Adaptive-Exoskeleton Safety Recovery Leader — Workforce Augmentation

The mandate

A field technician lost balance when an adaptive assistance profile persisted after equipment reassignment and a changed task posture. Established safeguards limited injury, but review found inconsistent device identity, fit verification, worker profile, firmware, task envelope and manual override records. The augmentation programme head was removed while unions and Occupational Safety requested a controlled evidence position.

The interim must start within two weeks for eight months, covering affected-device review, workforce assurance, profile and release control, two field cycles and successor induction. Permanent recruitment begins after a sixty-day fit and assignment baseline. Four weeks are protected for overlap; the role will not extend for general wearable programmes, new-site mobilisation or workforce-productivity redesign.

Handover requires every deployed device to resolve hardware and maintenance state, firmware, authorised worker, consent boundary, fit assessment, task and posture envelope, assistance profile, sensor state, override, exception and return. The successor must lead unseen worker-reassignment and sensor-drift exercises, with Safety and labour representatives accepting residual device, health-data and vendor-interface debt.

The authority may quarantine devices, suspend adaptive features, require refitting and retraining, cap approved tasks, direct the authorised €18 million recovery and appoint temporary control leads. Occupational professionals decide fitness and ergonomic suitability; supervisors release work; workers retain stop rights. The interim cannot diagnose health, compel use, certify devices, change employment terms or spend beyond delegation.

Procurement of a replacement fleet, redesign of industrial tasks and assessment of individual worker performance are excluded. The leader may require minimum-necessary profile evidence but cannot turn movement or fatigue signals into workforce surveillance. Recovery is bounded to safe assignment, transparent assistance, intervention and controlled change across the existing exoskeleton programme.

Why this seat is open

The balance event showed that adaptive assistance had become a human-safety control without the assignment and profile discipline expected of one. Removal of the programme head left Operations, Safety, Labour Relations and Engineering without a common decision owner. Temporary leadership is needed before any workforce expansion and permanent appointment.

What you will own

• Reconstruct affected deployments across device, maintenance, firmware, worker consent, fit, task, posture, profile, sensor, override and return.
• Define approved assistance envelopes that distinguish equipment capability, occupational judgement, worker preference and changing task conditions.
• Decide which devices and profiles may resume, require static assistance, need refitting or must remain quarantined.
• Command exercises for worker reassignment, sensor drift, low battery, incorrect fit, task change and failed manual override.
• Establish worker-visible adaptation and stop evidence without collecting movement, fatigue or health data beyond legitimate safety need.
• Govern recovery against released devices, verified fit, voluntary stops, training currency, profile exceptions and recurrence indicators.
• Transfer command through field cycles and successor acceptance of device variation, health-data boundaries and supplier limitations.

Candidate qualifications

• Held executive exoskeleton, occupational wearable, rehabilitation robotics or human-augmentation safety authority in live industrial settings.
• Reconstructed device assignment across fit, firmware, assistance profile, sensors, task posture, worker intervention and maintenance state.
• Suspended adaptive equipment when reassignment, drift or changing work invalidated its approved human-safety envelope.
• Worked with occupational-health, safety and labour representatives without diagnosing workers or converting sensor data into performance surveillance.
• Governed supplier-controlled firmware and profiles while preserving local stop, correction, evidence access and device-return control.
• Handed a recovered augmentation programme to permanent leadership through reassignment, override and field-condition exercises.

Non-negotiables

• Available within two weeks for exclusive Madrid service and regular travel to industrial field locations on live shifts.
• Has governed powered or adaptive human-worn equipment in consequential work; consumer fitness wearables are insufficient.
• No undisclosed interest in exoskeleton, occupational-health, training or workforce-analytics suppliers involved.
• Will protect voluntary stop, privacy and professional fitness decisions even where controls weaken a productivity business case.

1. 49 words maximum. State your Madrid availability and one adaptive-device assignment you suspended after its human context changed.
2. 49 words maximum. How did you separate legitimate fit evidence from intrusive worker-performance monitoring?
3. 49 words maximum. Which unseen reassignment or override failure would qualify the permanent leader?