That moment when the VC money actually hits the account is pretty blissful for founders. After months of pitches, meetings, term sheets, and lots of assorted paperwork, they finally have the runway to go and actually build the thing. Celebrations abound!

But wait just a minute. Once the check clears, has the VC fulfilled its obligations to the founders? Board meetings and catch up calls in the future, sure, but what about beyond that? While the focus tends to be on the money (after all the shorthand for venture capital firms is “funds”) there’s a lot of hard work that comes after that defines the reputation of the VC.

VCs want to tout themselves as being “hands on” but what does that actually look like in a successful partnership? And I don’t use the word partnership lightly. The best VC/startup relationships really are mutually beneficial partnerships where the startups grow and the VC makes ample returns on the investment. Well, we have been on the operator side of this relationship numerous times and to be completely frank, the difference between a truly “hands-on” VC and one that is paying lip service is quickly apparent.

Take one portfolio company we worked with that needed support on market entry as previous attempts had completely stalled. The product had enormous potential and the founders were ambitious, but they didn’t have a clear strategy or channel partners, or really any idea about how to find them. In alignment with the VC we were able to unlock solid warm intros, and build a structured entry plan with a signed partnership agreement and genuine top-of-funnel pipeline. The founders and the team immediately highlighted the stark difference between this genuine, meaningful support compared to other funds that made weak or unqualified intros that just didn’t pan out in the long run.

It’s worth expanding on what that contrast apparently looked like as this particular experience seemed to echo many stories we hear about less-than-ideal “support” that is anything but. It sounds really exciting when partners promise warm intros with flashy clients, oftentimes enterprise, and founders get stars in their eyes picturing explosive, rapid growth. Sure, there may be real intros behind these promises, and the meetings line up. However, if those intros don’t actually lead to converted deals, they lose a lot of their luster. A true partnership that moves beyond the transactional is not just going to lean on the hand-off. There will be ongoing support to help turn that first meeting into additional conversations that eventually lead to a deal.

It’s an uncomfortable truth that real portfolio support takes a lot more than well-meaning promises. In addition to solid investors and well-connected partners, the founders also need support from people who understand the ins and outs of GTM and can get deep into the weeds of a specific market entry. It’s a lot less flash for sure, and it’s harder to fit into a sleek narrative that can be summed up with “X number of introductions.” That being said, it’s also what can be the difference between a startup that stalls in its growth journey and the one that actually maximizes the cash raised.

A true partnership is recognizable when the VC leans in. Any VC can hand off the lead, pat themselves on the back and think “job well done!” However, in a real partnership, the VC will see that the deal is stalling and have enough GTM know-how to actually get the deal moving. This does not have to mean taking over or infringing upon the founder’s independence, but it should create meaningful opportunities that ensure the startup is thriving months, and years, later. That’s the true value-add!

If you want to honestly consider the support “hands-on” ask yourself the following:

Are the introductions made just hand-offs with no follow-up, or is there genuine follow-up throughout the conversations to maximize chances of a converted deal? If a VC is not actually following up they might just be ticking a box and not truly dedicated to meaningful support.

Does the VC team have more than a strong network? In other words, are there people who have true GTM experience that can help replicate that success? Beyond just getting the founder the call, someone has to be there to help move the deal along if or when it stalls.

If the company succeeds or fails in eighteen months, would you know specifically why? If you’re close enough to see the details, you’ll have an honest answer.

Being hands-on takes more effort, but leads to more fruitful partnerships. If you want to see what real portfolio support looks like in practice, let’s connect.