How to Structure a SIF Interview Preparation Pack for an Incoming Chair

A SIF interview is not a test the candidate passes or fails on charm. It is a structured assessment of whether the incoming Chair genuinely understands the firm, its risks, and the responsibilities of the role. A good preparation pack does not coach someone to perform. It equips them to engage with the regulators honestly and with command of the material. The difference matters, because regulators can tell within fifteen minutes which kind of preparation has happened.

What the pack is actually for

The SIF interview tests three things: fitness and propriety, understanding of the role, and understanding of the firm. The pack must serve all three, but its real job is the third. Regulators assume a credible Chair candidate has the first two broadly in hand. What they probe hardest is whether the person has done the work to understand this specific firm, its specific risks, and the specific governance issues they will inherit.

If the pack reads like a generic Chair induction, it has failed before the interview starts.

Structure the pack in four parts

Part one: the firm as it actually is

Open with a clear-eyed summary of the business model, revenue drivers, customer base, and competitive position. Include the current financial position, capital and liquidity headroom, and any material concentrations. Then the risk profile: top risks on the register, recent risk events, outstanding audit and compliance findings, and any open regulatory matters including skilled person reviews, supervisory letters, or ongoing remediation.

Do not sanitise this. If there is an open enforcement matter, a weak control area, or a strained relationship with a supervisor, the Chair must know and must be able to speak to it. Regulators will ask.

Part two: governance and the board

Cover the current board composition, committee structure, tenure, independence profile, and known succession issues. Include a candid assessment of board effectiveness: what the last review said, what has changed since, and what has not. Flag any dynamics the incoming Chair will need to address, including underperforming NEDs, dominant executives, or committee chairs whose terms are ending.

Attach the SMCR statement of responsibilities, the management responsibilities map, and the current prescribed responsibilities allocation. The Chair must be fluent on how accountability is distributed and where overlaps or gaps exist.

Part three: strategy, change, and regulatory context

Summarise the strategic plan, major change programmes, and the firm's position on current supervisory priorities: operational resilience, Consumer Duty outcomes, financial crime, and any sector-specific themes. Include recent Dear CEO letter responses and the firm's position on open thematic reviews.

Part four: the Chair's own plan

This is the part most packs skip and most regulators probe. The incoming Chair should arrive with a clear view of their first ninety days, their priorities for board effectiveness, their approach to engaging with supervisors, and their view of the two or three things that most need their attention. This is not a script. It is their own thinking, documented.

Rehearsal: what good looks like

Run at least two full rehearsal sessions with people who will challenge, not flatter. A former regulator and an experienced Chair from outside the firm is a strong combination. Rehearse the hard questions: what keeps you awake about this firm, where is the board weakest, what will you do differently from your predecessor, how will you handle a disagreement with the CEO.

The test is not whether the Chair gives a polished answer. It is whether the answer shows they have thought about the firm specifically, with judgement.

What goes wrong

Three failures recur. First, over-reliance on briefing from the executive team, which produces a Chair who sees the firm through management's eyes. Build in independent perspectives: internal audit, the SMF 16 and 17, external auditors, and ideally a conversation with the lead supervisor before the interview. Second, treating the pack as a document rather than a preparation process. The pack is the artefact. The preparation is the conversations. Third, avoiding the uncomfortable topics. Regulators will raise them. The Chair must have done so first.

Next step

Before commissioning the pack, agree with the incoming Chair how much time they will commit to preparation. If it is less than ten full days across six to eight weeks, the pack will not save them.

Frequently Asked Questions

How long should the pack be?

Long enough to cover the material properly, short enough to be read and absorbed. For most firms, a core pack of sixty to ninety pages with structured appendices works. The Chair should be able to re-read the core in a single sitting.

Should legal counsel attend rehearsals?

Yes for one session, to flag any sensitivities around ongoing matters. But do not let legal framing dominate. The Chair must sound like a Chair, not a witness.

What if the firm has unresolved supervisory concerns?

Address them head-on in the pack and in rehearsal. The Chair should be able to describe the issue, the firm's response, their own assessment, and what they intend to do about it. Attempting to downplay known concerns is the fastest route to a poor outcome.

Who should own the pack?

The Company Secretary typically coordinates, but the content owners are the CEO, CRO, General Counsel, and Head of Compliance. The incoming Chair should review drafts and push back where the material feels thin or defensive.

Should the pack include mock interview questions?

Include themes and areas of likely focus, not a question bank. A question bank encourages memorised answers, which regulators spot immediately.