Situation overview
This situation typically arises ahead of a funding event, refinancing discussion, or heightened investor or lender scrutiny.
The numbers matter, but what stakeholders are really testing is operational credibility. They want to understand whether the plan is grounded in reality, whether the leadership team has grip, and whether execution risk is properly understood.
I am usually brought in to help leadership teams pressure-test operational assumptions, sharpen priorities, and ensure that plans stand up to scrutiny. The objective is not optimism, but credibility and alignment.
What this situation often looks like in practice
While each business is different, common characteristics include:
-
-
An impending funding, refinancing, or covenant discussion
-
Investor or lender concern around delivery risk rather than headline numbers
-
Management plans that are directionally sound but operationally under-evidenced
-
Inconsistent or overly complex reporting and management information
-
Leadership teams under pressure to reassure stakeholders while still running the business
The risk is not simply funding outcome. It is loss of confidence in the team’s ability to execute.
-
Selected Case Studies
Independent operational review to support funding approval in a scaling rights-led business
Context
A fast-growing rights-led commercial business had scaled revenue rapidly across multiple territories, adding new programmes and headcount to meet demand. While top-line growth was strong, margin visibility, cash predictability, forecasting confidence, and renewal performance were no longer aligned with the pace of expansion.
Ahead of an Investment Committee decision, investors required independent clarity on whether the business was structurally sound and what was required to stabilise performance and protect value.
NorthCo was engaged to provide that assessment.
My role
Over a three-week engagement, I worked directly with the senior leadership team, including the CFO, COO, Sales Director, Programme Director, General Counsel, Technical Director, and CTO.
The remit was to assess operational causality, leadership bandwidth, forecasting integrity, and overall readiness to deliver the forward plan, and to provide investors with a clear, credible view of risk and stabilisation requirements.
What mattered operationally
The review confirmed a strong underlying commercial model, with genuine strengths in rights access, sales capability, and demand generation. The issues were structural and timing-related rather than conceptual.
Earlier agreements carried high fixed exposure, late activation dates, and compressed selling windows. Once historic under-recognition of rights-fee commitments was corrected, the true source of cash pressure became clear. The challenge was sequencing rather than viability.
Sales headcount had expanded quickly, but productivity remained highly concentrated. A small cohort delivered the majority of contribution, while the wider team lacked sufficient structure, management, and coaching. Growth had come from headcount rather than capability uplift.
Renewals represented the most underleveraged value driver. Performance sat materially below model requirements, with Account Managers carrying portfolios that limited proactive retention activity. Strengthening renewal ownership and capacity offered a near-term lever for improving margin and cash generation.
Finally, governance and forecasting discipline had not kept pace with complexity. A high-dependency timing chain required a more structured operating rhythm, including an integrated Sales and Operations Planning cycle, to improve predictability and decision quality.
Outcome
The review provided investors and management with a clear, shared explanation of the operational drivers behind cash strain, uneven performance, and forecasting volatility.
A focused stabilisation and value-protection plan was agreed, covering sales management, renewal ownership, rights structuring discipline, operating cadence, forecasting, and debtor management.
The findings formed a core component of the Investment Committee materials. Funding was approved as a one-off bridging requirement rather than an ongoing dependency.
The business is now implementing the recommendations as part of its operational plan, with improved cadence, stronger governance, clearer visibility through the current cycle, and a more disciplined foundation for long-term value creation.
Operational assessment and interim CEO leadership to realign an investment thesis
Context
Following an initial investment in a mid-sized manufacturing and distribution business, a private equity firm became concerned that growth had stalled and the original investment thesis was not being realised.
The company’s bank shared these concerns, particularly as forecasts indicated potential covenant breaches. Confidence in the management team’s ability to execute was weakening.
NorthCo was engaged to conduct an independent operational assessment and provide clarity on viability, leadership capability, and the actions required to stabilise performance and protect value.
My role
I led a comprehensive operational assessment covering leadership effectiveness, operational capacity, cash flow risk, succession exposure, and organisational culture.
As part of the engagement, I worked directly with the PE portfolio director and subsequently accompanied them to meetings with the bank to explain the findings and outline a credible path to stabilisation.
Following the assessment, I was asked first to support the CEO in implementing an improvement plan and later to step in as interim CEO when leadership change became unavoidable.
What mattered operationally
The assessment confirmed that the original investment thesis was sound, but operational reality had diverged sharply from assumptions.
The finance function lacked the capability to manage cash and control spend effectively. Leadership capacity was compromised by an absent and demotivated founder-CEO, whose disengagement had cascaded through the organisation.
An expensive senior team had been recruited to compensate for leadership gaps, but without direction or cohesion. This increased cost and complexity without improving execution.
Culturally, the business had lost energy and accountability. Reliance on a small number of key individuals created further risk, while succession planning was weak.
Despite these issues, the operational base and market opportunity remained intact. The problem was not the business model, but leadership, control, and alignment.
Outcome
The assessment produced a clear, action-oriented roadmap to stabilise the business and realign operations with the investment thesis.
The findings reassured the bank that the issues were understood and addressable, stabilising the external environment. When shareholder dynamics made leadership change unavoidable, I stepped in as interim CEO, enacted the improvement plan, and led the transition to a new permanent CEO.
The business has since regained momentum, improved operational discipline, and restored confidence across investors, lenders, and the leadership team. The organisation is now operating in line with the original investment rationale.
Operational assessment and succession planning ahead of founder exit
Context
A well-established business with a strong market position was being considered for acquisition. The founders had been central to the company’s success, owning key client relationships, driving product innovation, and managing critical partnerships.
The owners planned to exit within three months of completion. For the investor, the key question was whether the business could sustain performance without them, or whether value was too tightly bound to individual relationships.
I was engaged to conduct an operational assessment focused on succession risk, continuity, and value protection ahead of acquisition.
My role
I led a detailed operational and dependency assessment covering leadership depth, client ownership, product and IP continuity, and strategic partnerships.
The work was designed to go beyond diligence-style risk identification and provide a practical transition plan that could be executed immediately post-completion.
What mattered operationally
The assessment confirmed that while the business was fundamentally sound, several critical dependencies sat with the outgoing owners.
Leadership succession was the most immediate risk. While there was internal talent with potential, the scale and strategic demands of the business required external leadership appointments alongside accelerated internal development.
Client relationships represented a material revenue concentration risk. A significant proportion of turnover was linked to relationships personally managed by the founders, requiring a structured and credible handover plan.
Product strategy and innovation had been founder-led. Continuity depended on strengthening product leadership and ensuring IP and licensing were fully institutionalised.
Strategic partnerships, while largely contractual, still relied on personal influence in several key relationships, exposing the business during transition.
Outcome
A clear, phased transition plan was established ahead of acquisition.
Leadership succession was addressed through a combination of internal promotions and targeted external recruitment. Client relationships were mapped and transitioned through structured joint ownership during the founders’ notice period. Product leadership was strengthened, and IP ownership and licensing continuity confirmed. Key partnerships were stabilised and formalised beyond personal relationships.
The acquisition proceeded with significantly reduced execution risk. Leadership transitioned without disruption, client relationships were retained, innovation continued, and the business entered its next phase with institutional rather than personal dependency.
Additional relevant work
Additional funding and investor-readiness work includes:
-
- Interim CEO appointment to stabilise a loss-making consumer brand, restore banking confidence, and deliver a profitable exit following a period of operational underperformance.
-
Independent operational review for a lender-backed portfolio company experiencing margin erosion, cost escalation, and leadership transition. Work provided the board and lender with a clear, evidence-based basis for constructive challenge and supported management in developing a credible stabilisation plan.
-
Support to leadership teams in articulating credible, operationally grounded plans.
-
Board-level input to improve clarity, prioritisation, and decision-making ahead of capital events.
-
Interim support to stabilise reporting and operational grip during periods of heightened scrutiny.
Trust and context
This work is typically undertaken in close proximity to boards, investors, and lenders, often at moments where clarity, judgement, and credibility materially influence outcomes.
He delivered an outstanding result in the face of enormous complexity and uncertainty.
During my time as UK Head of Regional Restructuring at KPMG, I worked with Trev on completing a CVA of a publicly listed company in the UK; this was an complex and challenging project. From the outset, I was impressed with his motivation for taking such a challenging route; he wanted the best for all parties. Despite being pressed by certain parties to take an easier path favourable to them. He delivered an outstanding result in the face of enormous complexity and uncertainty. Resilient, reliable and straight, you want him on your side.
Mark Firmin – Managing Director – Alvarez & Marsal Europe