Healthcare-Technology Portfolio Economics Adviser

The mandate

The standing question is whether healthcare-technology portfolio growth is creating durable value once service support, replacement cycles and the capital tied up in deployment are considered. High equipment margins can subsidise weak service economics, while a strategically necessary product may appear unattractive under an incomplete allocation. The adviser will help the committee compare these realities without confusing clinical usefulness with financial viability.

The engagement reserves four days monthly for reviewing product economics, interviewing finance owners and circulating a concise challenge note. Quarterly committee attendance is included. Materials should arrive a week before review; urgent questions receive acknowledgement within twenty-four business hours and substantive advice within three working days. Detailed diligence or additional site attendance needs an agreed supplement, preserving a genuinely measurable retainer.

Portfolio reviews run for twelve months beginning 19 October 2026. Any renewal must be justified by unresolved lifecycle-economics decisions and approved by the committee chair after assessing whether management can sustain the challenge internally. Chennai workshops alternate with remote preparation; limited India site visits are scheduled within the reserved days. The adviser is not expected to be perpetually available across every product launch or regional time zone.

Product and investment accountability stays inside the portfolio: this adviser has no line authority and assumes no executive responsibility for equipment launches, service commitments or capex. The role shapes decision quality: it does not approve a product launch, release capex, set clinical requirements or sign financial statements. Recommendations must distinguish an economically weak proposal from an evidence-poor one, and give management a route to resolve uncertainty rather than simply ranking every investment below the hurdle.

Concurrent work in unrelated sectors is permitted subject to availability disclosure. Advisory work for a rival product portfolio, financial interests in proposed distribution partners or an engagement to sell the committee an implementation solution would require restriction or recusal. The adviser cannot turn the review into a self-generated consulting pipeline; any subsequent project procurement remains separately governed.

What you will own

• Question lifecycle profit assumptions by separating equipment contribution, service coverage, replacement demand and support obligations, highlighting where launch economics depend on untested lifecycle assumptions.
• Shape a comparable capex scorecard showing deployment timing, utilisation evidence and cash payback under delayed commissioning and the conditions for releasing further deployment capital.
• Test portfolio allocations for costs that are genuinely avoidable rather than accepting every shared charge as a reason to exit a clinically relevant product.
• Press management on inventory and demonstration-equipment assumptions, including ageing before commercial deployment and the operational conditions supporting reuse rather than immediate replacement.
• Challenge foreign-currency sensitivities using procurement and collection timing, leaving hedge execution with authorised treasury staff and exposing uncovered timing risk in the investment comparison.
• Recommend staged decision gates and evidence requests that let the committee defer uncertainty without treating further analysis as a substitute for necessary investment decisions.

Candidate qualifications

• Evidence eighteen-plus years in financial leadership with direct involvement in medical equipment, healthcare technology, pharmaceuticals or closely related manufacturing portfolios. Present a proposal where lifetime economics differed materially from launch margin, and explain how your challenge changed the committee's decision, not simply the format of the investment paper.
• Demonstrate commercial finance analysis across service contracts, installation cycles, inventory and capital investment. Bring a worked example distinguishing avoidable product cost from allocated overhead, with the resulting choice and its subsequent performance. Candidates must recognise when product safety or clinical benefit assessments require independent domain specialists.
• Show strong financial governance and the ability to connect management economics with controlled reporting. Explain an assumption that you refused to use because the source evidence was incomplete, how you communicated the resulting uncertainty and the bounded investigation that resolved it. Familiarity with foreign-exchange and treasury exposure should inform capital questions without expanding into unauthorised dealing.
• Demonstrate independent advisory conduct at a senior operating or investment committee. Describe how you handled disagreement with an executive sponsor, recorded residual risk and avoided taking over the decision. Disclose present product, supplier, distributor and consulting interests, and show a workable monthly cadence with response capacity alongside other retained commitments.

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 11 October 2026. Mandate reference PCT-ADV-2026-IND-42.