Education Growth-Channel Allocation and Contribution — Commercial Adviser

The mandate

The product commercial review needs to decide how much growth spend should remain in channels that convert well but generate uneven realised contribution. The adviser will challenge allocation using cohort behaviour, discounts, refunds and retention. This recurring question concerns product-level commercial economics, not enterprise capital strategy, curriculum ownership or a standing contract to run marketing campaigns.

Four days monthly support a channel challenge, cohort-evidence workshop, product review meeting and preparation. Product review attendance is included; complete ad-hoc experiment questions receive initial advice within three business days. Gurugram is the hybrid base, with source owners supplying approved data and any customer or delivery observation scheduled within the agreed allocation.

The six-month advisory window starts on 19 October 2026 and expires on 18 April 2027. The commercial review chair considers renewal based on altered allocation and stronger internal economic challenge. A request to run campaigns, build production analytics or lead a product turnaround requires separate scope; the retainer does not provide unrestricted operating support.

Channel allocation advice conveys no line authority over growth staff and no executive responsibility for the approved commercial result. Product management retains spend and pricing decisions, and specialist owners retain academic and delivery judgements. Recommendations must distinguish source-backed economic signals from hypotheses requiring an approved experiment before a strategic preference is treated as proven.

Concurrent non-competing advice may coexist with reserved time. A competing education product, acquisition-channel agency or partner paid according to recommended spend creates a conflict requiring disclosure. Agency commissions, experiment success fees and implementation revenue are excluded because the adviser may recommend lower spend, different measurement or no further channel expansion.

What you will own

• Challenge channel allocation cases by reconciling acquisition cost, realised revenue and continuing support obligations, identifying where conversion strength does not establish durable cohort contribution under the approved product economics.
• Probe discount and refund assumptions against observed customer behaviour, refusing apparent payback improvements that depend on omitted reversals or inconsistent treatment across channels and enrolment cohorts.
• Test retention signals for measurement timing and source integrity, distinguishing an economically useful pattern from a claim about academic quality or product outcomes outside commercial finance competence.
• Shape experiment alternatives with explicit hypotheses, stop conditions and retained spend approval, ensuring a preferred channel narrative remains testable rather than becoming a permanent commitment by default.
• Press sponsors to compare marginal channel spend rather than only historical averages, exposing saturation or delivery-capacity conditions that could invalidate extrapolation from earlier successful cohorts.
• Review product management responses and subsequent evidence, preserving rejected advice and reconsideration triggers when customer behaviour or realised contribution changes during the advisory term.

Candidate qualifications

• Demonstrate product-level growth economics or P&L judgement in education, consumer technology or a comparable cohort-led business. Describe an allocation recommendation personally influenced and the retained operating authority. Candidates must support practical advisory scope with decisions and artefacts, not assume enterprise board competence from a director designation or growth title.
• Show CAC, payback, refund and contribution understanding through a redacted cohort comparison. Explain a channel whose apparent efficiency failed when realised revenue and support were included. The adviser must preserve source and measurement limitations and distinguish commercial signals from academic, regulated or specialist product conclusions requiring the appropriate authorised owner.
• Evidence independent challenge without campaign control, including a recommendation to reduce spend or change experiment design despite sponsor enthusiasm. Show management response and what later evidence changed. A useful adviser cannot rely on directing implementation, an agency commission or a promised conversion uplift to demonstrate the value of this bounded commercial retainer.
• Evidence eleven years in commercially accountable product work, including a channel decision where realised enrolment contribution mattered more than acquisition volume. Reserve the four-day monthly cadence and disclose agency, channel-partner or competing-product incentives. Show how confidential cohort data was separated from other clients and explain why a spend-linked commission would undermine your ability to recommend reducing investment in a favoured channel.

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 14 October 2026. Mandate reference PCT-ADV-2026-IND-35.