????私募股權(quán)公司通常都是其投資組合公司的董事會(huì)中的活躍分子,。幾乎所有的投資公司都會(huì)密切監(jiān)視其投資組合公司的戰(zhàn)術(shù)表現(xiàn)：相對(duì)預(yù)算的業(yè)績(jī),、銷(xiāo)售管道分析、現(xiàn)金流監(jiān)控,、利潤(rùn)評(píng)估,、資本結(jié)構(gòu)優(yōu)化,、估值等等不一而足,。公司的戰(zhàn)術(shù)表現(xiàn)確實(shí)重要，然而作為投資者和董事,，私募股權(quán)投資人的終極角色還是應(yīng)該偏向于戰(zhàn)略方面,。投資人很容易迷失在細(xì)枝末節(jié)當(dāng)中，而忘記拷問(wèn)自己那些重大的戰(zhàn)略問(wèn)題,。

????下面我們列出了5個(gè)關(guān)鍵的戰(zhàn)略性問(wèn)題,，對(duì)于每家投資組合公司，甚至是潛在投資目標(biāo),，私募股權(quán)投資人每過(guò)3到6個(gè)月都至少應(yīng)該審視一番,。

????1、公司的核心戰(zhàn)略計(jì)劃是什么,？投資人需要在戰(zhàn)略目標(biāo)的框架內(nèi)評(píng)估戰(zhàn)術(shù)表現(xiàn),。公司或者業(yè)務(wù)部門(mén)的生命周期基本上就是由一系列的3-5年戰(zhàn)略計(jì)劃組成。計(jì)劃可以是開(kāi)發(fā)原型產(chǎn)品并贏得重要的首批客戶(hù)?？梢允菄?guó)際拓展,，增加收入和現(xiàn)金流，或者擴(kuò)展產(chǎn)品線(xiàn)進(jìn)入鄰近市場(chǎng),?？梢允峭ㄟ^(guò)對(duì)成本結(jié)構(gòu)的合理化改革，實(shí)現(xiàn)從增長(zhǎng)導(dǎo)向到價(jià)值導(dǎo)向的轉(zhuǎn)變,，或者完成從業(yè)務(wù)剝離到獨(dú)立實(shí)體的成功轉(zhuǎn)型,。也可能是在萎縮的市場(chǎng)中將公司的力量集中于某些核心產(chǎn)品。對(duì)于私募股權(quán)或風(fēng)投投資的公司,，在3-5年的計(jì)劃中常常有多種核心戰(zhàn)略可供選擇,。投資人必須持續(xù)地評(píng)估這種戰(zhàn)略計(jì)劃，如果公司的運(yùn)營(yíng)或競(jìng)爭(zhēng)環(huán)境發(fā)生變化,，該計(jì)劃是否仍然合適,。能夠清楚地確認(rèn)其核心戰(zhàn)略計(jì)劃的公司通常比缺乏戰(zhàn)略的公司表現(xiàn)更好。

????2,、投資人本身的狀況是否與該戰(zhàn)略計(jì)劃合拍,？這也許是投資人最難以回答的問(wèn)題，但卻是一個(gè)根本性的問(wèn)題,。私募股權(quán)公司通常善于在收購(gòu)股權(quán)時(shí)就排除那些不符合其戰(zhàn)略的交易,，但在投入資金之后，他們可能不會(huì)察覺(jué)到戰(zhàn)略環(huán)境的變化,。比如,，一個(gè)追求成長(zhǎng)的私募股權(quán)公司投資于一家已經(jīng)轉(zhuǎn)向慢速增長(zhǎng)的成熟期的企業(yè)；處于行業(yè)兼并風(fēng)潮中的小公司作為大公司的一個(gè)分支可能更加合適,；公司著手啟動(dòng)新的5年生產(chǎn)戰(zhàn)略,，而投資人已經(jīng)接近其投資周期的尾聲……

????這些例子告訴我們，有時(shí)正確的決定只能是轉(zhuǎn)手,?；卮疬@個(gè)問(wèn)題有時(shí)需要勇于承認(rèn)某項(xiàng)投資的失敗，但那也好過(guò)在與公司的投資戰(zhàn)略不符的企業(yè)身上空耗時(shí)日,。

????3,、公司的首席執(zhí)行官能否執(zhí)行該戰(zhàn)略計(jì)劃？多數(shù)私募股權(quán)投資人善于發(fā)現(xiàn)不稱(chēng)職的首席執(zhí)行官,。難題在于判斷是否好人被放錯(cuò)了位置,，特別是核心戰(zhàn)略發(fā)生改變的情況下。有時(shí)需要一個(gè)有遠(yuǎn)見(jiàn)卓識(shí)的思想家,，有時(shí)又需要實(shí)干型的“修理匠”,。有時(shí)需要救火隊(duì)員來(lái)扭轉(zhuǎn)乾坤，有時(shí)只要一個(gè)營(yíng)銷(xiāo)老手就夠。思想家的才干不適合于復(fù)興戰(zhàn)略,，營(yíng)銷(xiāo)專(zhuān)家也解決不了運(yùn)營(yíng)效率的問(wèn)題,。

????4、投入公司的資本得到適當(dāng)?shù)幕貓?bào)了嗎,？公司產(chǎn)品的關(guān)鍵單位經(jīng)濟(jì)效益就是必須實(shí)現(xiàn)投入資本的充分回報(bào),。資本回報(bào)率方法在各個(gè)行業(yè)有所不同（比如，成熟產(chǎn)品制造商和成長(zhǎng)階段的在線(xiàn)軟件公司需要關(guān)注不同的指標(biāo)）,，而資本的成本也不盡相同,。但不管處于何種商業(yè)階段，最終核心業(yè)務(wù)必須能夠產(chǎn)生有盈利的收入,。沒(méi)有單位經(jīng)濟(jì)效益的收入增長(zhǎng)并不值得投資,。

????Private equity firms are generally active board members of their portfolio companies. Nearly every investment firm spends a great deal of time monitoring the tactical performance of their portfolio companies: Performance vs. budget, sales pipeline analysis, cash flow monitoring, margin assessment, capital structure optimization, valuation, etc. The tactical performance of a company is important, of course. Ultimately, however, as an investor and board member, a private equity investor's role should be more strategic than tactical. It is easy for investors to get lost in the tactical minutia and forget to ask themselves the big strategic questions.

????The following are five key strategic questions private equity investors should ask themselves about each of their portfolio companies -- or prospective portfolio companies -- at least every 3 to 6 months.

????1. What is the company's core strategic plan? Investors need to evaluate tactical performance within the context of strategic goals. The lifecycle of a company or operating division is basically a series of 3- to 5-year strategic plans. The plan may be to develop a prototype product and win some key first customers. It could be to expand internationally, scale revenues and cash flow or expand the product set into adjacent markets. It could be to manage the transition from a growth to a value orientation by rationalizing the cost structure, or to successfully transition a company from a corporate spinoff to a standalone entity. It could be to narrow the company's focus to a core set of products in a declining market. There are numerous core strategies that are potentially appropriate 3- to 5-year plans for a private equity or venture-backed company. Investors must also consistently evaluate whether the strategic plan remains appropriate if there have been changes in the portfolio company's operating and competitive environment. Companies that clearly identify their core strategic plan almost always execute better than those that do not.

????2. Are we the right owners to execute on the strategic plan? This is perhaps the hardest question for investors to ask themselves, but it is fundamental. Private equity firms are generally pretty good at screening deals that don't fit their strategies at the time of acquisition but they don't always recognize when the strategic environment has shifted post-investment. A growth equity firm with a company that has shifted into slow-growth maturity; a company in a consolidating industry that would better off as a product or division of a larger company; a company embarking on a new 5-year product strategy with an investor near the end of their fund life…

????These are all situations in which the right decision may be to seek a new owner. Sometimes answering this question requires admitting relative defeat on a certain investment but that is preferable to spending years working on a portfolio company that is outside a firm's investment strategy.

????3. Does the company have the right CEO to execute on the strategic plan? Most private equity investors are good at figuring out when a CEO is underperforming. It's more difficult to determine whether a good CEO is in the wrong role, particularly if the core strategy has changed. Sometimes a company needs an entrepreneurial visionary, other times it might need an operational "Mr. Fix-It." Sometimes a company may need a turnaround specialist, other times it may need a sales and marketing expert. A visionary's talents are not appropriate for a turnaround strategy, nor should a sales and marketing guy be focused primarily on operational efficiencies.

????4. Is the company earning an appropriate return on invested capital? The key unit economics of the company's products must be earning more than a sufficient return on invested capital. The ROIC methodology varies by industry (a mature product manufacturer needs to monitor different metrics than a growth-stage online software company, for example), as does the cost of capital. No matter what the stage of business, however, at some point the core business must be able to profitably generate revenue. There is no point investing in revenue growth if the unit economics won't work.