Screening investment pitches before they reach the billionaire principal

Built on Chapter 2 of The Single Family Office by Richard C. Wilson. Full chapter text: FamilyOffices.com.

The employee reading incoming investment pitches needs a clear mandate. Without one, that person has to guess which proposals the principal wants to see. A billionaire family's inbox can become an informal investment committee with no agreed criteria and no consistent record of decisions.

Chapter 2 distinguishes investment leadership from support and operating roles. I would use that distinction to define pitch screening as a specific assignment. The employee can identify fit and missing information without pretending that an initial screen establishes investment quality.

Give the reader approved criteria

State the types of assets and transactions the family is prepared to consider. Include the proposed ownership role and any material exclusions. Use criteria the authorized investment team has approved so an employee can apply them without inferring the founder's preferences from recent conversations.

The criteria should explain when an exception goes to a decision maker. Staff need permission to identify an unusual opportunity while preserving the distinction between an exception request and an approved investment.

Ask for enough information to route the proposal

An initial submission should explain the asset, the requested capital, and what the sender is offering. Ask for the facts necessary to assess mandate fit. Avoid collecting extensive confidential records before the office knows whether it has a reason to examine the opportunity.

Give senders a clear enterprise contact route. A proposal forwarded through a family friend should reach the same screening process as a direct submission. The introduction can be recorded without becoming an instruction to advance the deal.

Keep presentation separate from evidence

In my comments on investor materials, I emphasize that the recipient needs to understand what the business does without confusion. For the screening employee, that means identifying whether the proposal can be explained clearly before spending the principal's attention on it.

Clarity supports routing; it does not verify the claims. An attractive sentence or short deck may describe a poor investment accurately. Keep the initial description separate from the work needed to assess management, economics, and legal terms.

Use consistent dispositions

The employee should be able to record that a proposal falls outside the mandate, needs specific information, or merits examination by the investment team. Define the next action for each disposition. A vague pile of interesting proposals makes it hard to know what the office actually intends to do.

Record the reason in plain language. That helps another employee understand the decision and lets management see whether the criteria are producing useful results. Keep access appropriate to the sensitivity of the information collected.

Prepare a concise escalation

When a proposal deserves the principal's attention, state the decision required. Include the fit with the mandate, the material unknowns, and the proposed next step. The principal should know whether they are being asked to permit further work or approve a commitment.

Include any actual deadline and its consequence. A sender's urgency does not by itself establish why the family should move. Ask the investment team to assess what is lost if the office declines to meet the requested timing.

Protect the employee from implied authority

Give the screener approved language for acknowledging receipt and requesting information. The sender should understand that examination does not constitute a commitment. Have counsel assess the wording and process appropriate to the office's activities.

Also explain who can discuss terms. A helpful employee may otherwise begin negotiating while believing they are merely clarifying the offer. Define the point at which the proposal transfers to an authorized investment professional.

Review the process with the investment team

Look at a selection of declined and advanced proposals. Ask whether the employee applied the criteria correctly and whether the criteria still reflect the family's intentions. Correct the instruction where it is unclear instead of blaming staff for an ambiguity the family left unresolved.

The objective is a manageable set of relevant opportunities with an accountable next step. The principal's attention becomes more useful when staff can explain why a proposal has arrived and what judgment is needed now.

Questions and answers

Can an assistant perform the first screen? A qualified employee can apply approved routing criteria. Investment assessment and commitment authority should remain with the appropriately authorized people.

Should a personal introduction bypass screening? Record the introduction as context and apply the family's process. Familiarity with the sender does not establish fit or investment merit.

This page is general information, not legal advice. Family governance documents and dispute processes should be reviewed by a qualified attorney.