Post-Close Value Creation

The thesis is set. The hold period is where you prove it.

Resultant, with the acquisition of Liberty Advisor Group, delivers hold period value creation as one firm. Liberty's senior M&A advisors build the plan. Resultant's technology, data, AI, and managed services practitioners execute it. The advisory and the delivery capability exist in the same firm, with one team accountable for the outcome.

What Liberty understands about the deal, Resultant carries into execution without losing context, urgency, or the financial logic the plan was built on.

Impact Story

Smooth Migration of IT Systems and Data Following Carveout

Read Story

Where are you in the hold?

Early Hold: Day 1 to 100

The value-creation plan is on paper. The PortCo leadership team is waiting to understand what comes next. The first 100 days determine whether the thesis gains momentum or starts to drift. This is when we establish the technology roadmap, launch integration or carveout execution, surface trapped value opportunities, and fill any technology leadership gaps before they create exposure.

We've built independent IT environments for four simultaneously carved-out business units across five countries, on time and on budget. We've stood up managed services at Day 1 cutover so PortCos have a functioning IT organization from the moment they go independent.

Mid-Hold: Execution and Transformation

By mid-hold, the question has shifted from whether the initiatives are running to whether they're moving the numbers. Most aren't, not because the plan was wrong, but because disciplined execution and accountable program management are harder to sustain than they are to launch. That’s the difference between a value-creation plan that moves EBITDA and one that consumes capital without producing it.

We've built data and AI platforms that produced measurable financial outcomes inside the hold period. We've delivered ERP transformations for PE-backed businesses on time and within budget. We've avoided $10M in potential revenue loss at a PortCo by stabilizing infrastructure and standing up technology leadership during an executive transition.

Late Hold: Exit Readiness and Go-To-Market Positioning

When the exit timeline comes into view, the technology environment needs to be stable, documented, defensible, and ready for buyer scrutiny. Technical debt that accumulated during the hold becomes a valuation problem if it isn't addressed before the process opens.

We conduct sell-side technology diligence before a buyer does, build the technology narrative for the CIM, identify SG&A performance improvement opportunities, and support the deal team through the diligence process. When a carveout is part of the exit structure, we design and negotiate the TSA to protect the seller through transition.

For a closer look at how we support exits, see our [Go-To-Market Advisory page].

What we deliver

Our senior advisors build the value creation plan, the 100-day roadmap, and the technology strategy. Experienced practitioners execute them within the same firm, with one team accountable for the outcome.

Integration and carveout execution

We manage TSA design and exit, IMO/SMO governance, third-party vendor coordination, and program delivery throughout. For carveouts, that means clean separation, on-time TSA exit, and a PortCo that can operate independently from Day 1. For integrations, it means keeping pace with the acquisition cadence without letting integration debt accumulate across the portfolio.

Resultant executed carveouts for Wind Point Partners' portfolio company Velocity Rail Solutions in eight weeks and built independent IT organizations for four simultaneously carved-out entities across five countries. Both on time. Both within budget.

Complex program management

ERP implementations, large-scale transformations, and multi-workstream programs fail at a predictable rate for predictable reasons: unclear governance, misaligned stakeholders, and risk that accumulates unnoticed until it becomes a problem too large to absorb quickly. We establish the PMO, run the governance, and own delivery accountability so operating partners have clear program visibility without managing the complexity themselves.

We've delivered ERP transformations for PE-backed mid-market businesses on the original 10-month schedule and within a $1M+ implementation budget.

AI, data, and analytics

We identify where AI and data create genuine operational or revenue leverage, assess data readiness, and prioritize by feasibility and financial impact. Resultant's data and AI practitioners then build and implement data platforms, master data management, analytics infrastructure, and AI solutions sized to produce results inside the hold period timeline. We don't build AI strategies. We build AI plans that move EBITDA, and execute them.

A PE-backed portfolio company had revenue it couldn't measure, running on four disconnected systems with no unified view of customers, retention, or lifetime value. We built a unified data platform in eight weeks. Leadership could quantify cross-sell and retention through executive dashboards for the first time. The ROI was immediate. The client authorized a 10x project expansion.

IT and security managed services

After a carveout or major transformation, the PortCo needs a technology function that operates reliably from Day 1 of independence. Resultant provides managed services across infrastructure, applications, security, and end-user support, giving the PortCo a stable, governed IT function without the cost of building it internally. For buy-and-build sponsors, we serve as the embedded IT organization across the portfolio, providing consistent execution across every transaction without rebuilding capability from scratch each time.

Velocity Rail Solutions needed a functioning IT organization from the moment it went independent. We stood up managed services at Day 1 cutover with 400 end users supported, mission-critical applications running, and no downtime.

Post-Close Value Creation FAQs

Who should own the 100-day plan: the operating partner or the portfolio company CEO?

The operating partner typically drives the plan in its earliest days, since the deal team carries the freshest and most complete picture of the thesis at that point. Ownership needs to transfer to the CEO and the leadership team well before day 100, though, because a plan that only survives with the operating partner in the room has not actually taken hold inside the business. [Placeholder — no confirmed Resultant engagement example for this specific ownership-transition claim; ground this in a real one if available.] The test of a well-run first 100 days is whether the plan keeps moving after the operating partner steps back, not how well it performed while they were actively driving it.

What should the first 30 days of a portfolio company's technology plan focus on?

The first 30 days should focus on establishing where technology risk and opportunity concentrate, not on making system changes or cutting costs prematurely. That groundwork, mapping the technology roadmap, identifying trapped value opportunities, and flagging any leadership gap before it becomes exposure, is what the rest of the 100-day plan gets built on. too quickly into execution before this picture is clear is usually what causes a 100-day plan to target the wrong priorities.

How do you implement an ERP system on a TSA deadline without blowing the timeline?

A TSA-constrained implementation requires a compressed, parallel deployment scoped specifically to the exit date on the TSA, not a standard rollout timeline stretched to fit. That typically means narrowing initial scope to what the business needs to operate independently on day one, with less urgent configuration and customization deferred to a phase after the TSA has closed. Resultant has delivered ERP transformations for PE-backed mid-market businesses on the original 10-month schedule and within a $1M+ implementation budget, which is the discipline a TSA deadline demands. Treating the TSA deadline as the go-live date from the start of planning, rather than a target to catch up to later, is what keeps the timeline from slipping.

How does a delayed ERP go-live affect exit valuation?

A delayed go-live compresses the window in which a buyer can see the financial control, reporting consistency, and scalability an ERP system is meant to demonstrate before the sale process opens. Buyers price technology risk into a deal whether or not the seller addresses it, so a transformation still mid-implementation at the start of exit prep tends to read as unresolved risk rather than progress. Resultant conducts sell-side technology diligence before a buyer does and builds the technology narrative for the CIM specifically to catch this kind of gap while there is still time to close it. Sequencing an ERP program so it is stable and fully adopted well before a sale process begins protects the multiple instead of putting it at risk.

Why do most AI initiatives in PE portfolio companies never move past the pilot stage?

Most stall on missing prerequisites, incomplete data readiness, no clear governance, and no single named owner accountable for the outcome, rather than on a problem with the technology itself. [Multiple industry sources cite very high AI pilot failure rates in PE portfolios — verify a current, defensible figure before citing a specific percentage.] An initiative launched without a measurement structure tied to a specific financial outcome tends to drift into a general capability nobody is responsible for scaling. A PE-backed portfolio company that could not measure its own revenue across four disconnected systems had a unified data platform built in eight weeks, after which leadership could quantify cross-sell and retention immediately, the kind of result that comes from treating AI as an execution program rather than a strategy exercise.

What governance structure does an AI initiative need to actually succeed in a PE-backed company?

The initiative needs a single named owner, accountable for both the deployment timeline and the EBITDA outcome it is meant to produce, installed before deployment begins rather than after a program has already stalled. [Named-owner governance framing is drawn from general industry research on AI value-creation programs, not a locked Resultant framework — confirm with a real engagement example before publishing.] Diffuse ownership across multiple stakeholders is one of the most common reasons a promising initiative loses momentum once the initial excitement fades. Resultant's approach assesses data readiness and prioritizes initiatives by feasibility and financial impact before any building begins, which gives that named owner something concrete and measurable to be accountable for from day one.

Work with us

The right time to talk is before the plan starts drifting. Talk to our hold period team.

Post-Close Value Creation