When one portco raises a technology question, get an answer your investment committee can read.
Typical triggers: a board question nobody could close, a company drifting mid-hold, or a worry before exit. A general partner (GP) can commission the answer directly. The GP receives a one-page scorecard and a short backup deck that an investment committee can read, drawn from a one-to-two-week review of a single portfolio company (portco) scored on seven axes. If the Portfolio Technology Diagnostic is scoped within three months, the review is credited toward it.
Why this exists
When the question is about one specific portco.
A GP often wants an answer on one portco before commissioning a fund-wide review. Typical moments are a deal under review, a pre-exit window, a recent acquisition not yet integrated, or a board question the PE operating partner could not answer in investment committee format. The Portco Technology Review is sized for that decision.
Who commissions it
Commissioned directly by the GP.
Pre-exit window
A portco is 12 to 24 months from exit. The GP wants to know what would surface in buyer diligence before going to market.
Post-acquisition review
An acquisition closed 6 to 18 months ago. Integration has stalled, or the value-creation thesis is not yet visible in technology terms.
Board question the operating partner could not close
The board asked about AI exposure, cyber posture, or IT spend trajectory and the operating partner did not have a documented answer. The GP needs a report before the next board meeting.
Operating-partner second opinion
The operating partner reports that a portco is fine. The GP wants a second opinion, to confirm that or to find what the operating partner's view is missing.
What gets scored
Seven axes. Same framework as the Diagnostic.
The Technology Review is the per-portco version of the scoring framework that runs at fund level in the Portfolio Technology Diagnostic. Cross-portfolio comparison is what scales up. Per-portco scoring is what this review produces.
- 1. Tech-spend trajectory. Quarterly trajectory normalized to revenue. Flags spend rising faster than revenue without a documented business case.
- 2. Architecture documentation. Whether the portco could produce a current-state architecture document a buyer's diligence team could read in 20 minutes.
- 3. Cybersecurity posture. Has the portco had a formal posture assessment in the past 18 months. Cyber insurance renewal and buyer-diligence exposure scored together.
- 4. SaaS rationalization status. SaaS spend mapped against utilization. Identifies room to cut SaaS spend.
- 5. AI exposure. Whether the portco is deploying AI features with documented governance.
- 6. AI data foundation readiness. Whether the portco could ship an AI use case to production today or needs substantial data work first.
- 7. IT leadership continuity. CIO or IT-leader gap and turnover risk. Execution risk on every technology decision.
The output
What you walk away with.
Page one
Seven-axis scorecard for the portco. Red, yellow, green per axis. Named issues. Dollar magnitude where the data supports it.
Backup deck
Three to five slides expanding the red and yellow axes. Recommended next Initiative on the top one or two. Cyber, compliance, and AI evidence cited where present.
Format
Written for an investment committee, in the format of a deal-diligence memo scaled to one existing portco. Designed for the partner who reads it in five minutes.
How it is structured
Fixed scope. One portco now, the portfolio later.
The Technology Review uses the same methodology as the Diagnostic. The difference is portco count and rollup format.
| Engagement | What it includes | Credit toward Diagnostic |
|---|---|---|
| Portco Technology Review (single portco) One portco, one to two weeks |
Seven-axis scoring, an IC-readable snapshot, and a backup deck | Credited toward the Diagnostic if scoped within three months. |
| Portfolio Technology Diagnostic Several portcos, full fund-level rollup, commissioned by the PE operating partner |
Per-portco scoring, fund-level rollup, and a partner-meeting deck | The same credit applies when the Diagnostic follows a review |
How it scales
From one portco to the portfolio.
01
Technology Review
A GP commissions the read on one portco. One to two weeks. If it does not surface anything actionable, either side can stop with no further obligation.
02
Decision
If the review finds a gap, two paths are open. Run the deeper per-portco Initiative on the flagged axis (Security Posture, Cost Optimization, Architecture Review, etc.), or scale the review format to the rest of the portfolio.
03
Portfolio Diagnostic
The PE operating partner commissions the Diagnostic for the remaining portcos. Same scoring. Fund-level rollup, partner-meeting deck, quarterly refresh option.
See the Diagnostic →Scope
What the review covers and where it stops.
The review scores and prioritizes a single portco. It is not an audit. The deeper Initiative on a red axis is a more detailed review of that area, and it is not an audit either. The review is not pre-acquisition due diligence; the IT Due Diligence Initiative is the engagement for that. It does not produce certified or attestation-grade evidence, which comes from a qualified assessor where required. The Initiatives and the Diagnostic are the further work.
Start with the question. Decide on scale after.
One portco. One to two weeks. There is no obligation to continue after the review.