To ensure robust decision-making, Eclipse requires that if a partner feels strongly against a potential investment, they must join the deal team alongside the champions. This forces a direct confrontation of the risks and ensures that by the time an investment is made, all major concerns have been addressed.
Instead of building a platform team of specialists, Eclipse operates like a small special forces unit. A lean team of senior partners, all ex-operators, handles everything from thesis creation to scaling companies. This ensures founders get direct support from proven builders, not junior staff.
Backing independent sponsors on a deal-by-deal basis is more than an investment strategy; it is an extended due diligence process. This approach provides deep, real-time insights into a manager's problem-solving skills under pressure, offering transparency that is impossible to achieve before a Fund I commitment.
Unlike committees, where partners might "sell" each other on a deal, a single decision-maker model tests true conviction. If a General Partner proceeds with an investment despite negative feedback from the partnership, it demonstrates their unwavering belief, leading to more intellectually honest decisions.
Large, contrarian investments feel like career risk to partners in a traditional VC firm, leading to bureaucracy and diluted conviction. Founder-led firms with small, centralized decision-making teams can operate with more decisiveness, enabling them to make the bold, potentially firm-defining bets that consensus-driven partnerships would avoid.
When you identify a deal blocker, don't confront them alone. First, approach your champion and ask for their perspective on the dissenter's hesitation and advice on the best way to engage them. This provides crucial internal political context and helps you formulate a more effective strategy before you ever speak to the blocker.
A16z's growth fund avoids traditional investment committees, which can lead to politicization and slow decisions. Instead, it uses a venture-style "single trigger" model where one partner can champion a deal, encouraging intellectual honesty and speed.
When a talented partner is too risk-averse, advice alone fails. The solution is to actively co-pilot their initial risky decisions, saying, 'We're going to invest in that company.' This 'teach by showing' approach gradually builds the courage and comfort level necessary to pursue asymmetric upside independently in the future.
Sequoia's internal data shows consensus is irrelevant to investment success. A deal with strong advocates (voting '9') and strong detractors (voting '1') is preferable to one where everyone is mildly positive (a '6'). The presence of passionate conviction, even amid dissent, is the critical signal for pursuing outlier returns.
The ideal champion, a 'Transformer,' has a high bias for action and innovation. However, this strength can become a liability. Their tendency to move fast can cause them to ignore crucial details and alienate other key stakeholders in a consensus-driven buying process, inadvertently killing the deal.
Founders Fund's perk allowing employees to co-invest personally is a clever mechanism to test true conviction. If an investor sponsoring a deal is unwilling to put their own money in, it raises a serious question about their belief in the investment's potential, forcing them to justify why it's a better allocation for LPs than their own capital.