The role of the Chair in a PE-backed, founder-led business is often misunderstood.

One of the most common questions I hear from first-time founders is: what is a Chair actually for?

For founders, especially those taking private equity investment for the first time, the role of Chair can feel opaque. In the US, many founder-led businesses do not operate with Chairs. In parts of Europe, the title can feel more institutional than entrepreneurial, particularly to founders used to informal investor relationships.

And behind the question sits a deeper concern. Is the Chair here to supervise me? Are they supposed to help me build the company, or to represent the investors’ interests?

Stewart Holness, Chair of PriceShape and an experienced operator across multiple tech investments, sees this confusion regularly.

“In most cases, founders don’t quite know where the role comes from or how it will deliver value. Often they have a perception that the Chair is someone who turns up, reviews the occasional deck, and starts and ends a meeting. When of course, in a PE-backed, founder-led business, the reality is very different.”

A good Chair provides more than governance

Andrew Blatherwick, Chair of Relesys and long-time Chair in PE-backed growth businesses, draws a clear distinction between public and private environments.

“In a public company the Chair is more of a governance role and less of a business role. In a PE-backed business, the opposite is true. You have to work with both the leadership team and the investors as more of a catalyst.”

Of course, directors have statutory responsibilities and boards must function properly. In a scaling business, however, governance is the foundation rather than the defining feature.

The Chair’s real contribution is operational and relational. Andrew describes the role as “the glue between a chief exec and the private equity company – the one who is speaking to both of them, trying to make sure that they understand each other, that the messages are clear.”

If either side stops trusting the other, the model breaks. But the Chair needs to ensure more than just trust; a great Chair will improve the quality of decision-making leading to better business outcomes.

So, who does the Chair work for?

Because it’s common for private equity investors to encourage the Chair appointment and put forward recommended candidates, this can lead founders to assume that whoever they appoint will ultimately answer to the investor.

Likewise, investors sometimes worry that a Chair is becoming too aligned with management and isn’t recognising shareholder concerns. Both perspectives are understandable, particularly when capital has shifted the balance of ownership and influence.

Peter Ryan, Chair of SecureFlag and a former public company CEO turned portfolio Chair, explains the delicate balance – and diplomacy – involved in the role.

“What you learn with experience is you’re there to enable the success of the company. You sit in the middle. The founder needs to feel they can trust you and talk openly, and that you’re not just going to report everything back to the investor. The investor needs to know you’re not going native with the management team.”

Stewart takes an even wider lens. As a statutory director, he argues, the Chair’s responsibility extends beyond any one constituency.

“The moment you’re a director, you’ve got responsibility for employees, for customers, for shareholders. The founders and the investors are both shareholders. You’re responsible to the room. You can’t simply sit there and say, I’m on this side or that side. That doesn’t get anybody anywhere.”

In practice, the Chair’s duty is to the long-term success of the company. That will sometimes mean backing the founder’s instinct. Sometimes it will mean challenging it. Occasionally it will mean asking everyone to slow down and rethink.

What it should not mean is being captured by either side.

Understanding the real work happening between meetings

Once in place, the effectiveness of a Chair tends to be determined by regularity of contact, the quality of conversations and the depth of understanding built with the leadership team over time.

For Stewart, the early phase of the relationship is particularly decisive. It is in those first weeks that the foundations are laid for trust, credibility and informed judgement.

“I expect to significantly deep dive into a business in the first six to eight weeks, spending time with engineering, product, customer success, sales, marketing and finance. You should be able to give a decent pitch of the business to a new investor or customer after about two months. If you can’t do that, you’re not very helpful.”

That early immersion builds credibility. Without it, advice too often strays into the  theoretical.

Andrew’s approach is to show up consistently and ensure he’s always available should he be needed.

“I will be in touch with the chief exec certainly every week, quite often every day. I visit the business at least once a month. And if the chief exec needs me, they know they can ring me at any time. They sometimes need advice pretty quickly, and they need to be able to bounce an idea off somebody else that they can’t do in their own business.”

Peter describes a similar pattern.

“You’re available on email, WhatsApp – whatever they need. It’s about making sure the CEO doesn’t get overwhelmed and that the investors get what they need without distracting the CEO from running the business.”

Formal board sessions do still matter. But in fast-growth businesses, most meaningful decisions are shaped between meetings.

At Relesys, Andrew has played precisely that kind of role. The company was considering expanding into the US at an early stage of its growth journey. But while it was a compelling opportunity, Andrew had been on the journey before, having previously supported businesses such as RELEX Solutions in their US expansion. He recognised the operational and capital intensity involved and saw that the move would stretch management focus and dilute capital at a point when the business was still building scale. Guided by his judgement, the board chose to delay the move and focus on expanding into the UK first.

This kind of judgement comes from having scaled before, knowing where capital gets consumed, and understanding when ambition needs sequencing. That said, Chairs don’t necessarily have to have ‘grey hair’ to be of value. They need to have the requisite experience of running and scaling successful businesses, but they must also have their finger on the pulse. As Andrew explains, “You might have been there and seen it all, but you’re totally out of touch with where technology is today, then you’re not going to be much use. It’s beholden on you to keep up.”

The safest place in the company

Founders are rightly proud of what they have built, but it can make certain  conversations more delicate, especially when there’s resistance or pushback.

And while certain hard financial messages are best delivered directly by investors, more nuanced conversations – around leadership capability, timing of hires, succession, or exit – lend themselves to the Chair’s domain. The Chair should be the person the CEO or founder can speak to candidly behind the scenes when they need support, which is why trust plays such a critical role in the relationships that go the distance.

“It’s very important that the founder feels they chose you,” says Peter. “They need to feel they can trust you and they’re not wasting their time talking to you.”

Andrew echoes this point.

“You are not the star, they are. You support and help them, challenge them where necessary and discuss how things can be improved. But this is better done behind closed doors.”

When things aren’t working

Even well-constructed relationships can come under strain. Differences in personality, expectations or pace can create tension. And sometimes, for all of the Chair’s powers of diplomacy, a difficult decision may be unavoidable, as Peter explains.

“If there’s a breakdown between the Chair and the CEO and it can’t be fixed, one of them needs to go. It generally becomes an unsustainable situation. The first reaction from the Chair’s perspective should be to course correct and get clarity on the problem, and why the CEO has an issue. But you can’t just battle through if it isn’t working.”

The third way

When founders ask who the Chair is actually for, what they are often asking is whether they are about to lose control of something they built.

The more accurate answer is simpler: a good Chair increases the probability of success for everyone involved.

As Stewart puts it, “You both want the same thing. You want to build a business, grow it, enjoy it, and avoid nasty surprises. The investor wants that too. The trick is to have someone with experience in the room who’s prepared to be hands on whenever it’s needed. Someone who has seen those cycles before - and who can help founder and investor navigate them.”

‍

‍