Operational Levers Defining PE and VC in 2025

Most professionals in the private equity and venture capital industry already know the surface-level distinctions: PE firms typically focus on mature companies, while VC firms target early-stage companies and young businesses with high growth potential.

But the real story lies beneath the surface. The key differences between private equity and venture capital show up most clearly in how each investment firm creates value after the deal is signed. Post-investment execution (not just capital deployment) is where the battle for returns is won.

Recent data from Bain & Company highlights how today’s market environment is reshaping the investment strategies of both private equity firms and venture capital firms. With high multiples, aging dry powder, and liquidity pressures, both types of firms are evolving their operational playbooks in order to generate above-average returns for their limited partners.

The Investment Thesis and Time Horizon

Although both private equity firms and venture capital firms are part of the same alternative investments universe, their starting assumptions could not be more different.

An investment thesis dictates not only what type of target companies they pursue but also the playbook for value creation and the role of the management team after the deal. The contrast in time horizons and investment strategies reveals why PE and VC operators approach portfolio support in fundamentally different ways.

Private Equity: Control and Compression

Private equity funds are built on the premise of control. A typical PE firm acquires a majority stake or takes a public company private through a leveraged buyout, immediately gaining influence over the company’s board and operational agenda.

This controlling interest allows the firm to dictate changes with speed and precision, compressing the timeline for results.

Traditionally, PE investments were modeled on a three-to-five-year horizon, with firms aiming to optimize operations, expand margins, and exit quickly.

In practice, though, holding periods have lengthened. Recent data from Preqin and Private Equity Info shows PE firms now hold companies for an average of 5.5–7 years, as high entry multiples and challenging exit markets extend timelines.

Unlike the venture model of nurturing long-term growth, PE is about acceleration, applying both debt financing and operational know-how to unlock value quickly.

Market realities, however, are reshaping the playbook. Bain notes that 24% of the $1.2 trillion in private equity dry powder is more than four years old, meaning capital is aging on the sidelines. This creates a burning platform: funds must find ways to deploy large sums efficiently.

The response has been a wave of bigger deals, with the average buyout in North America reaching $849 million, and a surge in public-to-private transactions, which now account for nearly half of buyouts above $5 billion.

But the real challenge goes deeper. With multiples high, PE firms can no longer rely on financial engineering alone. They must identify mature companies where operational improvements (from vendor management to cost restructuring) can be executed at scale.

This pivot has elevated the importance of platform teams inside PE, transforming them from financial overseers into hands-on operators capable of driving measurable change across portfolio companies.

Venture Capital: Influence and Patience

If private equity investments are about exerting control and compressing value creation into a few years, venture capital is almost the mirror opposite. VC firms typically provide minority stakes in early-stage companies or young businesses, where the risks are higher but the potential for long-term growth and outsized returns is greater.

Instead of buying a controlling interest, venture capitalists rely on influence. Their leverage comes from board seats, preferred stock rights, and access to networks, rather than direct authority over a company’s operations. The founder and management team remain in charge of execution, while venture capital firms focus on creating the right environment for innovation and scale.

The time horizon reflects this model: seven to ten years, sometimes longer. That extended runway acknowledges that many new businesses require multiple iterations before achieving product–market fit. Only then can they scale in ways that justify IPOs, acquisitions, or secondary sales on stock exchanges.

Here too, market realities are forcing adaptation. Bain’s 2024 data shows that while PE firms face a “deployment problem” with aging dry powder, VCs face a “performance problem.” With distributions at decade lows and IPOs accounting for just 6% of exit value, VC investors are under pressure to ensure that portfolio companies survive long enough and grow fast enough to attract future funding.

That has made operational support non-negotiable. Whereas in the past, platform teams at VC firms were often seen as value-add perks, they are now critical. The venture capital private equity ecosystem is demanding more than just capital; it requires scaffolding. 

Venture capital firms invest heavily in:

• Talent acquisition: building pipelines for executives and functional leaders who can professionalize portfolio companies quickly.
• GTM and fundraising strategy: helping founders design scalable go-to-market models and prepare for subsequent rounds of equity financing.
• Runway extension: providing tools, networks, and sometimes even shared services to help startups reduce burn and stretch both cash and time.

The emphasis remains on revenue growth. Bain estimates revenue contributes over half of venture returns, but the tools to enable that growth have expanded. In today’s market, a VC platform that cannot provide hands-on support risks leaving its companies underprepared for survival, let alone success.

The Levers of Value Creation

No matter the investment type, the ultimate goal of both private equity funds and venture capital firms is the same: to deliver strong returns for their limited partners. The real divergence lies in how those returns are achieved once capital has been deployed.

For private equity firms, value creation has historically leaned on financial engineering and debt financing. But with high entry multiples and intense competition for target companies, the pressure is now on to generate returns through hands-on operational improvements.

For venture capitalists, the story is different. With minority positions in early-stage companies, they can’t dictate cost cuts or restructurings in the same way. Instead, venture capital firms focus on enabling rapid growth, helping founders expand markets, build teams, and secure additional equity financing.

This divergence sets the stage for two distinct playbooks: the private equity playbook, built around operational control and efficiency, and the venture capital playbook, centered on momentum and scale. We'll share a brief overview of each and encourage you to expand your knowledge through research and self-study. You can also follow podcasts like Dry Powder for PE and a16z for VC to stay up to date with the industry, depending on your chosen career path.

Brief Overview of The Changing Private Equity Playbook

The private equity playbook has traditionally been anchored in leverage and multiple expansion. But Bain’s latest analysis shows that these tools are no longer sufficient in high-multiple markets. Operational execution has moved to the center of value creation.

That means after a deal closes, private equity firms focus on levers such as:

• Cost efficiency: streamlining company’s operations, consolidating vendors, and reducing overhead.
• Margin expansion: driving EBITDA growth by tightening resource allocation.
• Strategic add-ons: pursuing bolt-on acquisitions to capture synergies.
• Exit readiness: preparing publicly traded or privately held companies for smooth sales or IPOs.

This shift reflects the evolution of the private equity industry: while financial engineering remains part of the toolkit, hands-on operational oversight is now essential.

For those seeking deeper insights, Bain’s Global Private Equity Report provides a far more detailed look at how these strategies are reshaping the playbook for PE firms worldwide.

While private equity leans on operational control and efficiency, venture capital investors take a very different path. With minority stakes in early stage companies, VCs cannot mandate restructurings or margin initiatives in the same way.

A Brief Overview of The Changing Venture Capital Playbook

In contrast, venture capital firms focus on influence and momentum. They don’t take controlling stakes in early-stage companies; instead, they partner with founders, offering governance, equity financing, and access to networks.

But even this model is shifting. As McKinsey’s 2025 Global Private Markets Report highlights, even VC firms are evolving toward more operational involvement. They must pair capital with scaffolding to ensure survival and growth in today’s environment.

Core elements of the venture capital playbook include:

• Building leadership pipelines for scaling teams
• Crafting go-to-market strategies and fundraising roadmaps
• Extending both cash and runway with tools and networks that mitigate risk

While Bain shows that over 50% of VC returns still come from revenue growth, the path to unlocking that growth increasingly depends on platform teams providing operational and strategic support.

For those interested in exploring this shift further, McKinsey’s Global Private Markets Report offers a comprehensive perspective on how VC investors are adapting their playbooks to today’s market realities.

The Talent Imperative

In both private equity and venture capital, talent is the decisive factor that can accelerate or derail value creation. Deals may be priced in multiples, but execution always comes down to people.

In PE funds, the focus is on replacing or augmenting leadership in mature companies. When a PE firm takes a controlling stake, it often inherits entrenched management practices.

Installing a proven CFO, COO, or even building an entirely new executive bench can rapidly improve company’s operations and unlock margin expansion. The Bain report notes that operational teams are now seen as primary drivers of returns, and leadership change is one of the fastest ways to reset strategy. 

In VC firms, the challenge is different. Founders of early stage companies are visionaries but not always operators. Venture capital firms therefore spend significant energy helping startups professionalize. This includes recruiting first-time CFOs to manage vc investments, bringing in GTM leaders who know how to scale, and identifying board members who can mentor young founders. Because survival depends on rapid growth, the wrong executive hire can shorten runway; the right one can extend it.

Platform professionals are at the center of this work. In PE, they serve as talent scouts and succession planners across entire portfolios. In VC, they act as connectors, cultivating networks of advisors, recruiters, and even angel investors who can step in to fill key roles.

For aspiring Heads of Platform, mastering the talent lever means learning to spot leadership gaps quickly, knowing when to push for change, and building trusted pipelines of executives who can be placed into portfolio companies as needed. In both models, the ability to align the right people with the right stage of growth is what makes capital truly productive.

The Technology Lever

If talent is the “who” of value creation, technology is the “how.” Both PE firms and VC firms are investing in digital infrastructure and data-driven insights to give themselves and their portfolio companies a measurable edge.

In private equity investments, advanced analytics are increasingly part of the diligence and post-acquisition playbook. Tools that benchmark operational metrics across industries can reveal inefficiencies in target companies before a deal is signed.

After acquisition, portfolio-wide dashboards allow PE operators to track KPIs, identify underperformance, and standardize best practices. Technology here is as much about mitigating risk as it is about boosting returns.

In venture capital funding, technology is leveraged to accelerate growth. CRM systems and marketing automation help new businesses scale customer acquisition. AI-powered platforms can guide product development, predict churn, or optimize pricing models. In a market where extending runway is critical, the right tools can help startups do more with less and maintain the momentum that VC investors expect.

For platform teams, technology is no longer a back-office IT function; it is a front-line enabler of investment strategies. The best leaders treat tech like a shared service: sourcing tools once, negotiating favorable terms, and rolling them out across multiple companies.

This is where vendor solutions like Proven naturally come in. By streamlining vendor relationships and centralizing contracts across a portfolio, firms can not only reduce costs but also gain visibility into spend and risk across all portfolio companies.

For PE teams focused on margin expansion and VC teams trying to help startups extend runway, these efficiencies compound quickly.

For rising operators, the challenge is to stay ahead of which technologies move from “nice-to-have” to “non-negotiable” in your industry. In PE, that might mean portfolio-wide procurement platforms; in VC, it could be founder-friendly finance stacks or AI-driven GTM tools.

Implications for Platform Teams

For professionals moving into senior associate, VP, or Principal roles, the takeaways are clear:

• In PE funds, platform roles function like “operational CFOs,” focused on efficiency, integration, and margin expansion.
• In VC firms, platform roles act as ecosystem architects, enabling long-term growth through talent, GTM strategies, and fundraising support.

 Both require critical thinking, but the execution style differs: control and compression in PE vs. influence and patience in VC.

And increasingly, success comes down to how well platform teams can orchestrate the common levers of talent and technology across multiple portfolio companies. The best operators find ways to standardize what can be standardized (whether it’s recruiting playbooks, GTM frameworks, or procurement processes) so they can free up time and capital for company-specific challenges.

One of the most natural first steps in the right direction is streamlining vendor management and procurement across the portfolio. The right software can help platform teams unlock cost savings, improve visibility, and reduce operational risk. 

For PE, that’s directly tied to margin expansion; for VC, it helps extend runway and protect growth momentum. In both models, freeing the management team from administrative overhead gives founders and executives more bandwidth to focus on the strategic priorities that drive value creation.

For aspiring Heads of Platform, the lesson is clear: your mandate is no longer just to support; it’s to operationalize. Building scalable systems for people and technology across a portfolio is what distinguishes operators who add incremental value from those who deliver transformational impact.

Learn more about Proven's vendor management solution here.

Conclusion

The future of private equity and venture capital will be defined less by how firms source deals and more by how they create value once the ink is dry. In today’s environment, capital is abundant, but operational excellence is scarce.

For platform professionals, this is both the challenge and the opportunity. Whether you’re working with mature companies in a PE portfolio or early-stage companies in VC, your mandate is shifting from support to orchestration. 

The levers of talent and technology are no longer side notes; they are the engines that determine whether a firm delivers on its promise to investors.

The takeaway isn’t to memorize every detail of the PE or VC playbook — Bain and McKinsey already cover that in depth. The real takeaway is this: the next generation of Heads of Platform will be judged by their ability to turn frameworks into execution, and execution into outcomes.

For a deeper dive into modern operational strategies, see our resource for the Head of Platform role.

‍