In our conversation, Marc shared some of his insights on building successful leadership teams. He identifies some of the common leadership shortfalls at acquisition, explains the decision criteria for succession and outlines the behaviors that drive rapid, sustainable performance.
By way of an introduction, we’d like to know more about your background. You’ve led teams across Europe and the US in both public and private settings. How has that shaped your approach as an operating partner in private equity?
I’m very fortunate to have had transatlantic business experience. Being both American and European has taught me how to appreciate cultural references and sensitivities – which are essential when working with global clients – while the more “American” approach drives fast, decision-focused execution. That contrast has allowed me to be quite pragmatic and I draw on whatever piece of that experience I need, just as my bilingual, bi-cultural upbringing influences how I lead and equip my team.
When you step into a newly acquired portfolio company, what leadership gaps do you tend to find?
Openness to change – particularly in those we buy that are challenged from a result of not changing quickly enough – and secondly urgency are the things that are most often lacking. Family- or founder-led businesses operate with longer – even infinite – time horizons, unlike PE’s shorter 5-year time horizon cycles, where you are led by what you’ve committed to investors. That mismatch shows up most in slow decision-making, lack of strategic investments and aversion to risk taking. In fact, about 70% of CEOs and 80% of CFOs don’t survive their first PE cycle – so there is often a big gap in the leadership skills we see when we’re the first institutional investors.
How do you decide whether to retain or replace leadership teams?
We aim to make that call pre-close. Incumbents sometimes self-select out or there may be a gap in the team, for example where the Financial Controller is running the show – but the ideal is that we would know well before close, so we have some runway. When decisions wait until after close, we often look to see if we’re going to give a six- or twelve- month grace period or rip the Band-Aid off. In my experience, it doesn’t pay to wait: PE isn’t the best set up for people development. Hoping that someone will grow into a CEO or CFO role isn’t something that we have the time for – five years [of a deal cycle] goes by fast and we can’t leave the training wheels on – so we try to make a decision as soon as we can.
With the push for growth and value creation, which behaviors separate the good from the great within leadership teams?
Clock speed is the number one thing: people that can go from a light jog to a marathon. The best leaders shift from planning mode to sprint mode without hesitation – and the best tend to be the people who get the pace, get the governance, get the agenda and sustain momentum under PE demands.
How do you see the CFO role evolving in PE-backed businesses?
The role has become much more demanding. The good PE CFOs now act as quasi-COOs and a counterpart to the CEO: they can often be the more cynical or skeptical voice in the room! They have to juggle things the CEO doesn’t: handling M&A diligence, refinancing, lender negotiations, cash management and strategic forecasting – all somewhat newer areas for the CFO who might have just been used to keep the trains running on time. They can’t just report on past numbers; they must predict the business’ next-quarter “weather”.
The PE world has gotten more intense, and environment is tougher – you really need CFOs that have thick skin and could step in as CEOs if needed. The dual hat they wear mean they now need to be just as good as the deal team on the financials, and just as good as a COO would be on the operational side. Finding a CFO is often the toughest search. We’re also seeing they’re catching up to CEOs compensation-wise – they’re a solid second place now within the business. That’s different from ten years ago. The PE teams see how important to how a good CFO is to that hold period and that’s why we’re willing to pay the right talent.
So, how do you assess all those capabilities in a CFO candidate?
The first tell is often during the management presentations – their presence at the table is key. I’ve seen weaker candidates where they don’t even say a word, where you’ll see an exceptional one drive discussions, complement the CEO and fielding tough questions nobody else can answer. But even still, you see some failings – for example missing a 13-week cash forecast – only surface in ownership when you put them to the test.
What advice do you have for first-time CFOs in PE to help them hit the ground running?
I know from experience: becoming a PE CFO when you have never been a PE CFO is tough – why would PE give you a shot when you’ve never done it before? You need to show up with all the skills, qualification and intensity, that PE is looking for for them to say “ok, we’ll take a chance”. The advice is step up fast – show you have chops, the skill, the intensity, the insight, the responsiveness – get numbers back quicker than you think you can or show you know the complexities that may be beyond the scope of the traditional CFO role and get that done with flying colors. Once you’ve got that checkbox ticked, you’re in demand.
Looking from the outside in, it seems the role of the operating partner can be lonely. How do you collaborate with your peers at Riverside?
The Riverside model is unique – there are more than 70 operating partners, and we have all done private equity, we have all done exits – we’ve been in the shoes of the leadership teams. We build two relationship networks: with peers inside our own funds – and also with those across funds to share best practices, best tools in the toolkit, best external partners – as we’re not competitors across our funds.
The real secret sauce is between the deal team and the operating partner: being involved early, in all the stages that lead up to the close, that’s really invaluable. I will work on a portco from day one all the way through exit and I build rapport with the deal team, and the portco management team, which makes it a lot less lonely – I’m on calls with my deal team and the management team every single day! I just spend a lot of time on Zoom.
Is it competitive or is it collaborative?
On the operating front, we don’t tend to compete – we all know we’re going to transact at some stage, so you may buy what they own or vice versa. I view it as not winning or losing but as making the whole ecosystem better. Sharing best practices is better for the PE world. We’re making a more impactful asset class – and I’m here to help my peers.
Finally, what’s the right balance between strategic and tactical involvement?
You need to be 100% strategic and 100% tactical – you need 200% bandwidth to do the job! It ebbs and flows: during due diligence, pre close and the first 100 days you’re strategic. You’re determining and setting the course for the next five years. Then you get into execution, though from time to time, you check if you’re aiming for the right place on the horizon with the investment thesis. It’s a real pendulum swing during the hold cycle. But near exit, you’re very tactical to maximize value, so it’s very cyclical. The time horizon in PE is driving us towards excellence – the clock is always ticking, which is great motivation – and that’s the best part!
Marc Jourlait was interviewed by Monika Dowal (SVP at Finatal) in June 2025.