Skip to content
PROTOTYPE — MOCK DATAFigures are generated fixtures derived from the registry. Not ACF actuals.
Menu (13)
LAYER 3 — DEPARTMENT KPI PACK

Corporate Governance

11 metrics6 leading · 5 lagging11 manual4 without a target
Direct Disbursement Ratio (DDR)
REGCG-01
67.4%
+37.4pp vs target 30.0%
MANUALPayment GW / T24⏱ T+1

Head of Corporate Governance·IT System Planning

Direct Disbursement Ratio (flow basis)
REGCG-01B
48.9%
+18.9pp vs target 30.0%
MANUALPayment GW / T24⏱ T+1target proposed

Head of Corporate Governance·IT System Planning

NPL — Circular 31 basis
REGCG-02
22.8%
No target
MANUALT24 → DWH⏱ T+1

Head of Corporate Governance·IT System Planning

Provision coverage
REGCG-03
40.4%
+31.4pp vs target 9.0%
MANUALT24 → DWH⏱ T+1target proposed

Head of Corporate Governance·IT System Planning

CAR
REGCG-04
21.5%
No target
MANUALFinance⏱ T+1

Head of Corporate Governance·IT System Planning

AML report submission status
REGCG-05
23.9%
-76.1pp vs target 100.0%
MANUALmanual⏸ STALE

Head of Corporate Governance·IT System Planning

Policy currency
CG-06
37.1%
-57.9pp vs target 95.0%
MANUALmanual → GRC⏱ T+1target proposed

Head of Corporate Governance·IT System Planning

Open audit findings ageing
CG-07
3,866.6
Off target
MANUALInternal Audit⏱ T+1target proposed

Head of Corporate Governance·IT System Planning

Operational-risk loss events
CG-08
1435.6%
No target
MANUALmanual⏱ T+1

Head of Corporate Governance·IT System Planning

Collection conduct / complaint rate
CG-09
48.0%
No target
MANUALNexusti + CS⏱ T+1

Head of Corporate Governance·IT System Development

Data-subject / consent exceptions
CG-10
4,433.3
On target
MANUALConsent portal⏱ T+1

Head of Corporate Governance·IT System Development

LAYER 4 · THE PEOPLE UNDER THESE NUMBERS
readiness 64/100
3
ROSTERED
people with a scorecard
55%
COVERAGE
median · floor 60%
0
CAN BE RATED
of 3
0/4
GATE
conditions met

Delivery aggregate suppressed (R-S-16). This unit has 3 people, below the 5-person floor. A team aggregate over 3 people is an individual chart with a team's label on it — everyone reading it can work out whose numbers moved. Suppressed rather than drawn.

Nobody in this department can be rated today — and the reason is above the line, not below it: coverage is 55% because these metrics mostly have no target and none is certified. Fixing the pack fixes Layer 4; there is no separate Layer-4 problem to solve.

Team rosterAll departments
INTERNAL PROCESS · WHAT WE NEED BACK
  1. Is this what you are accountable for? Delete what is not; add what is missing.
  2. Is the formula right — especially the denominator?
  3. Who is the metric owner and who is the data owner? They must be two different people.
  4. What is the target, and on what basis was it set?
  5. Where does the number come from today — which system, or which spreadsheet?