Resolution-Liquidity Preparedness Board Adviser

The mandate

The bank’s going-concern liquidity framework assumes management time, stable payment rails and access to collateral operations that may not exist during a resolution weekend. Deposits are segmented by conventional product categories rather than behavioural flight and connected relationships, while securities described as liquid have incomplete transfer, haircut or central-bank eligibility evidence. Regulators have asked directors to demonstrate how cash, collateral, payments and legal-entity decisions would work after confidence deteriorates, not simply provide a larger stress number.

The adviser will challenge a resolution-day liquidity playbook covering deposit outflow, intraday needs, nostro positions, settlement obligations, collateral location, encumbrance, mobilisation steps, central-bank procedures and legal-entity barriers. The work should distinguish available, operationally accessible and regulator-acceptable resources; test whether authorised people, tokens, documentation and counterparties remain usable; and connect financial resources to the continuation of payroll, card, ATM, clearing and critical customer payments.

The cadence comprises one monthly board-risk session, fortnightly challenge with treasury and resolution leads, and two full simulations involving operations and market infrastructure. The adviser will review evidence packs before committee circulation, observe handoffs rather than accept narrated readiness and deliver a post-exercise challenge note to directors. Management must assign each identified weakness a named owner, practical closure evidence and a date aligned to the regulatory submission.

The adviser has no line authority, holds no executive responsibility and cannot trigger contingency plans, move collateral, draw facilities, contact regulators independently, direct payment priority, approve disclosures or sign the resolution submission. Executives operate the plan; counsel owns legal interpretation; the board approves risk and accountability. Advice must separate observed operational facts from assumptions and must not be presented as a regulator’s likely determination.

The appointment runs nine months. Renewal requires a minuted board decision tied to an outstanding regulator-linked readiness issue after both simulations. The adviser must disclose employment, mandates, investments or close relationships involving banks, central-bank service providers, payment schemes, custodians, resolution advisers and major depositors. Conflicted topics require recusal, and no remediation vendor or transaction referral value may be accepted.

Why the board wants this voice

Treasury sees aggregate resources, operations sees payment dependencies and resolution teams see the regulatory plan, yet directors must attest to the combined ability to act. Internal rehearsals have relied too heavily on verbal confirmation from process owners. An adviser who has experienced liquidity escalation and resolution testing can challenge operational reality without assuming management or supervisory authority.

What you will own

• Challenge deposit-outflow segmentation for relationship linkage, digital velocity, concentration, insurance status, channel and behavioural triggers.
• Test cash and collateral for location, encumbrance, eligibility, haircut, settlement timing, documentation and operational mobilisation.
• Map intraday obligations across clearing, cards, ATMs, securities, nostro accounts, payroll and critical customer-payment services.
• Review facility and central-bank readiness through authorised users, tokens, legal opinions, test transactions and current operating procedures.
• Observe both simulations, recording decision latency, failed handoffs, data gaps, unavailable people and unsupported resource claims.
• Frame board escalation thresholds, reserved decisions, information needs, regulator dependencies and accountable remediation evidence.
• Deliver challenge reports, residual-risk views, indicator recommendations and a final readiness opinion with explicit limitations.

Candidate qualifications

• Has held senior bank liquidity, recovery or resolution responsibility through regulatory examination or a severe confidence event.
• Understands deposit behaviour, intraday liquidity, collateral mobilisation, payment systems, central-bank facilities and legal-entity constraints.
• Can test operational capability through evidence and simulation rather than relying on policy descriptions or model outputs.
• Has briefed bank boards on resolution liquidity, critical-function continuity, management actions and regulator-facing weaknesses.
• Brings independent judgement across treasury, operations, risk, legal and technology without appropriating accountable executive roles.
• Can disclose and manage conflicts involving regulated banks, supervisors, payment schemes, custodians and resolution-service providers.

Non-negotiables

• Can attend monthly Manila sessions and both full simulations, including weekend or out-of-hours resolution exercises.
• Brings direct bank recovery or resolution-liquidity experience; ordinary liquidity reporting without operational testing is insufficient.
• Will not contact supervisors independently, imply regulatory endorsement or accept remediation-provider referral value.
• Will disclose financial and professional interests across banks, major depositors, payment infrastructures, custodians and advisers.

1. 49 words maximum. Which apparently liquid asset would you distrust first in a resolution-weekend resource count?
2. 49 words maximum. How would you test central-bank access without treating a written procedure as evidence of readiness?
3. 49 words maximum. What failed handoff during a simulation would warrant immediate board escalation?