Reading · Adrian Fleming · RSS Amplifier

This page did not load. You can still read it on the original site — the toolbar below keeps your place in the directory.

Hundreds of pages on the company. A single sentence on the person who is the company.

The deal documents describe the company in forensic detail and the founder in a single sentence.

The deal documents describe the company in forensic detail and the founder in a single sentence. You have it exactly the wrong way round.

Walk through a completed transaction file for an owner-led business and look at where the attention went. Hundreds of pages on the company. The assets, the contracts, the intellectual property, the leases, the warranties, the disclosure schedule. And the founder, the person who actually built and runs the thing, appears as a key-person clause, an earn-out schedule and a non-compete.

The proportion is exactly inverted. The documents lavish detail on the parts of the business that matter least to its future, and reduce the part that matters most to a few lines of risk-management boilerplate.

IN AN OWNER-LED BUSINESS, THE FOUNDER IS THE OPERATING SYSTEM

Be honest about what an owner-led company actually is. It is not a machine the founder happens to sit on top of. For most of these businesses, the founder is the machine.

The pricing instinct is theirs. The key relationships are theirs, often personally, often un-transferred. The judgement about which work to chase and which to refuse is theirs. The standard, the thing that decides what “good enough” means in that business, is theirs. The speed of decision-making, the appetite for risk, the read on a customer in trouble, all of it runs through one person.

The “company” you are diligencing is, to a large degree, the accumulated record of one person’s decisions. The entity is real. But the engine is a human being, and the documents treat the human being as a footnote to the entity.

THE DEAL UNDERWEIGHS THE ONE VARIABLE THAT DECIDES EVERYTHING

This is not a small oversight. It is the structural blind spot of owner-led dealmaking.

The transaction machinery is brilliant at things that can be specified. An asset can be listed. A contract can be assigned. A warranty can be drafted. So the process pours its energy into those things, because those are the things the process knows how to handle.

The founder cannot be specified that way. Their judgement is not an asset on a schedule. So the deal does the only thing it knows how to do with them. It treats them as a risk to be managed. Key-person clause. Retention payment. Lock-in. Non-compete. Every one of those is a defensive instrument. Not one of them is an attempt to actually understand, or transfer, the thing the founder does.

You have surrounded the most important variable in the deal with legal sandbags and called it handled.

RETENTION IS NOT TRANSFER

Here is the comfortable mistake. The deal keeps the founder for two or three years through an earn-out, and everyone treats that as the founder problem solved.

It is not solved. It is postponed. Keeping a founder physically present is not the same as acquiring their judgement. An earn-out buys their attendance and, if you are lucky, their cooperation. It does not, on its own, move what is in their head into the business around them.

And the structure can quietly make things worse. A founder counting down an earn-out is often optimising for the earn-out, not for the decade after it. Then the lock-in ends, and the operating system walks out of the door, having taught no one, documented nothing, and left a business that looks the same and decides completely differently.

You did not buy the engine. You rented the driver, and the lease just expired.

DILIGENCE THE FOUNDER AS THE PRINCIPAL ASSET

The fix is to treat the founder as the main thing you are acquiring, because in most of these deals they are.

Work out, specifically, what the founder does that the business depends on. Not their job title. The actual decisions, relationships and judgements that would not happen, or would happen worse, in their absence. Then ask the only question that matters about each one. Is this documented, distributed and teachable, or does it live entirely in one head.

Build the deal around transferring the capability, not just retaining the person. That means structuring the earn-out period as a deliberate handover, with the transfer of judgement as an explicit, measured deliverable, not a hoped-for side effect of the founder hanging around.

And be willing to reach the uncomfortable finding. Sometimes the honest answer is that the business is the founder, that there is very little underneath, and that what looks like a company is really one person and a brand. That is not a deal-breaker by itself. But it is a completely different deal from the one the documents describe, and you want to know that before the money moves, not after.

THE REFRAME

None of this means the documents do not matter. The assets, the contracts and the warranties all need the rigour they get. It means the rigour has been aimed mostly at the parts of the business that are easiest to paper, and away from the part that actually determines the outcome.

Your value as an investor or an adviser is not that you can paper a company thoroughly. The process papers companies thoroughly on its own. Your value is that you can see when a company is really a founder, name it honestly, and structure the deal around the truth rather than around the convenient fiction that the entity and the engine are the same thing.

That is a discipline, and it is a different one from legal and financial diligence. It takes a way of reading what a founder actually contributes, and whether that contribution can be moved into a business or only borrowed for the length of an earn-out. The best dealmakers build that read into the process, or they bring in someone whose whole job is to assess the founder as an asset, not just as a risk.

Do that, and you structure deals around what you are genuinely buying. Skip it, and you will keep acquiring founders and filing them as companies, and finding out the difference the day the lock-in ends.

You are usually buying a founder. The least you can do is look at them as hard as you look at their paperwork.

I created this Substack for business owners working too hard for too little return.

Each article draws on 30+ years as a business owner and angel investor to help you diagnose what’s really holding your business back, cut through the noise, make sharper commercial decisions, reduce avoidable risk, and act on the opportunities that actually matter.

Apply what you read, and you’ll stop confusing effort with progress. You’ll see your business more clearly, make better calls, and start fixing the problems costing you money, momentum and confidence.

Want the next article in your inbox?

Subscribe now