Insurance Capital Model Adviser

The mandate

This Adviser will help board risk governance answer whether capital model output remains decision-useful after accounting for dependency assumptions, tail behaviour, management actions and acknowledged model limits. The advice is focused on quantitative challenge and governance. There is no line authority, capital-allocation power, model approval or actuarial signatory role.

The cadence uses three days weekly for a fortnightly technical clinic, a monthly limitation and change review, and one scheduled committee meeting. Management provides approved methodology, calibration evidence, validation findings, use-test records and its proposed response. The Adviser will not calculate official capital or reperform an independent validation.

Challenge will cover risk taxonomy, distribution choice, parameter uncertainty, aggregation and diversification, dependency in stressed states, catastrophe or extreme-event representation, management-action feasibility and the link between model output and decisions. The Adviser must test whether a single point estimate hides material ranges or concentrations.

The review will also examine whether validation findings and use limitations reach capital decisions with comparable severity and timing. An accepted technical weakness cannot disappear merely because the aggregate result remains within a management tolerance.

All conclusions stay with accountable executives and formal governance. Written advice will distinguish conceptual concern, data weakness, calibration uncertainty, implementation defect and inappropriate use. Where validation or actuarial opinion is necessary, the matter will be referred rather than informally certified.

After nine months, the desired legacy is an improved limitation agenda, better change thresholds, more decision-oriented sensitivity reporting and documented committee dispositions. Conflicts involving capital-model providers, actuaries, reinsurers, financial holdings or recent validation work must be cleared before model-specific access.

What you will own

• Assess whether the capital model’s risk taxonomy and dependency structure remain consistent with current use.
• Challenge distribution, parameter and extreme-event assumptions for evidence, uncertainty and tail consequence.
• Test diversification claims under stressed dependency and identify concentrations obscured by aggregate output.
• Review management actions for operational, legal, timing and behavioural feasibility in the modelled state.
• Evaluate use-test evidence to determine whether governance understands and acts on model limitations.
• Frame board questions around ranges, sensitivities and failure modes instead of one capital number.
• Recommend deeper actuarial or validation review when advisory evidence cannot resolve a concern.
• Refuse production calculation, signatory, allocation and model-approval responsibilities.

Candidate qualifications

• Demonstrate board-facing experience with economic or regulatory capital models and their governance.
• Describe a diversification assumption that failed under stressed dependency analysis.
• Show how parameter or model uncertainty materially altered a capital decision discussion.
• Evidence challenge of a management action whose modelled benefit was not operationally feasible.
• Explain how you separated model validation, actuarial opinion and board advice.
• Provide an instance where model use, rather than technical design, was the principal weakness.
• Identify professional and financial conflicts relevant to independent capital-model advice.

Working terms and boundaries

• The nine-month retainer covers three days weekly, fortnightly clinics and one scheduled monthly committee session.
• There is no line authority, capital mandate, actuarial opinion, validation conclusion or model approval.
• Management supplies complete approved evidence and retains calculations, decisions and representations.
• Unscheduled committee or event work requires reprioritisation or a signed fee amendment.
• Provider, actuarial, reinsurance and investment conflicts require clearance before restricted detail is released.

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 QNT-ADV-2026-RUH-15.