Health and Education Technology Long-Range Planning Design Lead

The mandate

The defined problem is that long-range plans for health and education technology combine adoption ambition with delivery and cash assumptions that cannot be traced to accountable sources. The consultant will design the financial decision architecture for agreed business models. The project does not validate clinical or academic efficacy.

Deliverables are a long-range driver model, assumption ownership register and decision scenario book. The architecture must distinguish customer adoption, operating deployment and cash conversion instead of treating each as the same growth rate. Users should be able to identify what new evidence would change a capital or capacity decision without rebuilding the model privately.

Planning design starts on 19 October 2026 and spans five months to 18 March 2027. The first milestone on 30 November delivers source definitions and the reconciled driver baseline. The second on 25 January produces the scenario book and decision gates. The final 18 March milestone completes user testing and transfers the controlled model. Three days weekly are required.

Acceptance is by the head of finance and strategic planning sponsor. They must refresh selected drivers, reproduce scenario cash effects and explain a changed capacity choice. Tests include slower adoption and delayed operating deployment. A model that produces a plausible final total without a traceable causal bridge will not satisfy the acceptance condition.

The sponsor provides authorised planning records, adoption evidence, delivery-cost assumptions and an internal custodian. Mumbai is primary with planned remote business-owner workshops. Clinical validation, academic design, accounting-policy change and financing negotiation are excluded. Additional business models with materially different adoption or delivery mechanics require approved scope and fee control.

What you will own

• Define adoption, deployment and cash-conversion drivers with accountable business owners, preserving the operating distinction before building any long-range financial formula.
• Reconcile the baseline to authorised source records, separating measured facts, planning assumptions and evidence gaps that cannot responsibly support one confident growth path.
• Build scenario logic for slower adoption and delayed deployment, linking each capacity or funding consequence to its adoption cohort, implementation timetable and accountable assumption owner.
• Create decision gates that identify what evidence justifies capital or capacity changes, preventing a forecast revision from automatically becoming an approved commitment.
• Test assumption ownership and refresh procedures with finance users, observing whether a changed source can be processed without hidden central overrides.
• Validate the scenario book through fresh business cases, retaining model limits where clinical or academic questions remain outside financial analysis.
• Transfer the controlled model through a custodian-led deployment-delay exercise, checking that unresolved adoption assumptions retain named reviewers and that revised capacity needs reconcile to the scenario book.

Candidate qualifications

• Demonstrate hands-on long-range planning in health technology, education technology or a comparable adoption-led business. Explain the driver distinction that materially changed a capacity or funding decision.
• Show technical finance modelling with source lineage and scenario mechanics. Candidates should describe how delayed deployment affected economics differently from slower customer acquisition, rather than simply lowering a shared revenue percentage.
• Provide a planning architecture tested by internal users on fresh cases. Explain a failed refresh, the ambiguous source ownership discovered and the revision made before acceptance.
• Evidence consulting boundaries around specialist efficacy, accounting and capital decisions. Show how a financial model retained an unresolved non-financial prerequisite without presenting the consultant's analysis as clinical, academic or regulatory approval.
• Demonstrate internal transfer, version control and confidential source handling. The project requires practical finance delivery. Candidates should explain how an uncertain adoption assumption remained visible, what evidence could narrow it and how the scenario book led to a useful staged decision without pretending that the model could eliminate business uncertainty or authorise investment. Show how an internal custodian handled a fresh planning case where adoption evidence improved but deployment capacity remained constrained. Candidates should explain the separate drivers, the unchanged prerequisite and why stronger demand alone did not justify the original timing of capital commitment.

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 12 October 2026. Mandate reference PCT-CON-2026-IND-18.