I think a lot about Ebbinghaus’ Forgetting Curve. Effectively, how long does it take someone to forget new information and as a function, how often do you need to remind someone for them to retain memory of that new piece of information? Within an hour, the average person forgets half of what they learned. Within 24 hours, the average person forgets 70% of it. And within a week, they forget 90%. I won’t get too technical here, but if you are interested in learning more, I highly recommend reading this paper: Murre and Dros’ Replication and Analysis of Ebbinghaus’ Forgetting Curve.

And so, in theory, every time someone’s memory of you, of your thesis, or of your firm drops below 90% memory retention, you should remind them. Rough intervals of which are within minutes, within 2 hours, within a day, within a week, within 30 days, and so on. In practice, after you catch up with an LP, text them a note saying that you’ll follow up within the day. And yes, texts are often far more effective in maintaining relationships with LPs than emails. Emails are read by other team members and often lost in inboxes. The only exception to this rule is if you or your LP is an RIA, and requires all communication to be archived, including text.

Outside of scheduled catchups, spend a lot of time tracking people’s hobbies and interests in your CRM, and sending LPs an article, video, interview or insight that reminded you of them or that you think they’d genuinely appreciate; it goes a long way. Oh, and sending thank you notes more often than you think you need to, especially unprompted ones, really helps cement relationships. Over time, this will become a habit. Here’s an example of an email I send often:

My buddy Ian Park told me this when I first became an IR professional. “In IR, there are product specialists and there are relationship managers. Figure out which you’re better at and lean into it.” Since then, he’s luckily also put it into writing. In essence, as an IR professional, you’re either really good at building and maintaining relationships or can teach people about the firm, the craft, the thesis, the portfolio, and the decisions behind them.

To caveat ‘relationship managers,’ I believe there are two kinds: sales and customer success. Sales is really capital formation. How do you build (as opposed to maintain) relationships? How do you win strangers over? This is a topic for another day. For now, we’ll focus on ‘customer success’ later in this piece.

There’s also this equation that I hear a number of Heads of IR and Chief Development Officers use.

track record X differentiation / complexity

I don’t know the origin, but I first heard it from my friends at General Catalyst, so I’ll give them the kudos here.

Everyone at the firm should play a key role influencing at least one of these variables. The operations and portfolio support team should focus on differentiation. The investment partners focus on the track record. Us IR folks focus on complexity. And yes, everyone does help everyone else with their variables as well.

That said, to transpose Ian’s framework to this function, the relationship managers primarily focus on reducing the size of the denominator. Help LPs understand what could be complex about your firm through regular catchups—these touchpoints are crucial for maintaining a strong LP relationship:

• Why are you increasing the fund size?
• Why are you diversifying the thesis?
• How do you address key person risk?
• Why are you expanding to new asset classes?
• Are you on an American or European waterfall distribution structure?
• Why are you missing an independent management company?
• Who will be the GP if the current one gets hit by a bus?

The product specialists split time between the numerator and the denominator. They spend intimate time in the partnership meetings, and might potentially be involved in the investment committee. Oftentimes, I see product specialists either actively building their own angel track record and/or working their way to become full-time investment partners.

One of my favorite laws of magic by one of my favorite authors, Brandon Sanderson, is his first law: “An author’s ability to solve conflict with magic is directly proportional to how well the reader understands said magic.”

In turn, an IR professional’s ability to get an LP to re-up is directly proportional to how well the LP understands said magic at the firm.

My friend and former Broadway playwright, Michael Roderick, once said, the modern professional specializes in three ways:

1. The scientist is wired for process. The subject-matter expert. They thrive on the details, the small nuances most others would overlook. They will discover things that revolutionize how the industry works. The passionately curious.
2. The celebrity. They thrive on building and maintaining relationships. And their superpower is that they can make others feel like celebrities.
3. The magician thrives on novelty. Looking at old things in new ways – new perspectives. The translator. They’re great at making things click. Turning arcane, esoteric knowledge into something your grandma gets.

The product specialists are the scientists. The relationship managers are the celebrities. But every IR professional, especially as you grow, needs to be a magician.

Going back to the fact that most LPs are generalists, and that most venture firms look extremely similar to each other, you need to be able to describe the magic and your firm’s ‘rules’ for said magic to your grandma.

In part 2, I share some individual tactics I’ve worked into my rotation. Most are not original in nature, but borrowed, inspired, and co-created with fellow IR professionals.

Blockchain technology and tokenization promise to revolutionize private equity fund structures, though practical implementation remains at an early stage. According to a report by BCG and ADDX, the tokenization of illiquid assets could become a $16 trillion market by 2030.

Tokenization involves creating digital representations of fund interests on blockchain platforms. These tokens can represent LP interests in traditional fund structures, fractional ownership of specific assets, revenue streams from portfolio companies, or hybrid structures combining elements. The technology enables programmable features impossible with traditional paper-based systems.

There are key benefits that are driving interest in these technologies, namely:

• Enhanced liquidity through secondary trading
• Reduced minimum investments which allow for broader participation 
• Automated compliance through smart contracts
• Real-time settlement and record-keeping, and 
• Lower administrative costs at scale. 

These advantages potentially address longstanding private equity limitations around liquidity and accessibility.

However, significant challenges remain. Regulatory uncertainty persists in most jurisdictions, with securities laws struggling to accommodate novel structures. The SEC has provided some guidance on digital assets, but comprehensive frameworks remain under development. Technical complexity requires specialized expertise many firms lack. Market infrastructure for trading and custody remains immature while there is a need for more investor education, particularly for institutions with established processes.

The subscription process transforms investor commitments into legally binding obligations. While seemingly administrative, this process significantly impacts investor experience and operational efficiency. Modern subscription processes balance legal requirements with investor convenience through technology adoption and process optimization.

Subscription documentation serves multiple purposes beyond legal necessity. Core components include:

• Subscription agreement binding investors to fund terms
• Investor eligibility representations confirming qualified status
• Tax documentation enabling proper reporting
• Anti-money laundering verification satisfying regulatory requirements,
• Side letter negotiations documenting specific investor arrangements.

Each document type requires careful attention to both legal precision and practical execution. Subscription agreements must clearly articulate commitment amounts and timing, payment mechanics and default remedies, representation and warranty requirements, and governing law and dispute resolution. Seemingly minor drafting decisions can create significant downstream implications for fund operations and investor relations.

The SEC provides guidance on private offering requirements that shapes subscription documentation requirements. Side letter negotiations have evolved from exceptional accommodations to standard practice for institutional investors. Common provisions include fee arrangements, transparency and reporting enhancements, advisory committee participation, and transfer rights. Managing proliferating side letters requires systematic tracking, most favored nation provision management, operational capability to deliver varied commitments, and careful consideration of cumulative impacts.

Investment due diligence forms the core of most investor evaluations, examining whether your strategy can generate attractive returns sustainably. Investors probe every aspect of your investment approach, seeking evidence of both compelling opportunity and execution capability.

Investors begin by pressure-testing your investment thesis and market opportunity. They examine whether your identified opportunity is real and sustainable, questioning market size calculations, growth assumptions, competitive dynamics, and timing rationale. Be prepared to defend your market analysis with multiple data sources, acknowledge counterarguments while explaining your perspective, and demonstrate deep, nuanced understanding beyond surface-level analysis.

The differentiation discussion proves particularly crucial. Investors have typically seen dozens of funds claiming similar strategies, so it is essential to articulate clearly what makes your approach unique and sustainable. This differentiation might stem from proprietary sourcing channels, unique operational capabilities, differentiated market insights, or structural advantages. Whatever your claimed edge, be prepared to provide concrete evidence supporting its existence and sustainability.

Digital marketing for private equity faces unique constraints from securities regulations, investor sophistication expectations, and relationship-driven decision-making. But with some planning and care, you can deploy digital strategies to enhance fundraising efficiency and reach.

Remember that the regulatory framework shapes all digital marketing decisions. In the United States, the choice between Rule 506(b) and 506(c) fundamentally determines permissible digital activities. Under 506(b), general solicitation remains prohibited, limiting digital marketing to password-protected content, targeted communications to pre-qualified investors, and relationship-building rather than fund promotion. Rule 506(c) permits broader digital marketing but requires verified accredited investor status for all investors, creating operational implications.

Institutional investors evaluate private equity opportunities through several critical lenses that shape their decision-making. 

• Strategic fit: This is the most important factor. Institutions maintain specific allocation targets and strategic priorities. Your fund must align with their current needs, whether filling gaps in their portfolio, accessing new markets, or achieving specific return objectives. Thoroughly research their existing portfolio to identify where your strategy adds value rather than just duplicating existing exposures. 
• Operational excellence:  This has evolved from a differentiator to a minimum requirement. Institutions expect institutional-quality operations including robust compliance programs, sophisticated reporting capabilities, established governance structures, and proven operational infrastructure. This reflects hard-learned lessons from past fund failures attributed more to operational breakdowns than investment losses.
• Track record verification: Going beyond headline returns, institutions conduct exhaustive analysis examining various aspects– attribution methodologies, performance persistence across cycles, team stability and individual contributions, and alignment between historical investments and stated strategy. They frequently engage third-party verification services to validate performance claims, making it essential to maintain scrupulous records and consistent calculation methodologies from your first investment forward.
• ESG considerations: Environmental, social, and governance considerations have moved from optional to mandatory for most institutions. Your approach must go beyond policy statements to demonstrate actual integration and measurement. This means you have to include specific examples of ESG considerations affecting investment decisions, portfolio company improvements, and quantifiable metrics tracking ESG performance over time.
• Fee and terms:  Scrutiny on fees and terms continues intensifying as institutions seek to improve net returns. While Chapter 3 noted that private equity fees have remained relatively stable, institutions increasingly push for modifications including fee reductions for large commitments, enhanced governance rights and transparency provisions, and priority access to co-investment opportunities. Successful managers balance defending their economic model with strategic flexibility on terms that don’t fundamentally impact fund economics.