Vice President, Power Transmission Project Cost-to-Complete Governance

The mandate

Power-transmission contracts can appear financially healthy while their difficult remaining sections carry costs not represented by average progress. A delivery business is appointing a Vice President to govern cost-to-complete across its project portfolio, connecting engineering quantities and execution conditions to a credible profit outlook. The priority is financial judgement about work still necessary, not faster consolidation of unchanged project estimates.

Project controllers must establish what the remaining work actually comprises. Procurement commitments can be firm while installation assumptions remain provisional; completed stretches may not represent the terrain, access or subcontractor effort still ahead. The VP will require a bridge from approved progress evidence to remaining quantities, rates and time-related expenditure. Technical owners substantiate execution facts, while finance tests the resulting costs and prevents an optimistic average from replacing a difficult project-specific assessment.

The role controls completion-cost review standards and financial challenge, approving routine forecast revisions within established delegation. Material profit deterioration, significant provisions and changes to authorised project commitments require the relevant executive or finance authority. Engineering owns physical certification, contracts specialists establish customer rights and treasury owns financing policy. The VP cannot certify completed construction, assume an unapproved claim will be collected or alter contractual scope independently.

Twenty-three finance professionals will work through the portfolio framework. An eighteen-month initial agenda establishes critical-project reviews, repeatable estimate evidence and calibration of controller judgement through observed outcomes. The first year should expose unsupported remaining-cost assumptions and identify decisions requiring project leadership action. Subsequent work develops cross-project learning without imposing a uniform cost model on genuinely different execution environments.

Employment is permanent, open-ended and tied to continuing project finance accountability rather than a finite remediation appointment. By the end of the initial agenda, material forecasts should have identifiable evidence owners, approved uncertainty treatments and traceable changes from the previous completion view. The ongoing function maintains that discipline as new contracts enter delivery, enabling directors to distinguish a changing execution estimate from a concealed correction to a weak original project case.

What you will own

• Establish a remaining-work financial bridge from approved quantities and procurement commitments, distinguishing verified obligations from execution assumptions that still require project-specific evidence before they enter the profit forecast.
• Decide the completion-cost review priorities by downside significance and estimate weakness, directing specialist finance attention towards difficult remaining sections instead of treating every project as equally uncertain.
• Govern time-related cost assumptions through credible execution timetables, exposing the effect of access, mobilisation and subcontractor dependencies without claiming authority to certify their technical resolution.
• Challenge remaining rates and productivity assumptions against comparable observed work, documenting why completed sections do or do not provide a sound basis for forecasting the work still outstanding.
• Reconcile forecast movements into changed quantities, price, timing and corrected assumptions, making deterioration understandable to executives rather than explaining all differences through one unallocated contingency movement.
• Lead estimate-outcome calibration with project directors and controllers, testing earlier assumptions against subsequent execution evidence and retaining lessons that should influence the next completion-cost review.
• Develop project finance leaders through contested forecast cases, strengthening evidence challenge and appropriate escalation so portfolio judgement remains reliable when individual controllers or project sponsors change.

Candidate qualifications

• Demonstrate senior EPC, transmission or infrastructure project finance leadership with direct cost-to-complete and profitability responsibility. Describe a forecast you changed because the remaining work differed materially from completed work, identifying the quantity, timing or rate evidence used and the executive decision influenced. Your contribution should show financial ownership of the estimate rather than reporting figures prepared and accepted entirely by others.
• Bring detailed understanding of project commitments, remaining execution costs and time-related expenditure. Relevant examples should distinguish a contracted purchase from a provisional installation assumption and explain how uncertainty is treated without duplicating contingency. Show how you rejected a favourable average or unsupported productivity rate and obtained a credible project-specific view from the authorised technical and operating owners.
• Establish strong reporting and control judgement around estimate changes, provisions and customer claims. You must maintain reconciliation to approved financial records and avoid treating a disputed entitlement as certain recovery. Describe a material forecast revision whose accounting consequence required careful approval, the specialist evidence obtained and how unresolved contractual or technical facts remained visible in the decision paper.
• Show leadership of controllers and constructive challenge of project executives across locations. The VP needs enough standing to reopen a weak estimate under deadline pressure and develop others' reasoning. Provide a difficult completion-cost review you led, the decision rights respected and the later outcome used to assess the reliability of the accepted assumptions, including any residual uncertainty that remained rather than disappeared cosmetically.

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 11 October 2026. Mandate reference CVU-PER-2026-IND-068.