Vice President, AI Governance for Financial Services Platforms

The mandate

A banking technology services platform has AI experiments, production features and third-party capabilities dispersed across several product teams. Governance reviews occur, but the organisation cannot consistently establish which uses remain active, who owns their controls or when a material change should trigger reconsideration. The Vice President creates the enduring operating system that makes those lifecycle decisions accountable.

This is a permanent, open-ended appointment with a twenty-four-month initial build agenda. The first stage establishes a trustworthy use-case inventory and ownership model; the next integrates lifecycle reviews with product operating routines. The function should support proportionate decisions rather than create a central committee that becomes a bottleneck because every low-consequence experiment is treated as a major regulated deployment.

Governance must recognise differences in intended use, customer consequence and degree of external dependency. A third-party model integrated into a financial workflow may require evidence the platform cannot generate itself, while an internal productivity tool may need a different control perimeter. The leader will make those distinctions explicit and ensure qualified compliance and legal owners assess jurisdiction-specific obligations through their established processes.

The Vice President controls governance procedures, use-case classification quality and the escalation of insufficient evidence to the AI Governance Council. Product owners remain accountable for implementation and monitoring; independent risk functions retain challenge rights. The role does not approve legal compliance on its own, determine enterprise cybersecurity strategy or assume engineering line responsibility simply because a capability uses artificial intelligence.

The initial agenda succeeds when material AI uses have identifiable owners, lifecycle status and review evidence that can be inspected without reconstructing committee correspondence. Changes to intended purpose or third-party dependencies should produce timely reconsideration, and retired capabilities should no longer appear as unmanaged live exposure. Continuing leadership maintains that discipline as the portfolio grows and governance expectations change.

What you will own

• Establish the AI use-case inventory standard with purpose, lifecycle status, accountable ownership and dependency information, validating completeness against product and procurement evidence rather than voluntary declarations alone.
• Decide the proportionate governance routes for distinct use categories, documenting why the required evidence differs so controls reflect consequence and uncertainty instead of a universal paperwork burden.
• Build a lifecycle decision record linking initial classification, approval conditions and subsequent changes, allowing reviewers to understand whether a deployed capability still operates within its authorised purpose.
• Develop third-party evidence requirements with procurement and risk specialists, identifying claims the platform can test and dependencies that require contractual access, supplier explanation or explicit risk acceptance.
• Govern the escalation of incomplete or contradictory control evidence to the council, preserving product-owner accountability rather than allowing central governance staff to become implicit operating owners.
• Integrate retirement and material-change reviews into product routines, ensuring obsolete inventory entries, altered purposes and new dependencies are resolved before they undermine the governance perimeter.
• Build governance practitioner capability through case calibration and review coaching, enabling consistent classification across teams while retaining a documented route for legitimate exceptions and specialist judgement.

Candidate qualifications

• Demonstrate financial-services AI governance or innovation-control leadership with practical responsibility for multi-use-case oversight. Explain how you established inventory completeness, differentiated pilots from production use and resolved unclear ownership. Framework knowledge alone is insufficient without evidence that governance became an operating discipline rather than a one-time policy publication.
• Bring informed experience applying AI risk management concepts, including intended-purpose classification, lifecycle control and third-party dependency assessment. Describe a case where the required evidence changed as a capability's use changed. You should know when compliance or legal specialists must interpret external obligations and avoid presenting general framework familiarity as a professional legal opinion.
• Show process design judgement that balances proportionate control with reliable escalation. Relevant examples include simplifying low-consequence review without weakening accountability, detecting undeclared uses and preserving approval conditions through product changes. The appointment requires tracing real evidence across product, procurement and governance records, not relying on a register whose completeness no one can substantiate.
• Establish senior cross-functional leadership and concise council communication. Provide an example where product urgency conflicted with evidence readiness, how the issue was recorded and who made the final decision. Experience developing governance practitioners and sustaining their independence should accompany clear respect for engineering ownership and independent risk responsibilities.

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 10 October 2026. Mandate reference CVU-PER-2026-IND-195.