Cross-Border Finance Decision Architecture Director

The mandate

This six-month project will design a cross-border finance decision architecture across country, regional, process and group layers. It addresses recurring delay and duplicated approval without revealing organisational characteristics. The output must show how decisions operate, not merely who appears in a responsibility matrix.

Five dated artifacts govern delivery: observed-decision baseline by 30 October 2026; decision taxonomy by 11 December; alternative architectures by 29 January 2027; live-case pilot by 12 March; and final charter on 30 April. The Group Chief Financial Officer accepts each against traceability, authority precision and tested usability.

Decisions will be classified by obligation, consequence, reversibility, information proximity and cross-border externality. The project will test investment, performance, control, process exception and talent cases. It must distinguish consultation from consent and escalation from abandonment.

The live pilot will use disputed decisions whose current route produces delay or parallel approval. For each case, the consulting director will capture original evidence, alternatives, dissent, owner, elapsed time and subsequent action. A faster meeting is not success unless authority and follow-through are clearer.

Management supplies authorised records, policies and participants. The director may recommend authority and governance but cannot confer it, approve policy, decide individual cases after the pilot or implement organisation change.

Final acceptance requires a decision catalogue, evidence standards, forum design, exception route and transition plan. Implementation and technology workflow are excluded.

The adoption plan will identify chairs, secretariat skills, decision-data owners and the first three months of cases. It will also specify measures for deferral, rework, unresolved dissent and action closure. Management should be able to tell whether authority is genuinely clearer before considering any workflow automation.

The final pilot review will be chaired by a management nominee using the new evidence standard. The consulting director will observe whether participants distinguish advice from approval, close actions and record contrary evidence. Any ambiguity becomes a correction to the charter before acceptance.

An acceptance note will list the tested cases, elapsed decisions, unresolved authority and the first date on which management should reassess adoption. This makes project completion verifiable after the consulting team leaves.

The note also identifies its accountable custodian.

What you will own

• Map formal and observed ownership of material finance decisions.
• Create placement criteria and an enterprise decision taxonomy.
• Compare alternative architectures for speed, control and information quality.
• Define consultation, recommendation, concurrence and final authority precisely.
• Pilot the model on live cases and measure latency and closure.
• Establish exception and authority-conflict routes.
• Recommend the architecture while management confers authority.
• Deliver a standalone charter and adoption plan.

Candidate qualifications

• Demonstrate cross-border finance decision-right design.
• Show a formal matrix contradicted by observed behaviour.
• Provide a decision relocated after consequence and proximity testing.
• Evidence live-case testing rather than workshop agreement.
• Bring governance judgement across capital, control, performance and talent.
• Show scope control around implementation requests.

Working terms and boundaries

• The project commits three days weekly across six months and five dated milestone submissions.
• The Group Chief Financial Officer is the acceptor, applying evidence completeness and live-case usability tests.
• Management supplies authorised records and participants.
• Authority conferral, policy approval, case ownership, implementation and workflow build are excluded.
• Expansion requires written artifact, schedule and fee change.

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 8 October 2026. Mandate reference RHF-CON-2026-PAR-06.