Digital BPM Platform Chief Financial Officer — Price and Capacity Commitments

The mandate

A digital BPM platform is creating a CFO seat as pricing moves from straightforward staffing arrangements towards varied volume and service commitments. Customer work mix, operating coverage and delivery capacity can change faster than the contracted price. The business needs finance authority that makes those assumptions explicit before promising growth or efficiency. Employment is open-ended. The opening eighteen-month agenda establishes commercial concurrence and capacity-linked planning, followed by continuing platform-finance ownership across accounting, billing, cash and approved investment.

The finance model must explain what the price actually funds. A higher volume may be attractive if it uses existing capacity, but can require another supervisory layer or coverage shift when service thresholds are crossed. A change in case complexity may alter effort even if transaction count stays stable. Delivery owners define achievable capacity and service conditions; commercial leaders own proposed customer terms. The CFO tests the supported cost and margin consequences, separating evidenced productivity from an assumed saving that has not entered the operating plan. Contracted price should not be made viable by quietly omitting transition, coverage or nonbillable obligations.

Twenty-four finance professionals support approximately 950 service colleagues. You grant financial concurrence for ordinary price proposals under approved policy, approve finance plans and require capacity assumptions to have accountable delivery evidence. The platform chief executive reserves material commercial concessions and organisation commitments; group finance and the board approve major investment, borrowing and policy exceptions. Service staffing and operating methods remain with delivery management, while technology owners decide technical readiness. The CFO cannot promise service performance, independently authorise a workforce change or credit a technology saving before qualified owners support the operating consequence.

The first programme should establish a price-to-capacity bridge that retains volume bands, work mix, service coverage and approved cost steps. Bengaluru is the hybrid base with Chennai and Hyderabad working sessions and selected customer-finance discussions. Continuing responsibility includes an executive forecast that explains when changing demand alters the approved margin or cash proposition. Leaders should see the funded alternative before a customer term or capacity commitment is made. The finance institution must enable sensible growth while refusing an apparently profitable plan whose improvement exists only in a spreadsheet and has no accepted operating owner.

What you will own

• Establish the price-to-capacity financial bridge for ordinary service proposals, retaining volume bands, work complexity and coverage conditions so the commercial margin uses the same supported operating assumptions as the delivery plan.
• Decide financial concurrence within pricing policy through evidenced cost steps and cash terms, escalating exceptions where a proposed customer commitment depends on unapproved staffing, technology benefit or commercial concession.
• Set planning treatment for transition, coverage and nonbillable service obligations, preventing an attractive recurring price from excluding costs the platform has already accepted or must incur to support the contract.
• Build demand sensitivities with delivery owners that distinguish spare-capacity absorption from step changes in service cost, showing executives where similar transaction growth produces materially different finance consequences.
• Govern forecast revisions through approved work-mix and capacity evidence, separating observed productivity from a planned improvement and retaining the accountable decision behind any benefit credited to the business plan.
• Develop business-finance and planning managers in commercial and operating assumption challenge, enabling independent proposal review and precise escalation without the CFO personally rebuilding every account's price case.
• Present funded platform-growth alternatives to executive governance through reconciled price, cost and cash views, preserving reserved commercial and investment approvals while making the consequence of each authorised choice explicit.

Candidate qualifications

• Describe BPM, IT-enabled services or comparable commercial-finance responsibility where work mix or capacity thresholds changed a price decision. Show the supported operating inputs, omitted or stepped cost and financial concurrence you personally exercised. The example should explain why transaction growth did not translate mechanically into the forecast margin, rather than only cite a large revenue portfolio or an improvement target delivered by another team.
• Demonstrate a planning review where transition effort, operating coverage or nonbillable obligations were missing from an apparently profitable service case. Explain how you obtained delivery-owner evidence and changed the finance proposition. You must distinguish a credible operating improvement from a technology or efficiency assumption that has not been accepted into the service plan, while respecting delivery and technical authority.
• Bring 22–28 years across business finance, corporate FP&A, controllership or virtual CFO practice with substantial senior leadership. Applied professional finance or accounting competence must support rigorous commercial and financial records. The bounded CFO step requires leadership across managers, finance-concurrence judgement and sustained executive partnership, with clear preservation of chief executive, group finance and board approval outside the platform's delegated powers.
• Show development of finance managers who independently reviewed price and capacity assumptions and maintained a reconciled forecast. Constructive customer and delivery stakeholder work, secure contract information and purposeful service-location engagement are required. Your evidence must show continuing finance ownership rather than one advisory model, including a case where you reported an unsupported benefit candidly instead of using it to bridge a commercial target or justify an unfunded commitment.

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 15 October 2026. Mandate reference CVU-PER-2026-IND-176.