Leila Hassan example mandate · Vanar Foundry Showcase

Leila Hassan Executive mandate

Operations Leadership Seat · USD 5,200 / month

90-day COO mandate: Aldmere Fit-Out

Leila Hassan owns delivery. Client contracts and anything priced stay with the founders.

Prepared for: Aldmere Fit-Out · 76 staff, commercial interiors
Settlement: $COO · USDC on Base

Aldmere delivers good work late. Eleven of the last fourteen projects overran, the founders firefight every one of them personally, and nobody has asked whether the programmes were ever realistic. This mandate puts one person in charge of finding out.

Mandate agreed. The suspicion is that the estimates are wrong, not the delivery.

From 2 February, Leila owns project delivery, the operating cadence, resourcing across live jobs and spend to USD 30,000. Pricing, client contracts and variations remain with the founders. The first finding is likely to be uncomfortable: on the four projects reviewed, the programme agreed at sale was shorter than any comparable job Aldmere has ever completed.

5 days Per month, reserved

11 of 14 Recent projects overran

9 Live projects

USD 30k Spend authority

Document control

Document number: MAN-ALD-01
Version: 1.0
Effective: 2 February 2027
Owner: Leila Hassan, Fractional COO
Approved by: Sam and Dean Aldmere, founders
Next review: 4 May 2027
Classification: Confidential. Leadership team

Why

What the diagnostic found

Observed	Evidence
Eleven of fourteen projects overran	Average overrun 19 working days on a mean 64 day programme
Programmes are set during the sale	By whichever founder is on the pitch, before any delivery input
No project manager has authority over their own programme	Confirmed with all four PMs
Both founders are on site most days	Their diaries. Neither has been in the office a full week since August
Variations are agreed verbally on site	Then invoiced later, sometimes disputed
The work itself is good	Two repeat clients, no quality complaints in 14 projects

The pattern in rows two and three is the whole problem. Delivery is being held to a promise that delivery did not make and cannot change.

Authority

Decision rights

	Leila decides	Founders decide
Programme and sequencing on live projects	Yes
Resourcing and crew allocation across jobs	Yes
Project manager authority and structure	Yes
Subcontractor selection from the approved list	Yes
Spend to USD 30,000 within an agreed project budget	Yes
Operating cadence and reporting	Yes
Site safety escalation and stopping work	Yes, always
Programme dates offered during a sale	Input required	Decide
Pricing, quotes and contract terms		Founders
Agreeing a variation with a client		Founders, in writing
Anything legal or contractual		Founders and their solicitor

The eighth row is the change that matters. Leila does not set the dates offered to a client, but no date may be offered without delivery input, and that input is recorded.

Plan

What the 90 days does

Measure what jobs actually take

Fourteen completed projects, actual durations by trade and stage. This is the evidence base and it does not exist today.
PMs get written authority over their own programmes

Including the authority to say a date is not achievable.
Weekly delivery meeting, all nine live jobs

One hour. The founders attend and do not chair.
Realistic programme template from real durations

Used for every new quote from here. This is where the discomfort lands.
Variations move to written-only

No variation without a signed instruction. Protects the client relationship as much as the margin.
Review

Are the founders off site more, and are the new jobs hitting their dates?

Measures

How this gets judged on 4 May

Measure	Today	What good looks like
Projects quoted with delivery input	0	All of them, recorded
PMs with written programme authority	0 of 4	4 of 4
Variations agreed in writing	Rarely	Every one
Actual duration data	None	14 projects, by trade and stage
Founder days on site	Most days	Fewer, and by choice
Projects delivered on programme	3 of 14	Measured on jobs quoted after week 6 only

The last row is scoped deliberately. Judging this mandate on projects sold before the programme template changed would be judging it on a promise it had no part in making.

Document control

Revision history

Version	Date	Author	Change
1.0	23 January 2027	Leila Hassan	Agreed and signed. Effective 2 February 2027.
0.2	19 January 2027	Leila Hassan	Draft. Delivery input made a condition on quoted dates after both founders accepted the finding in clause 3.
0.1	15 January 2027	Leila Hassan	First draft from the operations diagnostic of 12 January.

How this mandate was built, and its limits

Written from an operations diagnostic delivered on 12 January 2027, drawing on completion records for fourteen finished projects, four of them examined in detail against their original programmes, the current schedule for nine live jobs, and interviews with both founders, all four project managers and two site supervisors. The duration comparison in clause 3 is based on those four projects and is described as likely rather than established because ten remain to be analysed. A fractional executive seat creates no statutory directorship and no signing authority. This mandate does not price work, does not agree variations, does not advise on contracts and is not a construction, health and safety or building regulations consultancy. Site safety escalation is included because stopping unsafe work should never wait for authority.