Global Director, Quantitative Data Integrity

The mandate

The Global Director will establish permanent quantitative-data integrity from source meaning through analytical use and monitored outcome. The role exists because conventional completeness and accuracy controls do not fully address time alignment, population eligibility, censoring, survivorship, label construction, revision or leakage. The appointee will make these risks visible and govern their treatment across quantitative methods.

The opening hundred days will map critical analytical datasets, their decision uses, transformations, temporal logic and known limitations. The Director will compare data definitions with actual code and sampled records, then identify where remediation effort follows availability rather than decision consequence. No source system, dataset volume or business descriptor is released before authorised disclosure.

Authority includes issuing quantitative data standards, refusing use where lineage or fitness evidence is inadequate, requiring owner remediation and approving delegated limitations with expiry. Source-system ownership, business definitions, privacy determinations and model conclusions stay with their appointed leaders. The Director’s job is to connect these accountabilities without turning the team into universal data operations.

By month six, priority datasets should have accountable semantics, point-in-time lineage, quality tests and use-specific limitation. By year end, model changes should include data-impact review, label revisions should be governed and severe incidents should produce controls that prevent analogous misuse. Metrics will emphasise undetected decision consequence, not only rows passing generic tests.

The permanent capability requires quantitative data stewards who can challenge temporal and statistical fitness. The Director will build a community of practice, delegate decisions and ensure analysts can explain why technically valid data may still be inappropriate for a specific inference or forecast.

What you will own

• Inventory decision-critical quantitative datasets with semantic owner, lineage, temporal basis, eligible population and approved uses.
• Define controls for as-of integrity, revision, censoring, missingness, label construction, survivorship and target leakage.
• Require fitness-for-use assessment when data moves between prediction, causal, valuation or stress applications.
• Restrict analytical use when provenance or quality evidence falls below tolerance and set approved fallback treatment.
• Govern dataset and label changes with impact analysis, versioning, backfill policy and model-owner notification.
• Prioritise remediation using decision exposure, detection latency, substitutability and statistical distortion.
• Report material limitations and incidents to quantitative governance with accountable closure and recurrence measures.
• Develop data stewards through cross-method review and delegated fitness decisions.

Candidate qualifications

• Demonstrate enterprise leadership over data integrity specifically for quantitative decision use.
• Describe a point-in-time or leakage defect that passed ordinary data-quality tests.
• Show how label revision or censoring changed model evidence and governance response.
• Evidence a dataset deemed fit for one analytical purpose but unsafe for another.
• Provide metrics connecting data defects to decision consequence rather than technical failure counts.
• Explain how you influenced source owners without absorbing operational data ownership.
• Show development of senior stewards capable of independent fitness-for-use decisions.

Working terms and boundaries

• This full-time permanent role owns quantitative data standards, restriction authority and first-year adoption.
• Source operation, privacy interpretation, model approval and underlying business definitions remain with designated owners.
• Incentives reflect risk-weighted integrity, faster detection and steward capability, not raw rule-pass percentages.
• Hybrid attendance supports cross-owner decisions, serious incidents and quantitative governance.
• Provider relationships, data interests and prior assurance work must be disclosed before source details are shared.

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 QNT-PER-2026-CPH-21.