Written for scope comparison and job evaluation
Where the work fits.
The useful question is not only what a role is called. It is what the role must influence, decide and leave working when the change is complete.
This page describes the role. Competencies describes the person.
This page lays out the scale, complexity and accountability behind my experience so a hiring team can compare the work with the mandate in front of them.
Read the role by its work
Scope is clearer than a title.
Across the career, the recurring assignment has been to make an important technology capability easier to govern, easier to operate and more useful to the organization.
Projects and programs have been the vehicle. The lasting work has been the operating model, decision framework, service capability, people system and governance that remain after delivery.
The tables below show the size, accountability and decision context behind the titles.
Scope at a glance
The fields a job evaluation reader needs first.
These inputs make the comparison visible across different title systems and organization types. They describe the work, not a self-assigned grade.
20people ledFinance, Legal, IT and HR solution centre
55+applicationsshared security, resilience and control layer
US$11Mbudgetannual application portfolio accountability
300,000registered userspublic fare platform in Winnipeg
| Dimension | Novo Nordisk 2010 to 2016 | City of Winnipeg 2023 to present |
|---|---|---|
| Organization size | 42,000 employees; US$16.6B equivalent net sales (2016) | 10,806 average annual City employees (2024); 850,000+ residents; $2.5B total City revenue in the 2026 budget update |
| Geographic scope | North America (including the U.S.), Europe and India; global application portfolio | Winnipeg, Manitoba; public transit and civic services |
| Organization and reporting line | Fortune 500 pharmaceutical company; direct headquarters role reporting to the CVP of IT within global IT leadership, with matrix work across infrastructure, security and application teams | Municipal IT leadership role in a flat, federated structure; one of four direct reports in Transit IT to the Manager of Innovation & Technology, whose wider mandate spans Transit, Fire and Paramedic IT; three levels below the CAO through the Director of IT. The flat structure gives portfolio leads broad cross-functional reach without adding management layers. |
| People and delivery span | Bangalore: 20-person Finance, Legal, IT and HR Solution Centre supporting seven enterprise applications, with formal line management; Copenhagen: cross-portfolio security and resilience mandates mobilizing matrixed teams of five to sixty | Three to eight formal project positions across live mandates, plus cross-functional delivery through business analysts, application leads, Purchasing, Legal, Finance and vendors working through matrix authority |
| Budget controlled | US$11M annual CAPEX/OPEX responsibility; approximately DKK 40M tied to the seven enterprise applications (2014) | $10.5M Council-approved capital program (2025) |
| Applications and service reach | Novo Nordisk's corporate IT organization held overall delivery and governance responsibility for 55+ enterprise applications in the formal corporate portfolio. My Copenhagen mandate covered the shared security, resilience, continuity and platform-control layer: assessing alignment to the corporate IT Security Standard, coordinating remediation and strengthening recovery and control evidence across the estate | Commercial applications in the Transit portfolio, including Peggo, fare collection and paratransit services. The fare-collection portfolio supports approximately $85M-$90M in annual passenger fare revenue within Transit operations; the 2026 adopted budget lists $103.2M in total service revenue. Peggo has 300,000 registered users. My accountability is the portfolio and its lifecycle, vendor and service governance, not the technical operation of each product. |
| Regulatory regimes | FDA GxP, 21 CFR Part 11, ISO 27001, SOX and European GDPR; compliance was a license-to-operate condition, with non-conformities requiring documented corrective and preventive action and QA closure | PCI DSS; FIPPA and PHIA privacy obligations; CFTA-governed public procurement |
Novo Nordisk reported DKK 111.8B in 2016 net sales in its published Annual Report. The table shows a rounded US dollar equivalent for comparison. City figures are drawn from the 2024 Annual Financial Report, the 2026 budget update and the City's 2024-2027 Multi-Year Budget. The fare-revenue range is an approximate scale indicator; the published 2026 Transit budget reports $103.2M in total service revenue and an $8.112M fare-revenue increase rather than a standalone annual fare-revenue total.
Scope dimensions
The ecosystem around the work matters.
Each row gives a plain-language input a job evaluator can compare: know-how, problem solving, accountability, organizational impact, communication and innovation.
| Factor | Sub-factor | Evidence from the work |
|---|---|---|
| Know how | Technical depth | 20+ years across ITSM, application portfolio governance, GxP and computer system validation, information security architecture, public procurement and COBIT governance. |
| Know how | Managerial breadth | Formal management of 140+ people at Mphasis/UCB, followed by a 20-person Finance, Legal, IT and HR solution centre, global security and transition mandates, and a public transit commercial application portfolio. |
| Know how | Human relations skill | I presented to CVP and VP forums and aligned managers, legal, finance, procurement, operations, vendors and technical teams around decisions they had to carry. |
| Problem solving | Thinking environment | I was repeatedly placed where no framework existed: no service catalogue, no system ownership model, no transition method or no shared procurement brief. |
| Problem solving | Thinking challenge | I designed operating models, governance frameworks, architecture standards, security programs and transition methods across three organizations. |
| Accountability | Freedom to act | The decision rights table below separates what I can decide, what I can negotiate or recommend, and what needs formal approval. |
| Accountability | Magnitude | US$11M annual application portfolio budget at Novo Nordisk (2014) and a $10.5M Council-approved capital program at the City (2025). |
| Accountability | Impact | I owned the IT Security Standard review, cross-portfolio control-remediation program and transition operating model at Novo. In Winnipeg, I share delivery ownership for a public capital program. |
| Impact | Organizational scope | Novo work covered a global application portfolio across India, Denmark and Europe. City work sits inside a municipal organization and affects public transit services. |
| Communication | Stakeholder complexity | I coordinated the technical and program work with Materials Management, Legal, Finance, Transit Operations, vendors and competing proponents, and supplied the material for the capital process. The Manager of Innovation & Technology carried the capital program through the City's political and executive approval path. I answered 200+ formally recorded proponent questions under competitive fairness rules. |
| Communication | Purpose | Persuasion and governance, not information provision. I built consensus through review cycles and translated policy into decisions and delivery. |
| Innovation | Thinking complexity | I designed frameworks intended to survive system changes, staff changes and program completion rather than depend on one person. |
| Knowledge | Breadth | IT governance, information security architecture, procurement law, financial management, regulatory compliance, vendor governance and organizational change across three countries. |
Decision rights
What I can decide, and what needs approval.
Work proceeds within policy and is reviewed afterwards. The examples below show the boundary between my working authority, recommendations and formal approval.
| Decision | My authority | Approval or countersign |
|---|---|---|
| Application acquisition requirements and technical fit | Own the requirements and evaluation process for applications in the delegated portfolio. Direct business analysts or consultants to elicit functional requirements from the line of business; work with IT Risk and Architecture to derive non-functional requirements from the business-impact assessment, privacy and data sensitivity, availability, recovery and security needs; maintain traceability into procurement, solution evaluation and recommendation | The line of business or Information Owner approves functional requirements and accepts business risk. The responsible IT head owns and accepts IT risk and exceptions. Corporate Architecture and Security Governance approve departures from enterprise standards or decisions outside delegated authority |
| Exceptions to standards | Assess the risk, document the rationale and recommend a disposition | The accountable architecture, security or business authority |
| Vendor evaluation criteria and scoring methodology | As a member of the evaluation committee, own the technology content and scoring inputs, then align them through consensus | Procurement and delegated approval of the evaluation process |
| Vendor evaluation and recommendation | As a member of the evaluation committee, apply the approved evaluation criteria and weightings through the multi-stage RFP. Assess technical proposals and demonstrations, answer proponent questions, contribute to consensus scoring and the consolidated evaluation matrix, and recommend the preferred proponent. Maintain an auditable record through each gate and support negotiations with Legal and Purchasing | Purchasing and Legal oversee each stage. The final award report requires approval by the responsible executives, including Legal, Purchasing, the Director of IT and CFO, with CAO or Council approval where thresholds require |
| Contract terms and service levels | Negotiate technology requirements, service levels and the statement of work with suppliers and Legal | Legal and delegated signing authority |
| Operating expenditure | Own forecasts, accruals, commitments and burn-rate control for the assigned portfolio | Delegated budget approval |
| Capital expenditure | Own technology requirements, cost inputs and business-case material for the approval process | Council or the applicable delegated approval body |
Read it with the evidence
Every claim has a chapter behind it.
Explore the work itself, then decide how the scope compares with the mandate you are hiring for.