Regulatory-Shock Business-Model Director

The mandate

New conduct constraints affect how the platform discloses, bundles and earns from credit distributed through merchants and digital partners. The existing model relies on fees, repeat use and partner incentives designed under older assumptions, while risk and operations costs are allocated after product decisions. Teams propose isolated price and eligibility changes, but these could shift harm, acquisition cost or default rather than restore sustainable economics. The board needs an integrated model before committing to the next partner cycle.

The deliverables are a rule-and-economics baseline, customer outcome map, product and partner profitability model, strategic option book, operating implications, transition plan and board package. The work must cover acquisition, disclosure, underwriting, pricing, fee, servicing, complaints, hardship, loss, funding, partner incentive, data and technology cost. It must distinguish legal requirement, supervisory expectation, management risk appetite and commercial assumption using attributable client advice.

Four milestones govern five months: week four accepts regulatory dependencies and current economics; week ten completes customer, product and partner diagnostics; week sixteen accepts tested strategic models and operating consequences; and week twenty-two delivers the preferred transition, conditions and execution roadmap. Billing follows those milestones. No customer test or partner discussion proceeds without approved protocol, and the consultant will not interpret law.

Acceptance requires finance and risk to reconcile representative cohort economics, customer teams to trace outcomes through complaints and hardship, compliance to validate advice dependencies and partners to test operational feasibility without being promised terms. Each option must show customer, capital, funding, loss, technology and transition effects. The sponsor returns one consolidated exception register within seven working days.

The client provides legal and regulatory advice, product terms, cohort performance, fees, losses, funding, partner contracts, customer research, complaints, hardship, operations, technology costs and controlled access. The consultant does not issue legal opinions, set credit policy, approve pricing, contact regulators, negotiate partners, make customer decisions, direct product changes or promise compliance outcomes.

Why this is external work

Product teams protect growth, risk protects loss assumptions and compliance protects interpretation, while the viable model exists across all three. Immediate rule-response work also favours the smallest change over the most sustainable one. External business-model expertise can reconnect customer and economic consequences without giving legal advice or selling a technology rebuild.

What you will own

• Map regulatory constraints and advice dependencies to customer journey, product terms, partner acts and economic drivers.
• Reconstruct cohort economics across acquisition, approval, fee, usage, funding, servicing, complaints, hardship and loss.
• Segment customers and partners by need, behaviour, outcome, operational cost, risk and permissible value exchange.
• Test simplified product, subscription, partner-funded, risk-sharing, narrowed and withdrawal options with transition costs.
• Translate each model into underwriting, service, data, technology, funding, capital and partner capability changes.
• Conduct approved customer and partner research while recording contrary evidence and avoiding unauthorised promises.
• Deliver the recommended model, decision conditions, customer protections, transition sequence and executive roadmap.

Candidate qualifications

• Has redesigned a regulated consumer-finance or payments business model after material conduct or product-rule change across partner channels.
• Understands acquisition, underwriting, pricing, fees, funding, servicing, hardship, complaints, losses and partner incentives.
• Can distinguish legal requirements from supervisory expectation, risk appetite and commercial preference.
• Has rebuilt cohort economics around customer outcomes rather than transferring value into less visible charges.
• Brings credible collaboration with boards, product, risk, compliance, finance, operations, data and partners.
• Is independent of regulatory lobbying, core-platform implementation, capital raising and partner-placement fees.

Non-negotiables

• Can attend monthly São Paulo decision weeks and approved customer and partner research sessions.
• Brings direct post-rule-change business-model redesign; generic fintech strategy or compliance work alone is insufficient.
• Will not interpret law, contact regulators, approve credit, promise partner terms or disguise customer harm.
• Will disclose ties to regulators, lenders, merchants, platforms, competitors, advisers and technology vendors.

1. 49 words maximum. Which cohort measure reveals that a fee change merely moved customer harm elsewhere?
2. 49 words maximum. How would you separate regulatory requirement from management risk appetite?
3. 49 words maximum. What partner assumption must be tested before selecting a redesigned model?