Advisory Board Member — Governance (Asset Management)

Conduct matters that cannot be quietly deferred

Conduct and control issues have a particular way of going unresolved. They are rarely urgent in the commercial sense, they often sit between functions, and each quarter there is a reasonable case for waiting another quarter. In funds and asset management, where the trust of clients and regulators is the franchise, that pattern is the risk. This board seat exists to make sure such matters arrive at the board framed for a decision, with an owner and evidence, rather than as a standing item that is noted and carried forward.

A board seat with oversight duties

Despite the title, the seat is a board role with oversight duties: to challenge, test and oversee, not to run. You will help agree how conduct and control matters are decided, including the thresholds for local leaders, and set the evidence the board uses to oversee spending, capacity and controls. You will question whether each commitment should survive, wait or be retired, and press on any proposal that leaves cost or risk unowned. You will test investment cases for adoption, dependencies and downside, oversee how matters are raised, and help the Group Chief Executive Officer and operating leaders resolve conflicts before money is committed.

The most useful contribution is often a question about form. What is the board being asked to decide? Who will own the outcome? What would change the recommendation? A paper that cannot answer those three is not ready, however thorough it is.

From escalation criteria to closure

During the first ninety days, directors should agree the criteria by which conduct and control matters reach the board, and in what form. Around month nine, conduct and control papers should be reviewed for a clear decision request, an owner and supporting evidence before they reach the board. By month 12, directors should have tested the conduct route in practice, with open conduct and control decisions tracked through to closure.

A board member with the right record

You have worked across six or more countries and can distinguish necessary local judgement from variation protected by history. In organisations with revenue of $295 million or more and at least 400 people, the baselines you set withstood scrutiny from a chief executive and from the managers running an investment, distribution and fiduciary platform. You can point to a well-liked commitment you brought to an end, the evidence for doing so and what it freed up.

Selection will look at what you have done in integration, professionalisation and succession. Governance ethics is wanted at level 4; level 3 will do for risk judgement, entity governance, and board and stakeholder management. If you would hesitate to challenge a commitment until every national head had agreed, or want influence without twelve months of accountability, this board is the wrong fit.

Meeting the chair, then the directors

In the opening week the Board Chair meets you first, privately, over video. Week three is a working exercise with the Regional President; week five an in-person meeting with executives who each lead a function; and the seventh week a closing session with the full board. You will hear back on each stage within five working days.