CASE STUDIES
Leadership decisions in practice
These cases concern an urgent CEO choice for a major investment, a CFO candidate who had won over the portfolio CEO but troubled the sponsor, and a management team that needed to be assessed while the sponsor was competing to win the deal.
01
CEO selection
A first-time CEO for one of the sponsor’s largest investments
The deal partner was leaning toward the experienced CEO despite reservations. Both candidates already had offers, and the sponsor needed an urgent answer.
The business was one of the sponsor’s largest investments. It had a distinguished name, but there was a sense that its best days were behind it. The alternative candidate knew the industry well; they had never been a CEO and had spent most of their career at a single company.
Vamsi examined how broadly the first-time candidate understood the business, the strategic demands they could handle and how they had put their capability to work. He judged this candidate to be clearly stronger, while identifying what they would need to learn on the job. Several substantial debriefs were needed to work through a recommendation that ran against the sponsor’s initial preference.
The appointment and follow-up
The sponsor appointed the first-time CEO. Vamsi gave the executive candid feedback on both their strengths and the development needs they would take into the role. Around six months later, the sponsor reported that the CEO was doing well. More than a year into the appointment, the business had completed two acquisitions, against an original plan of one.
02
CFO selection
When the CEO is convinced and the sponsor is uneasy
The CEO of a newly acquired portfolio company was set on a CFO candidate. The sponsor sensed something was wrong but could not yet explain what it was.
The CEO had led the business before the investment, so this disagreement came early in the relationship with the new owner. The candidate presented well and appeared to have the accomplishments to support the CEO’s confidence.
During the assessment, the candidate’s own account of their work raised concerns about financial judgment. The findings gave substance to the sponsor’s unease and went further than it had anticipated. The debrief was contentious. The CEO wanted to know how someone who presented so well, and appeared to have achieved so much, could be the wrong person for the job.
Reaching the decision
Vamsi addressed the CEO’s questions about the candidate’s record and explained the reasoning behind his recommendation. By the end of the discussion, the CEO and sponsor agreed not to proceed after targeted references confirmed risks found in the assessment.
03
Management diligence
Management diligence in a deal the sponsor still had to win
The sponsor needed to examine management closely while competing for the opportunity to invest. The assessment had to be thorough and leave the executives willing to engage.
The target was not the leading player in its market, and there were substantial questions to investigate. Given the size of the proposed investment, the sponsor wanted every member of the eight-person management team assessed. A poorly handled process could sour management’s view of the prospective investor.
Vamsi assessed all eight executives in three weeks. He shared findings as the work progressed, so the sponsor was hearing his judgments while diligence was still under way. About a week after the last assessment, it had his conclusions on the entire team.
After the investment
The investment went ahead, and the executives remained in contact with Vamsi. He went on to support six additional management hires: five to expand the team and one replacement.
Experiences with Vamsi
References available upon request.