Greylock measures partner contribution by whether they were "causally impactful" to a successful investment, rather than just who sourced it. This model incentivizes deep collaboration, such as building a prepared mind, helping win a deal, or adding critical value post-investment.

Related Insights

To ensure genuine collaboration across funds, Centerbridge structures compensation so a "substantial minority" of an individual's pay comes from other areas of the firm. This economic incentive forces a firm-wide perspective and makes being "part of one team" a financial reality, not just a cultural slogan.

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.

To avoid stifling talent, Sequoia uses 'freedom within frameworks.' It provides guiding principles—shared values and a common value chain (sourcing, picking, winning)—but allows partners total autonomy in their methods. This enables diverse, authentic styles, from deep thematic work to high-volume networking, to coexist effectively.

Venture capital returns materialize over a decade, making short-term outputs like markups unreliable 'mirages.' Sequoia instead measures partners on tangible inputs. They are reviewed semi-annually on the quality of their decision-making process (e.g., investment memos) and their adherence to core team values, not on premature financial metrics.

Temasek's partnership philosophy is not about risk diversification. Instead, it prioritizes collaborating with partners who can augment its internal capabilities and provide specific skill sets it lacks for a given opportunity. This makes partnership a strategic tool for capability building, not just capital sharing.

TA's compensation structure aligns partner incentives directly with investor returns. The primary way for partners to increase their ownership (carry) is by generating realized gains—i.e., returning capital to Limited Partners. This systemically prioritizes liquidity and successful exits over simply deploying capital or marking up portfolio value on paper.

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.

Bessemer's investment process favors individual partner conviction over group consensus. A partner can "pound the table" for a deal (the "gold nugget") without the risk of another partner vetoing it (the "blackball" model). This fosters ownership and bold bets, with performance as the ultimate accountability.

Structuring compensation around a single, firm-wide P&L, rather than individual deal performance, eliminates internal competition. It forces a culture of true collaboration, as everyone's success is tied together. The system is maintained as a meritocracy by removing underperformers from the 'boat.'

To manage performance despite long feedback cycles, Greylock developed an "inputs-based" model. They assess partners on 18 specific actions, like seeing 75% of competitive deals, believing that consistently strong inputs are the best predictor of long-term success.