Vice President, Credit Decision Science

The mandate

The Vice President will hold permanent accountability for quantitative decision design across credit assessment, limit assignment, pricing inputs and ongoing decision monitoring. The remit connects predictive performance with policy intent, fairness, operational feasibility and portfolio consequence. It is not a mandate to maximise model lift while treating the decision system around it as somebody else’s problem.

In the first ninety days, the appointee will map each major decision from eligible population through score, rule, override and outcome, then assess where models, policies or execution cause unexplained divergence. No client scale, product description or platform is published. The leader must therefore bring an adaptable decision-science method grounded in evidence and consequence.

Authority includes setting analytical standards, approving challenger design, requiring controlled tests, suspending decision components that breach agreed risk tolerances and recommending policy changes. Final risk appetite and commercial choices remain with designated executives. The VP will keep model, policy and operational ownership distinct while ensuring their combined result is understood.

By month six, champion-challenger governance, override analysis and outcome segmentation should operate consistently. By month twelve, decisions should be monitored for stability, approval quality, loss emergence, customer consequence and drift, with clear triggers for recalibration or policy intervention. Improvements must survive out-of-time and adverse-condition evidence, not only development samples.

The durable task includes building senior data scientists who can explain causal limitations, challenge leakage and negotiate decision trade-offs without hiding behind performance statistics. Success is better governed decisions and a strong leadership bench, not a proprietary model whose knowledge leaves with one team.

What you will own

• Map decision pathways from population and data eligibility through model score, policy rule, override and observed outcome.
• Establish development and challenger standards covering leakage, representativeness, stability, calibration and decision utility.
• Require outcome monitoring segmented by relevant risk and customer dimensions, with thresholds tied to specific action.
• Govern overrides by reason, direction, decision maker, subsequent performance and indication of model or policy weakness.
• Design controlled tests that isolate incremental decision value and protect risk boundaries before broad adoption.
• Recommend appetite or policy changes with quantified distribution, loss, approval and uncertainty consequences.
• Restrict components whose performance or integrity breaches delegation while preserving an approved fallback route.
• Develop quantitative leaders through model reviews, policy forums and ownership of adverse-outcome analysis.

Candidate qualifications

• Demonstrate executive ownership of credit decision science from modelling through policy execution and realised outcomes.
• Describe a model with strong discrimination whose calibration or decision use still produced an unacceptable result.
• Show how you detected target leakage, sample bias or instability before it reached scaled decisions.
• Evidence override analysis that led to a model, policy or authority change rather than generic retraining.
• Provide a champion-challenger test whose result contradicted stakeholder preference and how governance responded.
• Explain how you assessed distributional consequence without confusing statistical parity with sound risk decisioning.
• Show development of senior quantitative staff into accountable cross-functional leaders.

Working terms and boundaries

• This full-time permanent role carries delegated quantitative standards and restriction authority within approved risk governance.
• Risk appetite, commercial pricing, individual policy approvals and operational execution retain separate accountable owners.
• Bonus and long-term awards reflect sustainable decision quality, transparent uncertainty and talent depth, not model lift alone.
• Hybrid work includes in-person model, policy and outcome-governance sessions during material decisions.
• Relevant investments, data-provider relationships and recent model work require conflict declaration before restricted access.

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 9 October 2026. Mandate reference QNT-PER-2026-MUM-05.