Wealth-Platform Modernisation Board Adviser

The mandate

The board repeatedly returns to one unresolved question: can the bank move four booking centres from ageing, locally modified wealth systems to one strategic platform without corrupting client-book ownership, losing suitability evidence or creating a service event for its highest-value families? Management presents programme milestones, yet the committee cannot see a single evidential chain from product eligibility and investment mandates through migrated holdings, adviser workbenches, fees, tax lots, restrictions and client reporting. The adviser will help the board distinguish an impressive technology release from a safe migration of regulated client relationships.

The commitment is deliberately bounded. Two evidence days each month will be used for document review, executive challenge and selected migration-control sessions, with attendance at the scheduled Technology and Risk Committee meeting in that month; genuine chair or committee questions receive a substantive response within three Singapore working days. Delivery is remote except for three pre-agreed two-day Singapore blocks in months one, four and eight, each replacing that month's evidence days rather than creating an open travel obligation. The adviser is not part of incident command and is not on call for routine programme escalation.

The appointment runs for nine months, ending after the committee receives an independent opinion on the first material client-book cutover and the conditions for subsequent waves. The chair may renew once for no more than three months if a board-approved migration wave moves beyond the original term; renewal requires a written scope and fresh conflict confirmation, not a rolling continuation because delivery is late. The adviser can recommend a pause, a narrower population or additional evidence, but the term does not convert into programme management.

This is an influence-only appointment. The adviser has no line authority, executive accountability, budget delegation, release approval or power to accept residual conduct risk. The group CIO remains accountable for technology delivery, the chief operating officer for migration execution, the chief risk officer for independent challenge, and the relevant booking-centre executive for client treatment. Advice will be recorded in committee papers so that management's decision and the evidence supporting it remain unambiguous.

Concurrent non-competing board work is expected and must be disclosed. A current mandate for a directly competing Asian private bank, a shortlisted core-wealth vendor, the systems integrator, the migration-assurance firm or an investor pursuing a material asset of the bank is presumptively conflicted; the chair may require recusal or termination. Prior relationships are not automatically disqualifying, but commercial referral fees, implementation economics and undisclosed vendor advocacy are incompatible with the independence of this voice.

Why the board wants this voice

The committee has strong risk, finance and general technology experience but no member who has personally governed a multi-booking-centre wealth-platform cutover. Programme reporting currently aggregates testing, data quality and readiness into a single green status even when the underlying client consequences differ sharply. The board wants a practitioner who can connect architecture choices to adviser behaviour, suitability evidence, operational continuity and the irreversible moment at which a client book moves.

What you will own

• Press the committee to define cutover readiness separately for holdings, cash, tax lots, fees, mandates, restrictions, suitability history, corporate actions and client documents.
• Test the client-book segmentation and wave plan against relationship complexity, product eligibility, booking-centre regulation, unresolved exceptions and the bank's capacity to restore service manually.
• Challenge reconciliation evidence from source extraction through transformed records to platform balances, adviser views, downstream ledgers and client statements, exposing controls that prove only record counts.
• Shape the board's tolerance for orphaned data, open defects, stale suitability reviews and post-cutover manual work, including who may accept each exception and when it expires.
• Review dress-rehearsal and rollback evidence, asking whether operational teams can identify affected households, preserve transaction integrity and communicate accurately before financial or conduct harm compounds.
• Probe the governance of vendor, integrator and business-readiness claims so that accountable executives cannot transfer an unresolved decision into collective programme language.
• Deliver an independent closing memorandum stating whether the first client-book cutover evidence supports proceeding, pausing or narrowing later waves and which conditions remain under committee oversight.

Candidate qualifications

• Governed a core banking, wealth, private-banking or securities-platform migration spanning more than one booking centre, legal entity or regulatory regime.
• Directed client-book conversion in which positions, cash, fees, restrictions, mandates or suitability records had to remain traceable from legacy source to client-facing output.
• Challenged a cutover decision at executive or board level using reconciliation, operational-rehearsal and client-impact evidence rather than programme status alone.
• Worked across technology, operations, compliance and front-office leadership in a global private-bank or wealth environment with material vendor dependencies.
• Understands product governance, suitability, data lineage and service-continuity consequences sufficiently to interrogate specialists without displacing their accountable roles.
• Has served a board or senior risk committee in an influence-only capacity and can demonstrate a recommendation that materially changed migration scope, sequence or timing.

Non-negotiables

• Can protect two evidence days monthly, attend scheduled Technology and Risk Committee meetings and complete the three stated Singapore evidence blocks across nine months.
• Will disclose current private-bank, platform-vendor, systems-integrator, assurance and relevant investment relationships before receiving programme materials.
• Accepts no line authority, release signature, risk-acceptance power, vendor-selection vote or operational role during migration incidents.
• Can review complex migration evidence independently and state when the available proof does not justify a board assurance conclusion.

1. 49 words maximum. Describe the most consequential client-book migration you governed: booking centres, records moved, decisive readiness evidence and the cutover condition you challenged.
2. 49 words maximum. Which current bank, wealth-platform, integrator, assurance or investment commitments must be disclosed to this committee, and why?
3. 49 words maximum. Can you commit two evidence days monthly, committee attendance, three Singapore blocks and a three-working-day response window throughout the nine-month term?