requirements and circumstances of a real opportunity would need current review, and private platform assessment material remains outside this public demonstration.
- I am developing my understanding of how directors scrutinise customer propositions without approving individual campaigns or assuming management's operating role.
- For an actual role I would review the applicable Companies Act framework, independence and directorship limits, committee requirements and relevant SEBI LODR provisions with current qualified guidance.