Governance · How we decide
How we decide what to take.
Before Lakhera Global Services accepts a mandate, we evaluate it across five dimensions. The discipline is the point: we take mandates we can own and carry to a documented result, and we decline the rest. This is the framework that decision runs through.
Where we say no
Mandates we decline
Restraint is the proof. We state plainly what we will not accept — because a clear boundary protects the client, the counterparty and the firm.
Mandates we cannot own
If we cannot take accountability for the outcome end to end, we do not take the work. We do not accept mandates where our role would stop at advice.
Anything that requires influence-peddling
Our government and regulatory work is lawful, compliance-led execution. We decline anything that depends on lobbying, influence or a guaranteed outcome.
Engagements we cannot staff to standard
If we cannot put named, senior people on a mandate for its full life, we decline it rather than under-resource it.
Work that compromises confidentiality
We decline mandates that would require us to breach the discretion owed to an existing client, counterparty or jurisdiction.
Mandates with an unmanageable conflict
Where a conflict of interest cannot be cleanly managed, we step away rather than accept a position we cannot hold with integrity.
Scope without a path to a documented result
If the mandate has no realistic path to a defined, documented close, we do not take it on speculative or open-ended terms.
Why the framework matters
What the framework protects
The acceptance framework is not internal housekeeping. It is the discipline that protects everyone the mandate touches.
It protects the client
A mandate we accept is one we can own. The framework means a client is never left with a firm that disengages once the work gets hard.
It protects the counterparty
Clear boundaries on conflict and confidentiality mean every party to a mandate can trust how the firm will conduct itself.
It protects the outcome
By confirming scope, accountability and operational feasibility before we commit, the framework keeps mandates on a path to a documented close.
It protects the firm's standing
Declining work we cannot own — including anything that resembles influence-peddling — is how the firm keeps the standing that makes it useful to the next client.
The Method
The five dimensions we evaluate
Step 1: Jurisdiction
Where the mandate lives — the countries, regulators and cross-border corridors involved. We assess whether we can operate lawfully and competently in every jurisdiction the work touches.
Step 2: Institution / Organisation
Who the mandate is for — the institution, its standing, and the legitimacy of the engagement. We confirm we can act for the principal openly and in good standing.
Step 3: Scope of Work
What the mandate actually requires — the work, the deliverables and the path to a documented result. We accept scope we can own end to end, not scope we can only advise on.
Step 4: Individual Accountability
Who is accountable — the senior people who will carry the mandate. We accept only mandates we can staff with named, senior accountability from first conversation to close.
Step 5: Operational Considerations
Whether it can be run — capacity, timeline, conflicts and the practical conditions for execution. We confirm the mandate can be delivered to standard before we commit to it.
How the decision is governed
Evaluated, accepted or declined — under one standard
Every mandate runs through the same governed decision. How that decision is made, and how it is protected, is set out in our governance posture.
Evaluation: every prospective mandate is assessed against the five dimensions above before any commitment is made.
Acceptance: a mandate is accepted only when it clears all five dimensions and senior accountability can be named for its full life.
Decline: where a mandate fails any dimension — or falls in the list we decline — we say so plainly and step away.
Confidentiality: the evaluation itself is confidential. Prospective mandates, like accepted ones, are governed by discretion and described only by type.
Senior accountability: the acceptance decision is owned by senior people, not delegated — consistent with how the firm runs every mandate.
Submit a confidential mandate
Tell us what needs to happen. We will tell you, plainly, if it is a mandate we can own.
Every mandate is evaluated against this framework before we take it. If it is one we can carry to a documented result, we will. If it is not, we will say so.
FAQ
How a mandate is evaluated, accepted or declined
It is the structured way Lakhera Global Services decides which mandates to take on. Every prospective mandate is evaluated across five dimensions before we commit, and we accept only mandates we can own and carry to a documented result.
We assess jurisdiction, the institution or organisation involved, the scope of work, individual accountability, and the operational considerations for running the mandate. A mandate must clear all five before we accept it.
A mandate is accepted only when it clears all five dimensions and we can put named, senior people accountable for its full life. Where it fails any dimension, or falls within the work we decline, we say so plainly and step away.
We decline mandates we cannot own end to end, anything that depends on lobbying or guaranteed outcomes, work we cannot staff to standard, engagements that would compromise confidentiality, unmanageable conflicts of interest, and scope with no realistic path to a documented close.
Yes. A prospective mandate is governed by the same discretion as an accepted one. We describe mandates only by type and outcome, never by client, and the evaluation is treated as confidential throughout.
No. The framework governs which mandates we accept and how we hold ourselves accountable for them. It is a discipline of acceptance and ownership — it makes no promise about results, and we publish no acceptance-rate figures.