Challenge the evidence
Ask whether the assumptions, data and controls support the conclusion presented to the committee.
Independent Director candidacy
Independent judgement, grounded in the work behind the numbers.
Vasundhara can bring practical scrutiny to financial risk, banking technology, data integrity and AI adoption. Her value to a board is the ability to connect management’s assurances with the models, controls and delivery choices underneath them.
Seeking a first board appointmentIICA Databank registered. Primary fit: Risk Management and IT Strategy / Technology & Data. Supporting fit: Audit. Secondary fit: ESG governance & regulatory.
Committees
Committee fit
| Role | Committee | Contribution focus |
|---|---|---|
| Primary fit | Risk Management Committee | Challenge the assumptions, models and information behind the risk view. |
| Primary fit | IT Strategy / Technology & Data Committee | Connect technology investment with banking value, data integrity and accountable adoption. |
| Supporting fit · member | Audit Committee | Bring informed scrutiny to the data and controls supporting reported information. |
| Secondary fit | ESG Governance & Regulatory | Apply the discipline of financial data governance and regulatory reporting to ESG disclosure. |
Primary fit
Risk Management Committee
Challenge the assumptions, models and information behind the risk view.
How she can contribute
- Interrogate stress scenarios, model limitations and the connection between risk measures and capital decisions.
- Review whether risk reporting makes concentrations, exceptions and unresolved weaknesses visible.
- Ask whether management’s remediation has addressed root causes and has evidence of closure.
Questions she can bring to the discussion
- Which assumptions would most change the risk picture if they proved wrong?
- What material limitations remain outside the headline risk measures?
Primary fit
IT Strategy / Technology & Data Committee
Connect technology investment with banking value, data integrity and accountable adoption.
How she can contribute
- Challenge whether strategic programmes have clear business ownership, measurable benefits and realistic implementation dependencies.
- Review governance of critical data, lineage, quality and accountability across risk and finance systems.
- Test the evidence for AI deployment, including validation, control ownership and monitoring after launch.
Questions she can bring to the discussion
- Who owns the business outcome and the controls after this platform goes live?
- What evidence tells us this AI capability is ready for a regulated workflow?
Supporting fit · member
Audit Committee
Bring informed scrutiny to the data and controls supporting reported information.
How she can contribute
- Examine whether critical regulatory and risk figures can be traced to governed source data.
- Challenge repeat findings, control exceptions and management’s evidence for sustainable remediation.
- Connect model and data weaknesses with their implications for reporting reliability.
Questions she can bring to the discussion
- Can management demonstrate the lineage behind the numbers we rely on?
- What proves that a closed finding will not recur next reporting cycle?
Secondary fit
ESG Governance & Regulatory
Apply the discipline of financial data governance and regulatory reporting to ESG disclosure.
How she can contribute
- Review data ownership, definitions and evidence supporting ESG and regulatory disclosures.
- Question whether reporting controls are repeatable and whether exceptions are tracked.
- Support the board’s scrutiny of reporting readiness and assurance evidence.
Questions she can bring to the discussion
- Which disclosures depend on estimates or data with unclear ownership?
- Can the reporting process reproduce the evidence behind each material figure?
The boardroom contribution
Challenge, connect and follow through
Connect the agendas
Help the board see how model risk, technology change and data integrity affect each other.
Track the response
Seek clear ownership, milestones and evidence that management has addressed the underlying issue.
These are proposed oversight contributions. Executive implementation remains with management; committee allocation and appointment depend on the company’s needs and applicable eligibility requirements.
Sectors
Sector fit
- Banks, small finance banks and NBFCs (upper and middle layer)
- Housing finance companies and insurers
- Fintech and banking-technology product companies
- Capital markets and trading businesses
- Commodity and energy trading businesses
- Technology-led businesses serving regulated customers
Company stage
Board environments
- RBI-regulated entities constituting Risk Management and IT Strategy committees
- Banks and NBFCs formalising model-risk and AI governance
- Fintech and banking-technology firms selling into regulated buyers
- Indian arms of multinational financial-services groups
Candidate information
Board readiness
IICA Databank
Registered in the Independent Directors Databank (IICA / MCA), No. IDDB-NR-202601-084770. Online proficiency self-assessment test completed 21 January 2026.
Independence
No current directorships; a conflict register is maintained. Independence is confirmed for each company and appointment.
Eligibility
No disqualification. Eligibility, conflicts and the required declarations are confirmed with the appointing company.
DIN
Issued on appointment, through the appointing company's filing.
On appointment
Company-specific independence, consent and disclosure documentation to be completed with the appointing company.
Availability
Based in Bengaluru; available for board, committee and site travel across India. In independent practice since July 2026, so no employer consent is required.