Senior Vice President Global Migration — Banking Operations Boundary Design

The mandate

A banking operations group is consolidating customer-service and account-maintenance activity across international service locations. Existing plans count workload moving to a receiving centre, but they do not consistently show which decisions, client interactions and local obligations must remain in the originating market. The new SVP will own that migration portfolio and its service-boundary design. The opening twenty-four months cover several transfer waves; employment is open-ended, with continuing responsibility for migration standards, portfolio economics and the readiness of future receiving locations.

You will challenge the assumption that a transaction volume is a sufficient unit of transfer. Account amendments, customer enquiries and exception resolution consume different expertise and depend on approved access to client records. Some steps can move while final authorisation remains local. Legal, compliance and privacy owners determine applicable conditions; your programmes must translate them into operational plans that can be tested. The economic case should recognise retained work, duplicated coverage and temporary loss of productivity rather than claim the full sending-team cost disappears when the first activities are transferred.

Eighty-five migration colleagues report through programme directors, with sending and receiving operations managers committed through matrix agreements. You determine wave sequence, programme staffing and the evidence presented for transfer decisions. Local operations executives accept their retained and transferred responsibilities; technology approves access and system readiness. The global sponsor decides material investment or location changes. You may recommend holding a wave that lacks a credible service boundary, but cannot override a jurisdiction condition or remove local authorisation simply because the migration business case depends on a faster capacity reduction.

The first portfolio cycle should produce a transparent retained-work model and transfer choices supported by representative service cases. Later cycles must compare realised service and cost outcomes with the assumptions used to approve each wave. Mumbai is the executive base, with scheduled market and receiving-centre visits that validate operating conditions directly. Building programme directors who can negotiate responsibility boundaries is part of the enduring seat. The bank wants a repeatable migration institution capable of declining an uneconomic transfer, not a leader rewarded solely for announcing the largest number of activities moved.

What you will own

• Define the transferable-work baseline using activity, exception complexity and decision authority, exposing where a nominal task movement leaves consequential client or approval work with the originating market.
• Decide portfolio wave sequence against receiving capacity, access dependencies and retained obligations, recommending deferral where multiple programmes compete for the same scarce operational or technology expertise.
• Build migration economics that include duplicate coverage, training ramp and retained-market work, distinguishing genuine cost release from a redistribution of effort that preserves the original expense elsewhere.
• Set representative service tests with sending and receiving managers, including complex amendments and client exceptions so successful routine transactions do not conceal an unworkable responsibility boundary.
• Negotiate matrix commitments for migration specialists and operational owners, preserving named acceptance responsibilities rather than assuming attendance at a transition workshop implies capacity or authority has been agreed.
• Review realised outcomes after each wave against service reliability and retained-work assumptions, requiring corrective choices before an apparently successful transfer becomes the precedent for a larger programme.
• Develop programme directors through contested transfer cases, delegating ordinary wave decisions while retaining senior escalation for material economic weakness or disagreement about operational and jurisdiction boundaries.

Candidate qualifications

• Describe a global migration where the apparent transfer volume overstated work that could actually move. Explain the retained decisions, access or service constraints you identified and how they changed the business case or wave sequence. Your evidence should establish programme authority over a consequential choice, rather than a supporting role consolidating workload counts supplied by sending teams.
• Bring 18–22 years in banking or financial-services programme delivery, with VP or comparable migration leadership. Practical use of Prince2, agile delivery or equivalent disciplines should be visible in dependency management and decision records. The requirement is mature programme judgement across markets, not a particular methodology vocabulary disconnected from the operational conditions that determine whether a service can transfer safely.
• Demonstrate process-reengineering and transition methods that preserve local accountability. You must distinguish execution location from the authority to approve a customer or account decision and know when legal, compliance or privacy owners must determine a condition. Show representative testing, retained-work costing and a post-transfer review that changed a later programme rather than simply recorded the previously promised savings.
• Evidence leadership of directors and matrix operational owners across competing programmes. Explain how you secured real capacity commitments, handled disagreement with a market sponsor and developed managers capable of making boundary decisions independently. Regular planned travel and secure treatment of customer information are integral, as is the willingness to recommend a smaller or deferred migration when the evidence does not support the original ambition.

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 9 October 2026. Mandate reference CVU-PER-2026-IND-138.