AML Typology Quantification Director

The mandate

The Interim Director will establish the quantitative discipline used to translate financial-crime typologies into detectable, testable and governed analytical coverage. The assignment ends when internal leadership can run evidence-based review without reliance on the interim.

During the first month, the Director will select representative typologies and trace each from risk proposition through data observability, scenario logic, alert population, disposition and learning. Authority includes freezing unsupported tuning, requiring reasoned coverage claims, reallocating analytical review and escalating material blind spots. Investigation decisions and risk acceptance remain with designated executives.

The recovery must distinguish inability to observe behaviour from poor feature design, threshold weakness, label bias, capacity constraint and incomplete investigative feedback. Alert reduction is not an objective by itself. Every change will state which typology expression it targets, expected coverage, false-positive consequence, testing evidence and failure indicator.

By month five, a risk-to-coverage map, quantitative test protocol and tuning governance should operate. Two review cycles will follow. The nominated successor must challenge a deliberately overstated coverage claim, diagnose a seeded outcome-bias problem and present remaining blind spots and compensating measures to the acceptance panel.

Handover is accepted only when the Chief Risk Officer approves the typology inventory, observability assessment, testing evidence, limitation record and successor performance. The assignment excludes investigations, case decisions, legal interpretation, platform replacement and long-term staffing. Extension cannot be used to chase an arbitrary alert-rate target.

What you will own

• Map priority typologies to observable data, scenario or model coverage, evidence limitations and accountable risk owners.
• Define quantitative testing that assesses target behaviour, control populations, stability and unintended alert displacement.
• Challenge coverage claims that confuse scenario existence with effective detection of the stated risk.
• Diagnose alert and outcome changes across behaviour, data, tuning, case capacity and investigator-selection causes.
• Govern threshold, feature and model changes through hypotheses, pre-set success criteria and post-change validation.
• Make blind spots visible with residual-risk language and proportionate compensating control options.
• Complete two review cycles and test the successor with coverage and label-bias exceptions.
• Protect the boundary between quantitative coverage, investigation, legal interpretation and risk acceptance.

Candidate qualifications

• Demonstrate interim leadership of AML analytics grounded in typology coverage rather than alert-volume reduction.
• Describe a claimed control you proved could not observe the key behaviour in its risk statement.
• Show how you identified investigation-selection bias in labels or performance measurement.
• Evidence controlled tuning that improved relevance without silently displacing another typology expression.
• Explain how you quantified a blind spot when ground truth was incomplete.
• Provide an example of resisting a simplistic false-positive or alert-reduction target.
• Show an internal successor independently challenging a weak coverage argument.

Working terms and boundaries

• The eleven-month engagement runs five days weekly and includes diagnosis, two governance cycles and transfer.
• The day rate includes on-site analytical leadership; unusual travel requires written approval.
• The Interim Director may control analytical evidence gates but cannot decide cases, legal interpretations or risk acceptance.
• Investigations, platform replacement, long-term team redesign and operational case management are excluded.
• A one-month extension applies only to an incomplete successor review and formal acceptance panel.

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 QNT-INT-2026-JNB-14.