Regional Chief Financial Officer — Marine Engineering Entity Economics

The mandate

A marine engineering services region is creating a CFO seat as projects increasingly use resources from several operating entities. The customer contract, delivery workforce, specialist equipment and project accounting can sit in different places. Regional margin may appear stable while an individual entity bears costs or collection obligations that the management view has not explained. This is an open-ended appointment. The first eighteen months establish entity-linked economics and specialist decision coordination, with continuing regional finance ownership as the approved project footprint develops.

The CFO must preserve two useful views without confusing them. Project leaders need the total economics of delivering the contract; entity leaders need the authorised financial responsibilities reflected in their own records. Shared resource deployment does not automatically determine revenue ownership, charge entitlement or the correct tax treatment. You will connect operational consumption, approved contractual arrangements and specialist conclusions so the regional view reconciles to accountable entity positions. Tax and legal professionals determine cross-border positions; controllers approve local accounting policy. The role coordinates those inputs and their financial effect, not a substitute regulatory or professional opinion.

Thirty-four professionals report through business finance, entity accounting, planning and coordination leads across three operating entities. You decide ordinary regional finance priorities, approve management allocations consistent with authorised arrangements and require clarification when project economics conflict with entity responsibilities. Group finance and designated entity boards reserve new guarantees, borrowing, legal-entity change and material policy exceptions. Commercial owners retain contract commitments and engineering owners retain deployment feasibility. The CFO cannot set transfer-pricing policy unilaterally, certify local tax compliance without the qualified owner or use an internal management allocation as evidence of a legally enforceable cross-entity charge.

The initial agenda should create a project-to-entity bridge that explains contract ownership, consumed resources, authorised charges and unresolved professional decisions. Mumbai is the hybrid base with scheduled regional finance travel and remote specialist reviews. Continuing leadership requires capable entity partners who can distinguish an operational resource change from a change in financial responsibility. The region should be able to compare true contract performance and entity exposure, identify cash or margin that depends on an unapproved assumption and take the appropriate decision, rather than treating consolidated agreement as proof that each legal entity has a supported financial position.

What you will own

• Establish a project-to-entity economic bridge linking customer contract ownership, consumed resources and authorised charges, reconciling regional performance to supported entity positions without confusing a management allocation with a legal obligation.
• Decide ordinary regional finance priorities through both contract economics and entity exposure, requiring clarification where shared resources create unsupported cost or collection assumptions before the regional forecast treats them as settled.
• Set cross-border specialist decision reviews with tax, legal and controller owners, retaining their conclusions and unresolved dependencies so the business plan reflects authorised positions rather than presumed treatment.
• Govern management allocations within approved arrangements through evidenced resource consumption, identifying changes that require professional or commercial approval instead of silently moving margin between entities to meet regional targets.
• Build entity collection and cost-responsibility reviews for shared projects, exposing which party owns the financial action and where contractual or professional evidence remains insufficient for the assumed cash or margin.
• Develop regional and entity finance partners in dual-view analysis, enabling independent explanation of contract performance and legal-entity responsibility without routine CFO reconstruction of the project and specialist records.
• Present regional choices and reserved decisions to executive and entity governance reviews, showing reconciled economics, unresolved treatment and the consequence of each authorised course without bypassing local or group approval.

Candidate qualifications

• Demonstrate senior finance leadership in marine engineering, offshore or onshore EPC, or a comparable international project-services platform. Explain a project using resources across entities where regional economics differed from the apparent position of an individual entity. Identify the approved arrangements, operating evidence and specialist decisions you connected, and show what your own finance judgement changed rather than relying on consolidated margin agreement alone.
• Establish 28+ years of finance practice and substantial VP or business-unit finance-head scope through P&L, planning and multi-team leadership evidence. Show how your professional finance or accounting competence supported rigorous project and entity analysis, and how you obtained specialist conclusions when the decision required them. The regional step needs personally exercised authority and sustained finance leadership across boundaries while preserving entity boards and group-reserved powers.
• Describe collaboration with tax, legal and accounting owners on a material cross-border or multi-entity project question. Show how you separated resource consumption, authorised charge arrangements and professional treatment, including uncertainty that remained in the forecast. Comparable multi-entity responsibility is relevant where the method is robust; the candidate must not assume that a management cost allocation independently creates revenue entitlement or proves local compliance.
• Show development of finance partners who could maintain a project-to-entity bridge and escalate changed responsibilities without your personal intervention. Constructive regional stakeholder work, secure contract and entity information, and willingness to report an unresolved specialist dependency are essential. Mumbai-based hybrid leadership and scheduled travel are required, with examples of sustained governance that improved decision quality across projects rather than merely reconciling one exceptional month-end difference.

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 10 October 2026. Mandate reference CVU-PER-2026-IND-171.