Kharon,
The purpose of a DFO is so the CP can actually concentrate on 'operational compliance' Think of the DFO as a coordinator, balancing, catching, stacking, aligning, joining all the dots and being able to make a jigsaw puzzle picture even the 'board' will understand.
How very UK CAA/GCAA UAE of you...
Over very many years, I have realised how definitional that juxtaposition of DFO/CP really is. Here you can throw in the "accountable manager" into the mix as well.
In days of old, the accountable manager was the boss of the legal entity to whom the AOC had been issued - he/she could delegate authority left, right and centre to their heart's content, but could never escape responsibility/accountability. There was no bullshet 'pass-the -parcel' arrangements like you see in Qantas or elsewhere and the buck stopped at the top. DCA/DoT/CAA and early CASA did not accept minions in the path between the head of operational compliance and performance (the CP) and the head of commercial compliance and performance (the boss) - full stop.
Your description of the role of the DFO was what real CPs did before CASA and others let the foxes into the chookhouse. Every minion between the boss and the CP emasculated the CP in the path to keeping the commercial fantasies in the realm of safe and practical aviation, particularly since none of the minions suffer any real consequences for their cock-ups. Even if the boss fired them, they would just turn up somewhere else to rerun their interference on some other hapless CP.
The Australian regulator has made modern CPs nothing more than Senior Pilots, pilots with no real corporate clout and no regulatory support. So now comes this thought - oh, we need a DFO, a person who does all the things that a CP used to do except for regulatory compliance and who can be looked to as a new regulatory target of sorts. Pity that there is no legislative support to hold the DFO accountable for anything or to require any particular skills or experience to hold the position - unlike those other places like the UK, UAE or other colonial offshoots. But, as you say, suggestions of corporate interference in operational management are "a little outlandish" - it would never happen here, would it?
Of course, if you want to get a glimpse of how the model works in Australia, have a look at how Tiger fared under the BMI boys - that worked really well!!!
Methinks, in pushing the DFO barrow without the necessary framework in place that you are polishing a little more than the gilding on the lily...