Your full story.
Just for you.

Your operational risk framework at Harlow is one of the most credible evidence records I can point to. A 34% reduction in incidents across three business lines in year one isn’t a claim — it’s a measurable, dated outcome. It directly validates Operational Risk Management, Change Leadership, and Stakeholder Management at proficient-to-leading level. In a regulated environment where risk frameworks are under increasing scrutiny — DORA, SR 21/8 — this kind of evidence is rare and audit-ready.

The 40% onboarding reduction at Harlow sits alongside the 100% EMIR reporting accuracy at Caldwell — together they show that you don’t just manage process, you redesign it for reliability. Most operations professionals have process improvement on their profile; you have specific, dated, quantified results across two different employers and two different problem types. That distinction is what makes a skills record credible rather than decorative.

Your trade settlement grounding from Stanmore — 800+ trades per day, fixed income, reconciliation depth — gives you a technical foundation most mid-career transformation leads simply don’t have. When you’re managing change or building risk frameworks, you understand what’s actually happening in the operational layer. That’s a genuine differentiator in any senior ops or COO conversation, and it’s currently underrepresented in how you’re narrating your earlier career.

Programme Management sits at ‘Developing’ with 4 evidence records — you’ve led cross-functional projects, but the record doesn’t yet show you owning a programme at full strategic scale. The £2.1m transformation at Harlow is the strongest evidence you have. The question is: what’s the next programme that would move this into ‘proficient’, and can you structure it so the outcome is as measurable as the risk framework was?

Advanced financial modelling appears in your private skills at ‘Developing’ — the CIMA Strategic level pathway you’re on is the right route. But there’s a gap between completing modules and having applied output. A concrete modelling project tied to Harlow operational data would shift this from ‘developing’ to ‘proficient’ faster than any qualification alone.

You took a two-year career break and mapped the skills it built — project coordination, advocacy, financial literacy teaching. The record is there. But is it told in the way that serves you best? The skills from that period are evidenced. The question is: does your public CareerID represent them in the same confident, specific way as your Harlow and Caldwell records?