|
Below are a sample of our Associates’ past project track records.
|
| |
| |
Post Deal Management Assessment |
| |
| |
|
| Customer |
Middle-East based private equity investor |
| Timescale |
1 month project |
| Need |
Post deal assessment of MBO, looking at management dynamics and structure. |
| Objectives of project |
Interview 21 top executives of company, obtain integrated assessment of both the HR and business strategy issues. |
| Barriers |
Legacy merger had left a split in the management team, and entrenchment of behaviours. |
| Solution |
Transparent process of interviews and feedback to management created a dialogue based on an independent team of interviewers. Emphasising working to the strengths of each executive, a fresh perspective on role definitions was established. |
| Process delivered |
Direct interviews with each executive by a multi-disciplinary assessment team. |
| Outcomes, Return on Investment |
Client quote "I have thanks to this process the information I would have typically gathered in 4 or more months, in a matter of weeks. It has given me a solid foundation to make key decisions with the executive team." Benefits to bottom-line performance of the company, thanks to the fast decisions, translate into a return on investment of under 18-months. |
| |
| |
Investment Managers’ Assessment Process |
| |
| |
|
| Customer |
European based growth capital investor |
| Timescale |
3 week project |
| Expressed Need |
Increased efficiencies in deal pipeline process |
| Objectives of project |
Internal process improvements for interviewing and assessing management. Benchmarks to anticipate and inform the necessary management changes through the growth life-cycle. |
| Barriers |
Past initiatives to standardise the interviewing practices and bring greater objectivity resulted in too rigid and top-heavy a process, that increased overall deal processing costs. |
| Solution |
Removal of duplication of effort between investment managers in the interviewing process. Profiling of each investment manager to identify strengths and best role. Templates for growth stages to use with management as a planning tool. |
| Process delivered |
Direct consulting time with client, combination of one-to-one interviewing, online assessment tools, and workshop sessions. |
| Outcomes, Return on Investment |
25% reduction in total interviewing time for typical deal assessment, whilst increase in accuracy and structure of interview outcomes. RoI within one year, based on the reduction of deal processing overhead. |
| |
| |
Due Diligence Pre-Deal, Foundation for Partnership with Investor |
| |
| |
|
| Customer |
UK based mid-market investor |
| Timescale |
1 month |
| Need |
In the context of a tight founder team with established relationships between them, the investor had this question: How open is the management team as whole, to a partnership with an investor, and do they have the right skills for the next stages of growth of the company? |
| Objectives of project |
Establish the dynamics between the founder team, and profile their strengths and weaknesses. |
| Barriers |
The founder team had such an established style of working together, based on the experiences of the early stages of the company, that any changes or new executive members appointed by the investors would likely meet with resistance. |
| Solution |
Open protocol of interviews and online assessments, with buy-in from the founder team based on the mutual benefits of profiling for their own growth as a team. |
| Process delivered |
Direct interviews with the founder team by multi-disciplinary team of interviewers, complemented by online profiling tools. |
| Outcomes, Return on Investment |
Based on the profiling, a common understanding was established for the growth stages of the company, flagging up future milestones for the team’s evolution. A very clear plan was made for a new appointment, avoiding any hiring mistakes. RoI based on risk management improvement of < 1 year. |
| |
| |
New Senior Appointment – Risk Assessment |
| |
| |
|
| Customer |
France based private equity investor |
| Timescale |
1 week project |
| Need |
Risk assessment of new senior executive |
| Objectives of project |
Having found a suitable candidate, final stages of profiling were to ensure no hidden behavioural issues existed. |
| Barriers |
The standard recruitment procedure had produced a qualified candidate based on suitable company experience, responsibilities, sector knowledge and qualifications. Anticipating how this candidate would react in situations of conflict and stress remained important but unknown. |
| Solution |
In contrast to the proceeding process of recruiting for the desirable experiences and qualities, an assessment process that looks at both positive and ‘shadow’ sides of personality was delivered. |
| Process delivered |
Back ground checks, 1-1 interview and specific ‘values and shadow’ online assessment process. |
| Outcomes, Return on Investment |
RoI based on improved risk management of < 1 year. |
| |
| |
Private Equity Service Provider – Internal Culture and Communications |
| |
| |
|
| Customer |
UK based service provider to the Private Equity market |
| Timescale |
1 day + support |
| Need |
Improved internal communications and sense of responsibility to international offices. |
| Objectives of project |
Increase the awareness of colleagues and international cultures. |
| Barriers |
Time pressures and habits had led to defensive attitudes between colleagues across international offices – being based in different offices and without the personal opportunity to build informal relationships, there was little likelihood improvement. |
| Solution |
Chairing an open process of looking at explicit communications, compared to the hidden opinions and attitudes. Simple but effective dialogue framework, independent of cultural biases. |
| Process delivered |
Workshop and 1 – 1 support sessions |
| Outcomes, Return on Investment |
Explicit recognition between colleagues’ own contexts and constraints. Delivering a more constructive culture to cooperation. Return on Investment under 6 months, based on cost-effectiveness of the workshop and cooperation efficiencies. |
|
|
|
|
|