Skip to main content

Home/The Challenge

The big challenge with institutional investors

Without an integrated deal and asset management system, institutional investors face structural limitations in transparency, control, scalability and risk management.

Twelve symptoms

As private market allocations grow, manual processes become a constraint

A constraint on performance, governance and institutional resilience. Most investment offices recognise at least eight of the following.

1

Fragmented deal information across emails, Excel files and teams

2

Limited visibility for senior management into pipeline health and progress

3

High dependency on individuals to track deal history and rationale

4

Limited audit trail of decisions, approvals and changes

5

Knowledge loss when team members leave

6

Challenges in supporting audit and regulator reviews

7

Time-consuming report production cycles

8

Inconsistent data across reports

9

No systematic tracking of covenants, conditions or key risks

10

Increased key-person and operational risk

11

Rising headcount to manage complexity

12

Higher long-term operating costs

Current alternatives

What most institutions run today

These four patterns are what a capable team builds when no single system covers the whole lifecycle.

Spreadsheet-centric operating model

  • Excel used for deal pipeline tracking, valuations, cash flows and exposure analysis
  • Separate spreadsheets maintained by different teams (PE, PD, RE, Infrastructure and others)
  • Heavy use of macros and manual controls

Email and shared drives as workflow tools

  • Deal discussions, approvals and document sharing conducted over email
  • Shared network drives or SharePoint used for storage
  • Folder structures act as the de-facto process logic

Manual operational and financial performance tracking

  • Quarterly valuation updates based on GP reports
  • Adjustments tracked manually in spreadsheets
  • Performance comparisons done ad hoc

Informal knowledge networks and shadow systems

  • Institutional knowledge stored in people's experience
  • Key decisions remembered rather than documented
  • New staff learn through apprenticeship
  • Power users create Access databases, Excel-VBA tools or local dashboards
  • Critical processes rely on these unofficial tools

Consequences

What it costs, compounded over a cycle

Key-person risk

When institutional knowledge is stored in people's experience and key decisions are remembered rather than documented, a resignation removes part of the investment record.

Slow reporting cycles

Quarter-end becomes a production exercise: extracting, reconciling and re-keying numbers that should already agree, weeks after the decisions they describe.

Weak audit position

Limited audit trail of decisions, approvals and changes makes internal audit, external audit and regulator reviews expensive and defensive.

Inconsistent numbers

The same exposure appears differently in the board pack, the risk report and the LP letter, and nobody can say quickly which one is right.

Headcount as the scaling strategy

Rising headcount to manage complexity means operating cost grows with the portfolio instead of with the returns it generates.

Missed opportunities

Without a systematic pipeline and covenant view, deals stall quietly and remediation dates pass unnoticed.

The DEALWISE answer

Replace the workaround, keep the discipline

Everything a good investment office already does, including screening, committee governance, diligence workstreams and covenant monitoring, held in one system that remembers.