Maritime Digital-Risk and Customer-Assurance Adviser

The mandate

The forum's recurring question is which external digital-risk findings matter to logistics service reliability and customer trust, and what evidence is sufficient before an assurance statement is made. A broad threat feed can create urgency without identifying a meaningful service dependency. The adviser will test prioritisation and assurance quality at technology-leadership scope, not become a shadow maritime operator or enterprise risk chief.

Five days per month cover finding review, service-owner interviews and a written forum challenge. Scheduled assurance sessions are included. Customer questions needing a reviewed response must be submitted with the relevant evidence five working days before the session; the adviser acknowledges off-cycle requests within one business day and provides bounded advice within four. Live incident handling and commercial promise-making remain outside the cadence.

The six-month agenda begins on 19 October 2026. Renewal is approved by the forum chair only for remaining digital-risk or customer-evidence questions and subject to conflict review. Bengaluru is the India base, with remote preparation and prearranged workshops. The adviser should improve internal discrimination between a relevant exposure and a noisy signal rather than add another permanent layer to the ticket queue.

This forum role assigns no line authority over engineers, service delivery or customer teams. There is no executive responsibility for incident action, customer commitments or enterprise risk acceptance in the advisory scope. Recommendations can challenge relevance and evidence, but retained leaders approve the response. The adviser must distinguish a threat-intelligence observation from proof that a customer's service is exposed or protected.

Concurrent work is permitted outside competing logistics platforms and reviewed assurance matters. A security vendor sales relationship, retainer for a customer counterparty or paid preparation of the assurance statement under review would conflict. Before accessing service evidence, the adviser must explain those links and agree subject-specific recusal or data restrictions. Confidential findings cannot be recycled into another provider's commercial risk narrative.

What you will own

• Test digital-risk findings against actual logistics information-service dependencies, distinguishing relevant exposure from intelligence that has no demonstrated connection to the reviewed customer or workflow.
• Question customer assurance statements for evidence scope, expiry and exclusions before the forum allows technical activity to be described as a durable protection guarantee.
• Shape response-priority comparisons showing service consequence, evidence confidence and practical control options, leaving implementation and enterprise risk acceptance with authorised internal owners.
• Press service and cyber leads to identify who can substantiate an assurance claim and who may approve its communication to customers under existing authority.
• Challenge executive business-review materials that conceal unresolved access or recovery limitations behind general maturity scores, recommending clearer evidence and bounded descriptions of capability.
• Recommend forum review triggers and evidence-retention practices that keep digital-risk advice useful after configurations, threat observations or customer requirements change.

Candidate qualifications

• Show twenty-two-plus years in technology with substantive infrastructure, cyber-engineering or global service-delivery leadership. Present a digital-risk or customer-assurance recommendation you challenged, the service relevance tested and the decision influenced. Explain the source evidence that connected the finding to a customer dependency and the communication or risk-acceptance decision that remained with authorised security and commercial owners.
• Demonstrate practical knowledge of threat intelligence, external digital exposure, identity and service dependency. Explain a case where an alarming finding proved less relevant than a quieter operational weakness, and show how evidence changed prioritisation. Candidates must distinguish observation, exposure and confirmed compromise without overstating their assurance.
• Bring customer-success or executive review experience translating technical limitations into credible service discussions. Provide a statement you narrowed or refused because its evidence was insufficient, identifying who retained commercial approval. Logistics or maritime context is useful, but the role does not assume authority over shipping operations or contractual legal interpretation.
• Prove independent advisory conduct with vendor, customer or concurrent-assurance conflicts handled in practice. Disclose relevant relationships and show capacity for five reserved days monthly. The adviser must produce clear written challenge, protect sensitive service evidence and avoid becoming the default owner of incidents, ticket remediation or customer communication.

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 8 October 2026. Mandate reference PCT-ADV-2026-IND-57.