BRIEFINGS
Unfiltered leadership insights for small and mid-sized private equity firms. We look below the surface to give Operating Partners, General Partners, and Board Chairs a completely different perspective on how human capacity drives or drags portfolio margins.
Should I Fire Someone or Fix It?
Evaluating Portfolio CEO Derailment
When an aggressive scale mandate stalls midway through a hold period, a Private Equity Operating Partner is immediately forced into a brutal, multi-million-dollar binary choice. Do I fire the CEO or try to fix them?
Executing a mid-hold replacement is an absolute nightmare. It destroys momentum, panics the management team, and forces the deal team to completely re-underwrite their valuation models.
Replacing a CEO mid-hold routinely delays an exit timeline by 12 to 18 months, directly compressing the fund’s IRR and eroding time-to-value.
But sitting on a sluggish, underperforming asset while your timeline bleeds out is equally catastrophic.
When an Operating Partner types this dilemma into a search engine at 11:00 PM, most leadership consultants will tell them to review the leader’s KPIs, conduct a 360-review, or audit their strategic
playbook. That is an outside-in distraction. It targets surface symptoms while completely missing the underlying failing structural mechanism.
The Diagnostics of a System Freeze
A sudden drop in leadership execution under scale mandates is rarely a talent issue or a terminal skill deficit. It is a system freeze.
When a highly vetted founder or executive faces aggressive board velocity for the first time, their uncalibrated internal operating system hits its capacity limit. Simply put, the incoming capital and board-level pressure overload the machine.
To survive, the leader’s processor defaults into one of two defensive survival scripts.
The Combatant
Bullish, defensive, and aggressive, the leader’s nervous system perceives board feedback as an existential attack, forcing them to fight every single strategic decision. As a result, they make wrong choices disguised as the right strategy.
The Yes-Man
The leader defers self-advocacy, and begins treating every directive as law.
To an outside investor, a yes-man might look compliant and cooperative. But in reality, they are a hidden liability on the balance sheet.
The Cost of Compliance
When a portfolio CEO becomes the “yes-man”, they overlook their own strategic signal. The one that built the asset and justified its acquisition in the first place.
Their operational focus shifts entirely from growth and core metrics to pleasing the person who tells them what to do.
And the operational consequences are mathematical.
-
Creative Immobilization: The CEO stops innovating and waits for directives in an anxious, static state.
-
The Tracking Illusion: When directives do arrive, the unconscious goal becomes showing the Operating Partner that they’ve been completed rather than driving the operational outcome.
As a result, output stalls and revenue flattens.
The Surrogate Parent Projection
You cannot fix a compliance-driven system freeze with a strategy redesign or a communication seminar. You have to check under the hood.
Under intense scale pressure, a leader with no Human Operating System upgrade will unconsciously project their combatant or “yes man” straight onto the fund, the board, or the Operating Partner.
In either case, the portfolio CEO is not executing a business plan. They are reacting to a surrogate parent.
The Line in the Sand: When to Fire
How do you know if the asset is terminal or correctable?
I spent five years upgrading the internal infrastructure of an elite portfolio CEO before their company was acquired.
The shy, “yes-man” had been replaced with a CEO that grew revenue 150% in year one. Had become a trusted advisor to the federal government and national news category expert.
That is the baseline shift from defensive compliance to enterprise expansion.
If your current leader is bottlenecking the asset, your line-in-the-sand metric for whether to fire or fix them comes down to one question:
Are they aware of the unconscious scripts running in their background?
Until that diagnostic has been run, you are burning cash and wasting time.
But if you deploy a dedicated transition protocol, and the CEO can articulate the foundational reason for their “yes man” or combatant behaviour in less than five words, and their operational execution still fails to change within weeks, let them go.
But if you have not yet looked under the hood to clear that underlying projection loop, replacing them is an empty gesture.
You will simply hire another flawless resume with the exact same raw processor, and watch the next 100 days freeze all over again.
PROTECT YOUR IRR
DIRECT INQUIRY FOR MANAGING DIRECTORS, OPERATING PARTNERS, AND ENTERPRISE CHAIRS. ALL BRIEFINGS CONDUCTED IN ABSOLUTE CONFIDENTIALITY.