We are preparing for an exit in two years and our investment banker suggests keeping a specialized, highly custom client-relations seat on our Accountability Chart because buyers like seeing it. However, this custom seat is currently causing operational bottlenecks and slowing down our workflow. Do we optimize for the buyer or for current operational efficiency?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

When preparing for an acquisition, it is natural to feel the pull to design your organization to please prospective buyers. However, keeping an inefficient, highly customized seat on your Accountability Chart just because an investment banker thinks it looks good is a mistake. Buyers do not acquire static organizational charts; they acquire efficient, scalable, and highly profitable operational engines.

If a legacy seat is causing bottlenecks and slowing down your operations, it is actively destroying the enterprise value you are trying to build. You must prioritize operational health and efficiency today by structuring the business correctly. Building an Accountability Chart that fosters efficiency is crucial for your company's long-term health and exit readiness, even if it means restructuring some roles.

Prioritizing Operational Health

Focus on optimizing your internal operations rather than making cosmetic changes for buyers.

Follow these guidelines:

• Design your Accountability Chart for maximum efficiency and execution. Eliminate any seats that create drag, lead to redundant steps, or foster inefficiencies. For instance, consider how your current Accountability Chart structure might be causing issues like those described in [resolving leadership turf wars](/qa/resolving-leadership-turf-wars-accountability-chart).
• If the client-relations functions associated with the custom seat are genuinely valuable, redistribute those specific roles to existing, scalable seats. Think about roles like account management or customer success, which are typically designed for growth.
• Document your automated and streamlined workflows to show buyers that you have built a modern system that does not rely on outdated, highly customized roles. This demonstrates your business is turn-key, as discussed in [operational playbooks for strategic premium multiples](/qa/operational-playbooks-for-strategic-premium-multiples).

A clean, functional Accountability Chart with clear lines of reporting and high profit margins is far more attractive to a sophisticated buyer than a legacy structure kept around for appearances. Understanding [how to design a specialist seat](/qa/restructuring-seat-for-legacy-leader-hitting-ceiling) can also be helpful if you need to retain expertise while optimizing the chart.

Build the ideal structure for execution, and the valuation will follow. Your focus should be on creating a business that runs smoothly and profitably, demonstrating true business exit readiness, rather than just appeasing potential buyers with a specific chart. Consider how [thinking time can help design the Accountability Chart](/qa/thinking-time-accountability-chart-exit-prep) for exit preparation.

Related questions

• [How does AI assist in identifying and mitigating risks for businesses undergoing exit planning?](/qa/how-does-ai-assist-in-identifying-and-mitigating-risks-for-businesses-undergoing-exit-planning)
• [Why buyers pay more for EOS-run businesses](/qa/why-buyers-pay-more-for-eos-run-businesses)
• [How do I know if my business is actually ready for a clean exit, or if I am just burning out and need to fix my internal operations first?](/qa/business-exit-readiness-vs-founder-burnout)
• [How do we design a specialist seat on our Accountability Chart for a legacy leader who has hit their management ceiling, so we retain their expertise without stalling our growth?](/qa/restructuring-seat-for-legacy-leader-hitting-ceiling)
• [What concrete weekly measurables should we track for our accounting and IT seats to keep them accountable without resorting to subjective check the box metrics?](/qa/back-office-weekly-scorecard-measurables)