Performance Attribution Programme Director — FX-Neutral Banking Results

The mandate

A banking finance team cannot consistently explain how much of a selected product-market P&L movement comes from reporting currency, changed budget rates, entity perimeter or genuine commercial performance. Current bridges use different rate dates and sequencing, so two analysts can reach different explanations from the same approved results. Beginning on 26 October 2026, this five-month engagement delivers an FX-neutral attribution book, controlled rebasing conventions and an analyst replay guide. It resolves a specific analytical method, not the wider planning model or the design of management reporting packs.

The 7 December 2026 diagnostic milestone reconciles the selected P&L populations, rate sources and comparison perimeters, identifying why existing attribution differs. The 28 January 2027 design milestone supplies rebasing rules, rate-date conventions and worked bridges for translation, volume, mix and other agreed drivers. Final delivery on 26 March 2027 includes historical scenario tests and two internally reproduced analyst cycles. The method must state its sequencing and interaction treatment explicitly; changing the order of effects must not create an unexplained difference labelled commercial performance merely because the resulting message is more convenient.

The finance operating officer and head of management reporting accept the outputs. Diagnostic totals must tie to controller-approved actuals and approved budget populations. Design tests must reconstruct unchanged local-currency results under alternative reporting rates, isolate an agreed entity-perimeter change and preserve all residuals with explained ownership. Final acceptance requires analysts to replay unseen cases and reconcile the full bridge to control totals without consultant corrections. The fee is split 30%, 30% and 40% across accepted diagnostic, method and transfer stages, regardless of whether the attribution makes a market's reported performance look stronger or weaker.

Treasury supplies approved actual, budget and comparison rates and retains hedging ownership. Controllers provide accounting translation positions, signed-off P&Ls and entity-change records; six analysts and four business-finance owners support the sponsor. Four days weekly cover Chennai-led analysis and scheduled workshops. FX trading, hedge recommendations, accounting-policy changes and legal interpretation are excluded. New products or markets require written scope approval. The deliverable must retain source-currency results and the authority for each rate choice, ensuring analytical rebasing is not confused with changing the booked accounting result or retrospectively redefining an executive's performance target.

What you will own

• Reconcile the selected local-currency and reporting-currency P&Ls to approved actual and budget populations, identifying rate-source, cut-off and perimeter differences before constructing a performance explanation from incompatible comparison bases.
• Design rate-date and rebasing conventions with treasury-supplied inputs, documenting the purpose and authority of each analytical rate without altering accounting translation or implying that performance analysis confers FX risk-management authority.
• Construct attribution bridges that separate translation, budget-rate change, volume and mix under an explicit sequencing rule, preserving interaction effects rather than allocating them opportunistically to whichever business narrative is preferred.
• Build entity-perimeter comparison cases using controller-approved change records, distinguishing acquired, transferred or discontinued activity from like-for-like commercial movement before the method labels the remaining result underlying performance.
• Test unchanged-business and adverse-rate scenarios against known expected results, documenting residuals and ownership so an apparently reconciled total cannot conceal a materially incorrect attribution between currency and operating drivers.
• Transfer the method through unseen-case replay and two analyst-run cycles, correcting guidance where reasoning fails and leaving controlled rate inputs, worked examples and an explained residual register for future use.

Candidate qualifications

• Demonstrate financial-services performance analysis that separates currency and commercial effects using actual multi-market P&Ls. Describe an attribution you personally corrected because rate convention or calculation sequence changed the explanation. The required proof is a reproducible analytical decision, not a generic constant-currency percentage or a presentation that reconciled only after an unexplained residual was assigned to business performance.
• Bring twenty-two to twenty-eight years in banking finance, FP&A, management reporting or related financial analysis, with strong professional accounting grounding such as Chartered Accountancy. You must understand why analytical rebasing differs from accounting translation and how budget-rate changes alter comparisons. Experience should include direct collaboration with treasury and controllers while respecting their ownership of approved rates, hedging and booked financial results.
• Evidence method design for volume, mix or perimeter effects where interaction required explicit judgement. Explain how you retained acquired or transferred activity separately, challenged an unsupported like-for-like claim and made residual uncertainty reviewable. You should be able to test the method using unchanged-business scenarios rather than assume that a mathematically balanced bridge proves each attribution is economically correct.
• Have delivered a bounded finance programme with documented tests and internal analyst transfer, reserving four days weekly over five months. Show a replay exercise that revealed a reasoning weakness and how you repaired the guidance. Clear communication with market owners, secure handling of banking results and willingness to refuse rate or residual changes chosen solely to improve the message are essential to credible independent delivery.

Application

Applications for this mandate are received in one way only: through the India Board Terminal's application process. It is automated end to end. Your Executive Passport travels to the mandate holder in its confidential form, your answers to the three questions below are read before anything else in your file, and every stage that follows is recorded on your applications page.

There is no address to write to and no intermediary to call. The mandate holder reads what the Terminal delivers and nothing else, which is what keeps the process the same for every applicant and keeps your name out of it until you release it. Applications close on 8 October 2026. Mandate reference CVU-CON-2026-IND-017.