Supply-Chain Resilience and PMO Governance Specialist Adviser

The mandate

The operating forum's standing question is whether a reverse-logistics programme can remain reliable when repair capacity, specialist decisions and transport routes are concentrated in a small number of dependencies. A healthy average lead time may conceal exposure to the loss of one capability. The adviser will examine this programme resilience problem at functional PMO scope, not claim a board-level enterprise supply-chain mandate.

Five days each month support risk-paper review, workstream interviews and a written governance challenge. Operating forum attendance is included, with papers received five working days in advance. The adviser acknowledges urgent questions within a business day and responds within four when the evidence is available. Real-time transport routing, customer escalation and technical disposition are not part of the retainer.

The engagement runs for six months from 19 October 2026. Renewal needs the forum chair's approval and a stated unresolved resilience question. Bengaluru is the working base, mainly remote preparation with planned India operating workshops inside the commitment. The specialist should strengthen the forum's ability to distinguish a manageable queue issue from a dependency requiring an authorised contingency decision.

PMO advice confers no line authority over repair or logistics staff. The adviser accepts no executive responsibility for unit disposition, delivery commitments or implementation of contingency routes. Recommendations can test priorities, evidence and escalation practice, but functional managers retain execution and the supply-chain director accepts material tradeoffs. The role must not become a second unofficial programme manager.

Concurrent non-competing process-advisory work is acceptable if cadence is protected. A retainer for a repair provider being evaluated, an undisclosed logistics supplier interest or authorship of the reviewed contingency proposal creates a conflict. Those relationships require disclosure and restricted review or recusal; confidential capacity data cannot be reused to help another provider win work.

What you will own

• Test resilience papers for dependence on scarce repair skills, specialist approvals and transport routes, asking which disruption would invalidate the reported programme service level.
• Question PMO dashboards that use averages to conceal ageing tails, repeat rework or units blocked by decisions outside programme delegation.
• Shape contingency comparisons showing feasibility, evidence gaps and approval needs without selecting providers or committing operational spend on the forum's behalf.
• Press workstream owners to define escalation conditions and decision deadlines so dependency risks do not remain indefinitely classified as ordinary open issues.
• Challenge whether capacity plans include the recovery burden of quality failures and returned-unit variation rather than only nominal throughput under stable conditions.
• Recommend forum review practices and coaching questions that transfer resilience judgement to retained PMO managers, preserving technical and commercial decision ownership.

Candidate qualifications

• Demonstrate eighteen-plus years in supply-chain programmes, reverse logistics or technical service recovery with substantive group-manager or PMO leadership. Describe a dependency risk you made visible, the decision influenced and the operational evidence that supported your recommendation. Show the contingency assumption you challenged and the functional approval required before the programme could rely on an alternative repair or logistics route.
• Show familiarity with high-value technical returns, preferably semiconductor equipment or comparably complex engineered products. Explain a case where quality disposition, repair capability or customer obligations limited a contingency that looked attractive in logistics terms. Candidates must recognise and preserve specialist technical, compliance and commercial authority.
• Bring practical PMO risk and capacity judgement supported by artifacts used in operating reviews. Provide an example where average metrics hid meaningful exposure, describe your revised evidence and show how the forum changed its escalation or contingency decision. Lean methods should produce observable flow or governance improvement rather than additional reporting categories.
• Prove independent specialist advice alongside concurrent work, including a supplier or proposal-authorship conflict you managed. Disclose current repair, logistics and process-consulting interests. Explain how you sustain five reserved days monthly, produce concise written challenge and avoid becoming the default owner of daily programme actions after the forum meets.

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 8 October 2026. Mandate reference PCT-ADV-2026-IND-49.