Home / Investors / Operational Due Diligence
Entry Assessment - For VCs & Investors

Can they run the plan
they just pitched you?

Operational due diligence for venture capital firms, venture debt funds, lenders, angel investors and family offices. I read how a company runs day to day - processes, systems, people - and tell you where productivity, quality and continuity break against the plan, before you wire the money. Written in 1-2 weeks, at deal pace.

The economics behind DD: read the 10x Rule - operational gaps in target companies become 10x more expensive once the fund owns them.

Active engagements. Currently running operational reviews across regulated and operationally complex industries, privately coaching executives and founders, and working with early-stage startups through advisory board seats and pre-seed consulting. Multiple engagement types, the same structural failure modes. Having sat at the table with founders as an advisor - not just as a consultant coming in for a week - is exactly what sharpens the read on founder dependencies and governance gaps in a DD engagement.
How the relationship works

One deal is where it starts.
The portfolio is where it pays.

A fund or a lender rarely needs an operator once. The same execution question comes back at every deal, inside every company that is struggling, and again before every follow-on. What compounds is knowing the operator already, so there is no re-briefing and no second discovery.

01

Before the money moves

Operational diligence on the target. Can the processes, the systems and the team carry the plan being pitched?

1-2 weeks, at deal pace
02

Inside the company after

The 90-day plan executed rather than filed. Interim cover, a stalled migration, board reporting the company cannot build yet.

Per job, as it comes up
03

Before the next round

A readiness check ahead of a follow-on or a refinancing, so the operational story going into the round is the real one.

Ahead of each raise
04

Inside your own process

An operational dimension added to the underwriting itself, scored the same way every time. Your team runs it. I am not in the loop on future deals.

Once, then it is yours
The relationship is standing. Every engagement is still scoped, priced and paid on its own - no retainer, no minimum, nothing to unwind if a quarter goes quiet.

One assessment. Six things I look at.

Three layers - the processes, the systems people use, and the culture around them - read for what they say about productivity, quality and continuity. This is a surface read on how the company runs, not a code audit or a model review. Where a deal needs a specialist, I say so.

Productivity

How the work moves

Who decides, where work queues, where handoffs drop things, and how long it takes to get from a decision to something delivered. Bottlenecks named specifically, and what breaks at the next headcount step.

Productivity

Whether the systems help or get worked around

The tools people use every day, judged by whether the work goes through them or around them. A team routing around its own systems is visible in a week, and it is usually paid for in hours nobody counts.

Quality

What quality costs to hold

What gets redone, what reaches the customer and comes back, and how much of the week goes on that. Rework is capacity, and inside the company it usually reads as a headcount problem.

Continuity

What depends on named people

Where knowledge sits in one person's head, what stalls while they are away, and what the company has never had to run without them. Knowledge silos, governance gaps, single points of failure.

People

Founders, team and how decisions get made

Decision patterns under pressure, how cross-functional work is actually coordinated, and the distance between the stated culture and the observed one. Often the highest-value part of the assessment.

After the wire

The first 90 days

If you invest, what the value creation plan should cover, prioritised. Written so your team can act on it without me.

What VCs usually ask before engaging.

Our internal knowledge is a competitive asset. Why would we hand it to an outsider?

Every engagement starts with a signed mutual NDA and a written scope before any work begins, and the confidentiality obligations continue after the engagement ends. Access is limited to the systems and documents the specific job requires. Nothing from one client is carried into another, and no client work becomes a case study, named or unnamed, without written permission.

Beyond the paperwork, the model is built to move knowledge into the company rather than out of it. Every engagement ends with a written handover: the root cause, the process change, and what your team now runs on its own. An agency or a retainer consultant has a structural reason to keep that knowledge on their side, because it is what makes the next invoice necessary. Here the handover is the deliverable.

Who is this for?

Venture capital firms (seed to growth stage), angel investors, family offices, corporate venture arms, and accelerators. Especially useful for tech-forward funds investing in fintech, SaaS, AI, and early-stage operational companies.

How long does it take?

Standard DD: 1-2 weeks. Light DD focused on a specific risk area: 3-5 days. Comprehensive (technical + operational + AI + team): 2-3 weeks. Express DD for time-sensitive deals possible at premium rate.

What's in the final report?

Confidential 15-25 page PDF: executive summary with a clear execution-readiness verdict, how the work moves and where it queues, whether the systems carry the work, what quality costs in rework, key-person and continuity risk, red flags requiring deal terms or post-close action, and prioritized post-investment value creation recommendations.

How is this different from McKinsey or Big 4?

Three differences.

1. Faster. 1-2 weeks vs 6-8 weeks. Modern deal pace requires modern DD speed.

2. Operator-led. I spent 10+ years actually building and scaling the systems I assess - building the onboarding that scaled an R&D team from 30 to 150 engineers, shipping regulated banking products to 100K+ users. Pattern recognition comes from earned scars, not framework application.

3. Independent & small. No partner approval cascade, no junior associate doing the first draft. One experienced operator owning the assessment - which means findings are sharp, calibrated, and honest by structural design.

Will you also help post-investment?

Yes - this is the model I'm building toward. Pre-investment DD followed by continued work with the portfolio company as fractional PM/COO/coach if there's a fit. The same person who diagnosed the issues helps fix them. Cleaner handoff, faster value creation, and a continuous feedback loop that keeps the DD process honest. For VCs whose model accommodates this, it's substantially more efficient than serial consulting engagements.

Is everything confidential?

Yes. NDA is standard. Both with the VC firm and the target company. Findings are shared only with the engaging fund. Data accessed during DD is destroyed after report delivery unless ongoing engagement is contracted.

How is pricing structured?

Three options:

1. Per-deal: Light DD scoped to your budget. Standard DD scoped to your budget. Comprehensive DD scoped to your budget. Express DD (24-48h) scoped to your budget.

2. Retainer: Monthly retainer for funds doing 3+ DDs/quarter. Better economics + faster turnaround.

3. Annual partnership: Discounted rates + first-priority scheduling for funds doing high deal volume.

What sectors do you cover?

Strongest fit: fintech, digital banking, SaaS, AI/ML companies, adtech, B2B operational tools, and any tech-forward operating company.

Less ideal: deep tech (hardware, biotech), pure consumer brands without tech component, deeply regulated industries I haven't worked in (med devices, defense).

Honest fit assessment is part of the intro call.

How do we start?

30-minute scoping call. Tell me the deal context, target company, what you're worried about, and timeline. I'll come back with a scoped proposal within 24 hours - or tell you honestly if I'm not the right fit.

What is actually being assessed

Growth readiness, not a document review.

Commercial and financial diligence tell you whether the plan is worth backing. They do not tell you whether this company can execute it. The plan assumes a certain speed, a certain scale, and a certain kind of team. I start from the business processes that plan depends on, then ask whether the technology and the people can carry them. The longer argument for why this sits outside the standard diligence pack is here.

Processes

Process maturity and how work actually moves: who decides, where it queues, where handoffs drop, cycle time between decision and delivery, and what breaks at the next headcount threshold.

Do the processes that work at 40 people survive the 120 the plan requires?

Technology and AI

The systems people work in every day, judged by whether the work goes through them or around them - including whether the AI in the deck maps onto a process the company actually runs.

Does the stack carry the work the plan describes, or is the team working around it?

Culture

Founder dependencies, decision rights, key-person risk, and whether the team can absorb the change the plan demands.

Is this a team that can run at the pace being promised, or one that has never been asked to?
Post-close surprises are rarely commercial. They are usually operational, and they are usually visible before the close to someone who has run the thing being assessed.
The fund-level version

Put an operational lens in the underwriting itself.

One assessment tells you about one company. The more useful version is upstream: most underwriting models weigh market, team pedigree, and financials, and carry no operational dimension at all. That is why the same category of surprise keeps arriving after the close.

Look back at what actually went wrong. Across your last cycle of deals, which post-close problems were operational, and which of them were visible at diligence if anyone had looked?
Name the recurring patterns. Founder dependency, a process that does not survive the next threshold, an architecture that assumed a smaller company, an AI claim with no data foundation underneath it.
Turn them into criteria. A short, specific set of operational questions added to the standard diligence pack, scored the same way every time.
Hand it over. Your team runs it. I am not in the loop on future deals unless you want me on a specific one.

This improves how the fund assesses execution capability. It is not investment advice, not a valuation methodology, and not a view on which investments to make. Where and how capital is deployed remains entirely the fund's decision.

Equity and debt are not the same buyer

If your capital has to come back, execution is the whole question.

An equity investor is underwriting upside, and a company that executes slowly is a dilution problem to be solved at the next round. A lender is underwriting downside. Repayment is mandatory whether the milestone lands or not, and the upside is capped, so the risk that matters is the company failing to do the thing it said it would do.

Equity

Focused on the future case. Execution slippage is repriced at the next round, painfully but survivably.

Debt and structured capital

Focused on the present and the past. A missed milestone is a liquidity event, and covenants only help if someone reads the operation behind them.

Which is why this work fits venture debt funds, tech-lending desks, revenue-based financiers and family offices at least as well as it fits equity funds - and why the same read is worth repeating during the loan term, not only before it is written.

After the wire

Diligence is the first job, not the only one.

A fund cannot put a partner inside every company it backs. I take the operating jobs a portfolio company has no one for, paid by the job, with no retainer to the fund.

The 90-day plan the diligence already identified, executed rather than filed.
Interim cover when a product or program lead leaves mid-stage.
A stuck migration or launch that crosses teams and belongs to none of them.
Board reporting the company cannot build for itself yet.
Onboarding that holds through a hiring sprint. I built one that carried an R&D team from 30 to 150.
An operating baseline for a company the fund wants read properly after the close.
The same person who found the risk can go and fix it. No re-briefing, no second discovery, no handover between two firms.

Have a deal in motion?

Book a 30-minute scoping call. NDA-friendly. Fast turnaround. Written scope before we start.