????私募股權(quán)公司通常都是其投資組合公司的董事會中的活躍分子。幾乎所有的投資公司都會密切監(jiān)視其投資組合公司的戰(zhàn)術表現(xiàn)：相對預算的業(yè)績、銷售管道分析、現(xiàn)金流監(jiān)控、利潤評估、資本結(jié)構(gòu)優(yōu)化、估值等等不一而足。公司的戰(zhàn)術表現(xiàn)確實重要，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該偏向于戰(zhàn)略方面。投資人很容易迷失在細枝末節(jié)當中，而忘記拷問自己那些重大的戰(zhàn)略問題。

????下面我們列出了5個關鍵的戰(zhàn)略性問題，對于每家投資組合公司，甚至是潛在投資目標，私募股權(quán)投資人每過3到6個月都至少應該審視一番。

????1、公司的核心戰(zhàn)略計劃是什么？投資人需要在戰(zhàn)略目標的框架內(nèi)評估戰(zhàn)術表現(xiàn)。公司或者業(yè)務部門的生命周期基本上就是由一系列的3-5年戰(zhàn)略計劃組成。計劃可以是開發(fā)原型產(chǎn)品并贏得重要的首批客戶。可以是國際拓展，增加收入和現(xiàn)金流，或者擴展產(chǎn)品線進入鄰近市場。可以是通過對成本結(jié)構(gòu)的合理化改革，實現(xiàn)從增長導向到價值導向的轉(zhuǎn)變，或者完成從業(yè)務剝離到獨立實體的成功轉(zhuǎn)型。也可能是在萎縮的市場中將公司的力量集中于某些核心產(chǎn)品。對于私募股權(quán)或風投投資的公司，在3-5年的計劃中常常有多種核心戰(zhàn)略可供選擇。投資人必須持續(xù)地評估這種戰(zhàn)略計劃，如果公司的運營或競爭環(huán)境發(fā)生變化，該計劃是否仍然合適。能夠清楚地確認其核心戰(zhàn)略計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)略計劃合拍？這也許是投資人最難以回答的問題，但卻是一個根本性的問題。私募股權(quán)公司通常善于在收購股權(quán)時就排除那些不符合其戰(zhàn)略的交易，但在投入資金之后，他們可能不會察覺到戰(zhàn)略環(huán)境的變化。比如，一個追求成長的私募股權(quán)公司投資于一家已經(jīng)轉(zhuǎn)向慢速增長的成熟期的企業(yè)；處于行業(yè)兼并風潮中的小公司作為大公司的一個分支可能更加合適；公司著手啟動新的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，有時正確的決定只能是轉(zhuǎn)手。回答這個問題有時需要勇于承認某項投資的失敗，但那也好過在與公司的投資戰(zhàn)略不符的企業(yè)身上空耗時日。

????3、公司的首席執(zhí)行官能否執(zhí)行該戰(zhàn)略計劃？多數(shù)私募股權(quán)投資人善于發(fā)現(xiàn)不稱職的首席執(zhí)行官。難題在于判斷是否好人被放錯了位置，特別是核心戰(zhàn)略發(fā)生改變的情況下。有時需要一個有遠見卓識的思想家，有時又需要實干型的“修理匠”。有時需要救火隊員來扭轉(zhuǎn)乾坤，有時只要一個營銷老手就夠。思想家的才干不適合于復興戰(zhàn)略，營銷專家也解決不了運營效率的問題。

????4、投入公司的資本得到適當?shù)幕貓罅藛幔?/strong>公司產(chǎn)品的關鍵單位經(jīng)濟效益就是必須實現(xiàn)投入資本的充分回報。資本回報率方法在各個行業(yè)有所不同（比如，成熟產(chǎn)品制造商和成長階段的在線軟件公司需要關注不同的指標），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)務必須能夠產(chǎn)生有盈利的收入。沒有單位經(jīng)濟效益的收入增長并不值得投資。

????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.