Expected Loss Model Governance Adviser

The mandate

The Adviser will support one continuing oversight question: are expected loss models, overlays and governance responses proportionate to current evidence and transparent about their limits? The role encompasses IFRS 9 and CECL reasoning where relevant, while preserving the distinction between accounting estimate ownership, risk analytics and independent validation. There is no line authority.

The agreed cadence comprises a monthly performance and overlay review, a fortnightly case clinic during material change periods and attendance at scheduled quarterly committee meetings. Management will provide approved model results, validation findings, monitoring, scenario evidence and its proposed disposition. The Adviser will not build models, produce provisions or certify inputs.

Advice will test exposure segmentation, default and cure definitions, life estimation, forward-looking variables, scenario weights, post-model adjustments, low-default treatment and outcome analysis. The Adviser should identify whether a concern reflects conceptual weakness, implementation, data, calibration drift, estimation judgment or control failure, because each demands a different response.

The Board Risk Committee and accountable management retain decisions. Recommendations will state the supporting and contrary evidence, uncertainty and conditions for reconsideration. Model validators keep their independent opinion, and accounting management remains responsible for the reported estimate and related representation.

At the end of eleven months, governance should have an improved performance dashboard, disciplined overlay register, sharper change criteria and a documented response to recurring limitations. Conflicts involving model developers, validators, data vendors, financial interests or recent assurance work must be cleared before any confidential detail is shared.

What you will own

• Review whether model scope, segmentation and core definitions remain aligned to actual use and observed outcomes.
• Challenge calibration, scenario weighting and forward-looking evidence for stability, responsiveness and unsupported precision.
• Test every material overlay for a named deficiency, quantitative rationale, approval, monitoring and exit trigger.
• Evaluate back-testing and outcome analysis for cohort effects, censoring, timing and misleading aggregate offset.
• Advise the committee on whether limitations require monitoring, compensating control, redevelopment or restricted use.
• Track remediation and determine whether extensions reflect evidence-based progress or recurring delay.
• Preserve distinct ownership among development, validation, accounting estimate and board oversight.
• Refuse model construction, provision production, approval and line-management requests.

Candidate qualifications

• Demonstrate senior oversight of IFRS 9 or CECL models, overlays and accounting-estimate governance.
• Describe a model concern you correctly attributed to data, implementation or use rather than methodology.
• Show an overlay you challenged because its quantitative basis or exit condition was weak.
• Evidence outcome testing that exposed deterioration concealed by aggregate performance.
• Explain how you used validation findings without treating them as management’s accounting conclusion.
• Provide an example of influencing board action with no operational decision authority.
• Identify provider, assurance or financial conflicts relevant to this appointment.

Working terms and boundaries

• The retainer covers eleven months, two days weekly, monthly review and planned quarterly committee participation.
• There is no line authority, model approval, estimate ownership, validation opinion or production responsibility.
• Management provides complete approved materials and owns models, provisions, entries and representations.
• Unscheduled meetings require reprioritisation or a written addition to the retainer.
• Conflict clearance precedes disclosure of developers, validators, exposures or providers.

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-TOR-07.