Investment Committee Guidelines

12 years ago Dr. McLean Sibanda, back then the CEO of The Innovation Hub, asked me to chair the investment committe of this amazing institution which is tasked with investing in researchers & innovators across deep tech to biotech to everything in between. Over the years we invested in over 300 startups. This morning they asked me to stick around for an additional 3 years. But this is not a post about me but rather to take you behind the scenes of what we did to make the whole investment process better so that you can learn how with a few tweaks we aligned ourselves better with the people we are meant to support. 2 caveats: - I am sharing learnings in my personal capacity. - I may be writing this post, but none of any of this would have been possible without the amazing support to try something new by all involved! If you're a startup looking for funding read this so you know exactly what happens behind the scenes and can prepare yourself better: https://lnkd.in/dSw4NNnZ Tips for other funding committees: 1. You're investing in the jockey much more than the horse at this stage of business readiness so it doesn't make sense to just look at the business plan. We changed our funding discussions by inviting the entrepreneur to our committee meetings so that the committee had time to ask questions that were maybe confusingly covered in the business plan and also for us to get a sense of the jockey... after all we are interested in the innovator and their idea and not trying to find faults in their writing abilities around a business plan. 2. In a typical investment committee day we would look at 10-16 businesses to invest in so it requires excellent time management. TIH did an amazing job at also making it even easier to make a decision by working with us to clarify before the meeting all the info that we really needed to understand the investment case so you don't waste time in the actual day. 3. If we turned away a funding request it had to come with our suggestions of what they could do to re-submit. The experience should be a learning one for applicants! 4. We invested time in getting to know each other in the committee. This helped enormously as each has deep technical expertise so made it easier to know who to listen to for best guidance in unfamiliar technical territory. 5. Remember to make it fun. We should take what we do seriously but not ourselves. 6. If you're chairing, remember to stay in the background: your role is not to influence but rather to steer, guide and help the flow. I tried to share my view only after everyone else had spoken and bring the discussion to a closing decision. Mostly I stepped up when someone had to stick their necks out and take a chance for the entrepreneur (sometime one gets caught in the risk side of a investment and not enough in our risk-taking mandate). Hope this helped!

Before the spreadsheet opens, investment committees run every deal through the same filter. Three questions, in order. First: Is this the right person? They want sponsors who've executed similar projects, ideally in the same market. Track record matters more than pro forma projections. A developer who's built 15 projects in Charlotte carries more weight than one who's built 30 scattered across the country. Second: Is this the right asset? Committees gravitate toward projects that fit templates they've had success with. Garden apartments near employment nodes. Build-to-rent in growing suburbs. Industrial along highway corridors. If your concept requires a long explanation, you're already at a disadvantage. Third: Is this the right market? Sun Belt markets still check this box, but committees are granular now. They want specific submarket data, not regional optimism. They're asking about infrastructure capacity, competing supply, and absorption trends at the neighborhood level. The deals that clear committee are the ones where all three answers come back clean. Miss on any one of them, and the spreadsheet barely matters.

if EQT hired me to standardize how they document investment committee meetings, here is what i would do: IC meetings move fast. decisions happen in the room, conditions get added verbally, and half the nuance never makes it into a slide. afterwards? everyone remembers it slightly differently. and that's where problems start. because IC notes aren't just a recap. they're what teams come back to months later when a deal progresses, when partners rotate, when LPs ask "why did we do this?" that's why i built an IC meeting template in Jamie. Jamie is a privacy first AI note taker. no bot joins the call. fully GDPR compliant. built for the kind of conversations where confidentiality actually matters. using our IC template in Jamie every IC gets documented the same way. nothing missed, nothing left to memory: → deal and meeting context → key discussion points raised → committee questions and concerns → decision and any attached conditions → clear follow up actions with owners try it in your next IC → https://lnkd.in/daRdagJi

🛡️⛓️💥 𝐘𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐛𝐢𝐠𝐠𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐤 𝐢𝐬𝐧’𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐟𝐨𝐥𝐢𝐨. 𝐈𝐭’𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐨𝐨𝐦. In too many family offices, the decision room is where capital discipline quietly breaks. Not in the spreadsheets—there the numbers line up. ⛓️💥⛓️💥⛓️💥 𝐈𝐭 𝐛𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐤𝐬 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐢𝐬 𝐟𝐮𝐳𝐳𝐲, shadow decision-makers weigh in after the meeting, and no one can say who owns the next move. I see the same patterns in investment committees, councils, and ad-hoc “kitchen cabinet” calls. Here are five quick tests: 1. If three senior people give three different answers to “What is our mandate?”, you don’t have governance—you have drift. 2. If decisions get revisited in private after the meeting, you don’t have escalation—you have shadow process. 3. If the independent chair can’t say who makes the final call on liquidity, you don’t have clarity—you have risk. 4. If the same conflict shows up every quarter (control vs. liquidity; yield vs. impact), you don’t have alignment—you have loops. 5. If advisors leave meetings with “assumptions” instead of a written brief, you don’t have ownership—you have noise. 𝐎𝐧𝐞 𝐬𝐢𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐧𝐞𝐱𝐭 30 𝐝𝐚𝐲𝐬: Run a 60-minute “decision audit.” 📝List your last 10 major decisions and answer four lines for each: What was the decision? Who made it? By what process? What changed after the meeting? You’ll see exactly where mandate, authority, and cadence break down—and where to fix them. 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐝-𝐜𝐨𝐝𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐛𝐚𝐬𝐢𝐜𝐬: 𝐚 𝐨𝐧𝐞-𝐩𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐚𝐭𝐞, 𝐝𝐞𝐜𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭𝐬 𝐛𝐲 𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐠𝐨𝐫𝐲, 𝐚 48-𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐞𝐬𝐜𝐚𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐫𝐮𝐥𝐞, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐦𝐞𝐞𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐚 𝐧𝐚𝐦𝐞𝐝 𝐨𝐰𝐧𝐞𝐫 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐝𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐞. 𝐈𝐭’𝐬 𝐛𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐠. 𝐈𝐭 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤𝐬💎 🧐 If you run or advise a Family Office: which of these hurts most right now—1, 2, 3, 4, or 5?

What is Family Office Investment Committee? The Investment Committee (IC) is the body that vets, debates, and ultimately approves or rejects deals. It’s the filter between your pitch and the family’s capital. Members usually include family principals, CIOs, and trusted external advisors. Their mandate is to balance financial performance with the family’s values, risk appetite, and legacy objectives. What happens inside? • Deals are presented, debated, and stress-tested • Every assumption (returns, risk, liquidity, manager background) is scrutinized • Alignment with the family’s long-term vision is weighed as heavily as IRR • Final approval requires consensus, not charisma How do you approach it? • Expect layers. Even if a family member loves your idea, the IC will have the final word • Never rush the process. Families value patience… it often takes 3 or more meetings before real decisions are made • Come with clarity, not hype. The IC has heard every pitch under the sun… what stands out is transparency and alignment with their stated priorities • Build champions inside. Your real goal is to equip the family member or CIO who will carry your deal into that committee room when you’re not there • Follow up with substance. ICs need data, not generic updates. Every document should reduce friction and answer objections before they surface Practical reality? You don’t “sell” an Investment Committee. You educate, you align, and you respect their pace. If you do it right, you’re not just securing a check… you’re earning the trust of a multi-generational capital base. #familyoffice #banking #fintech #investment #ai #finance #growth #planning #wealthmanagement

#TheVCJourney | 31 — Playbook   Inside the Investment Committee — Who Really Decides Your Fate  Myth   If a VC partner likes your startup, the deal is done.  Reality   Every serious VC decision goes through an Investment Committee.   It’s where conviction is tested, risks are dissected, and millions get signed off.  Who Sits in the IC   → General Partners (fund managers)   → Senior team members with domain expertise   → Sometimes LP observers (in larger funds)  What They Discuss   → Team credibility and track record   → Market size and timing   → Product moat and defensibility   → Unit economics and scale potential   → Risks that could sink the deal  The Process   1. Partner champions the deal   2. Memo is circulated (deep analysis, risks, ownership math)   3. IC meets → debates, challenges, votes   4. If greenlighted, term sheet is issued  Founder Lens   The partner you pitch is your advocate.   But the IC is the jury.   Your story must survive multiple voices and skepticism.  LP Lens   IC discipline is the safeguard.   It ensures fund capital isn’t driven by one person’s bias or hype.  India Lens   Younger funds may run ICs informally.   Mature funds run them like boardrooms — structured, data-backed, and ruthless.  Final Truth   VC deals are not closed in coffee chats.   They are closed in IC rooms.   And in those rooms, clarity, numbers, and conviction decide your fate.  The VC Fellowship #PlaybookVC #VentureCapital #Startups #SJInsights