Welcome back. I hope May is off to a steady start.

One pattern we see often in mid-market growth work is that companies do not always outgrow their strategy first.

They outgrow the informal ways knowledge moves through the business. That can sound like a small issue until it starts showing up in commercial execution.

• A newer sales rep knows the product information, but not the customer judgment behind it.

• A regional team handles an opportunity differently than the leaders closest to the strategy would have expected.

• A manager has access to the training materials, but still has to rely on a few experienced people to explain what really matters.

At first, the problem usually gets described as a training gap. Sometimes that is true.

But in many growing mid-market companies, the deeper issue is that too much important knowledge still lives in pockets. It sits with senior leaders, veteran salespeople, product specialists, and long-tenured operators who have built judgment over years.

That works when the business is smaller. People are closer to the source. Newer employees learn by listening. Product nuance, customer context, pricing judgment, and sales instincts move through proximity.

Then the company grows. More products. More customer segments. More regions. More people making decisions farther away from the experts who shaped the original approach.

At that point, knowledge cannot rely on proximity anymore. It has to be translated into something the organization can teach, reinforce, and use consistently.

This issue looks at why that matters for mid-market companies, and why the visible problem is not always the real one. What looks like a training issue may actually be a sign that the business has become more complex than its knowledge-transfer systems can support.

Turning Product Knowledge Into Sales Execution

PDC, a division of Brady Corporation, is a useful example of how this issue shows up in practice.

PDC had long relied on the strength of its sales force. Customers counted on the team not only for product information, but for guidance, responsiveness, and the ability to help them find the right identification solution across a broad product portfolio.

As the business prepared to hire and onboard new salespeople, leadership recognized that the existing sales training materials were no longer keeping pace. The materials needed to be updated, but the underlying issue was larger than content refresh.

The visible problem was training effectiveness.

The deeper question was whether PDC had a repeatable way to translate product expertise and commercial judgment into something new salespeople could actually use in the field.

Maven worked with PDC’s executive management team and product managers to build a new architecture for the sales materials. The work had to simplify and standardize training across multiple products without losing the practical detail that made the sales force effective.

That distinction matters.

In many mid-market companies, the most valuable knowledge already exists inside the business. The harder work is deciding what needs to be preserved, what needs to be simplified, and what needs to be taught consistently so the next group of people can execute with the same level of judgment.

For PDC, the outcome was not just better training material. It was a clearer structure for transferring commercial knowledge as the sales organization grew.

Read the full PDC case study: https://maven-associates.com/project/pdc-a-brady-corporation/

Why Knowledge Transfer Becomes an Operating Issue

In many mid-market companies, the first version of commercial excellence is informal.

Experienced people know the products.
They understand the customers.
They can explain the tradeoffs, spot the exceptions, and help newer team members avoid obvious mistakes.

That works until the business becomes too complex for knowledge to keep moving through proximity alone.

Product portfolios expand gradually. Customer needs become more varied. New hires are expected to ramp faster. Managers are asked to coach across situations they may not have personally experienced.

Meanwhile, the training and enablement systems are often still built for an earlier version of the company.

This is where the standard response can miss the mark.

Most teams try to solve the problem by adding more documentation. More product detail. More training material. More standardized formats.

Those things may be useful, but they are not sufficient if the real issue is decision logic.

The question is not simply whether people have access to information. It is whether they understand what matters, when it matters, and how to apply it in a customer situation.

That is why the better question is not, “How do we standardize everything?”

It is, “What must be standardized so the business can scale, and where does judgment need to remain local?”

For a growing mid-market company, that distinction matters. Training materials are not just support tools. They become part of the operating system that determines whether commercial capability can be transferred reliably across people, products, and growth phases.

When that system is weak, the impact shows up beyond onboarding. It can affect sales consistency, margin quality, management leverage, and the ability to scale without depending too heavily on a small group of experienced people.

Spotlight: Building the Next Generation of Sales Capability

McKinsey recently published a piece that connects directly to this month’s theme: B2B sales is getting more complex, and many sales teams are not keeping pace.

That does not necessarily mean salespeople are underperforming. In many cases, the job itself has changed. Customers expect more guidance, product portfolios are broader, and sellers are increasingly expected to diagnose needs, shape solutions, and explain tradeoffs in real time.

That requires a different level of capability than simply knowing the product line.

McKinsey notes that many sales leaders see a meaningful capability gap inside their teams, and that faster-growth B2B companies are investing in the skills required for more consultative selling, including product knowledge, solution design, account planning, and customer-specific insight.

For mid-market companies, the takeaway is straightforward: sales enablement cannot just be a library of product information. It has to help people make better decisions in actual customer situations.

That is what makes the PDC example relevant. The work was not just about updating training content. It was about creating a clearer structure for how commercial knowledge should be organized, simplified, and transferred as the sales team grew.

Read the McKinsey report: Building next-generation B2B sales capabilities

How Maven Helps Mid-Market Companies Make Expertise Repeatable

At Maven, we approach capability-transfer questions as business-design issues first.

The starting point is not the training deck, the onboarding checklist, or the enablement materials. It is how the company creates value in practice, where that value depends on judgment, and what structure is required to make that judgment easier to transfer as the business grows.

That lens reflects mid-market reality. Leadership teams are lean, product knowledge often sits with a small group of experienced people, and the business cannot afford to let critical expertise remain trapped in informal channels for too long.

Our work in these situations typically centers on a few core areas:

• Clarifying what knowledge actually drives performance
  Separating the information people need to know from the judgment they need to apply in real customer, product, or operating situations.
  

• Turning expert knowledge into usable decision logic
  Helping teams translate what experienced people know intuitively into structures that newer employees and managers can learn, coach, and reinforce.
  

• Surfacing the adjacent issues behind the visible problem
  Identifying when a training issue is also pointing to management gaps, product complexity, commercial inconsistency, or an operating model that has not kept pace with growth.

The goal is not to create more material. It is to reduce noise and help the business preserve the judgment that makes execution work.

If your growth depends on making critical expertise easier to teach, repeat, and scale, that is the kind of work we do.

As always, you can send me a message on LinkedIn or visit maven-associates.com/contact-us to connect.

Why this Matters

If inconsistency in commercial execution is starting to show up across the business, it is worth diagnosing the issue before deciding on the response.

Sometimes the problem is people. Sometimes it is process. Sometimes the business has simply become harder to transfer than leadership realizes.

That distinction matters because the wrong diagnosis can lead to the wrong investment. More training will not solve a management issue. More documentation will not solve a judgment issue. And more standardization will not help if the company has not decided where local judgment actually creates value.

The goal is not to remove variation everywhere. It is to standardize what must be repeatable, while protecting flexibility where judgment genuinely matters.

Onward,
Mark Hess
Founder, Maven Associates
https://maven-associates.com/

Discussion Question for Readers

If you have seen a business struggle to transfer critical knowledge as it grows, where did the issue show up first?

Was it in onboarding, sales consistency, product positioning, manager coaching, customer conversations, or something else entirely?

If you found a way to make important knowledge easier to teach, reinforce, or apply across the business, I would be interested to hear what helped.

Leave a comment

If this perspective was useful, sharing it with someone else working through a similar growth or execution challenge would be the highest compliment.

Share

Know someone who thrives in mid-market execution work? We’re always looking to connect with experienced independent consultants. Learn more or refer a colleague by hitting the button below.

Join the Roster

Welcome back.

One pattern we see often in mid-market growth work is that leadership teams treat profit improvement and growth strategy as separate conversations. One is framed as defensive. The other is framed as ambitious.

In practice, the stronger companies tend to treat them as linked.

The clearest growth decisions often come after a business has identified where profit can be unlocked first.

Not because leadership lacks ambition, but because that work creates something most growth plans quietly depend on: funding, clarity, and a more honest view of what the core business can actually support.

That matters most when a company has no shortage of options.

New products. New markets. New channels. New initiatives that all sound directionally right.

The risk in those moments is usually not hesitation. It is expansion without enough sequence. Moving into growth before the business has identified which improvements can finance it, which strengths are actually worth extending, and which ideas create more activity than advantage.

In the mid-market, that distinction matters more than it sounds. Many businesses do not have a growth problem first.

They have a sequencing problem.

Using Profit Identification to Sharpen Growth After an Acquisition

Publishing Concepts Inc. is a useful example of how this issue shows up in practice.

After acquiring its largest competitor, PCI had doubled in size. Leadership had momentum and no shortage of ideas about where growth could come from next. But rather than move straight into expansion planning, the team chose to begin with profit identification.

That decision reflected two judgments.

First, profit improvement could help fund future growth initiatives.

Second, an outside perspective could help distinguish between ideas that were interesting and ideas that could materially strengthen the business.

Maven began with a structured process to surface, prioritize, and evaluate the most promising improvement opportunities.

Over a six-week profit hunt, the team developed business cases around the highest-potential ideas, which included customer call center redesign, sales effectiveness, pricing strategy, P&L tracking for better decision-making, and marketing efficiency.

Only after those opportunities were identified and handed off for execution did the growth agenda come into focus. What made the sequence work was not just that PCI pursued both profit and growth. It was that leadership treated them as linked decisions, with the first creating sharper judgment around the second.

Read the full PCI case study: https://maven-associates.com/project/publishing-concepts-inc-pci/

Why Profit Work Often Improves Growth Decisions

One reason growth planning gets harder after an acquisition or a period of change is that leadership teams are usually not short on ideas.

They are short on a clean way to judge which ideas deserve real backing.

That is where profit improvement is often misunderstood.

It is commonly treated as a separate workstream. Something operational. Something defensive. Something to do before the “real” strategic conversation begins. In practice, it often does the opposite.

It sharpens strategy by forcing the business to get more honest about where value is created, where it leaks, and what the organization can realistically fund and absorb.

That matters because many growth plans look stronger in principle than they do in sequence.

A team may identify attractive adjacencies, new offerings, or expansion opportunities, but still be unclear on three more important questions. Which improvements in the current business can help finance those moves. Which parts of the operating model need to perform better before expansion adds strain. And which apparent growth ideas actually reinforce the core rather than distract from it.

In the mid-market, that sequencing discipline is especially important. Most companies do not have the luxury of funding growth through abstraction. They need clearer economics, better management visibility, and a stronger understanding of where the core engine is underperforming before they can pursue expansion with confidence.

This is why self-funded growth is often underweighted. It lacks the energy of a new initiative. But in practice, it usually produces something more valuable: growth that the business can support without creating hidden fragility.

The stronger pattern is not optimize first and grow later as if those are separate phases. It is using profit work to improve the quality of the growth decision itself.

The best sequencing does not delay ambition. It makes ambition more credible.

Spotlight: A Client’s Perspective on Sequencing and Outside Judgment

One of the more useful signals in work like this is when a leadership team recognizes that the next question is not simply what to do, but where independent judgment can improve the quality of the decision.

That was part of Drew Clancy’s perspective at PCI following the acquisition of its largest competitor. With the business suddenly operating at a different scale, the challenge was not generating more ideas. It was deciding which issues deserved attention first, which growth paths were worth backing, and which opportunities were better left alone.

What stands out in that situation is not just that PCI pursued both profit improvement and growth.

It is that Drew recognized the value of outside perspective in filtering the opportunity set.

For many leadership teams, especially after a major acquisition, proximity can make every initiative feel urgent. An external view can help separate momentum from priority.

That kind of judgment also matters after the advisory work is done. Recommendations only create value if management can absorb them, sequence them properly, and keep execution moving over time. In PCI’s case, the real benefit was not just a set of ideas. It was a clearer view of where the business could improve, where it could expand, and how to carry that work forward with more discipline.

Read Drew Clancy’s full client spotlight: https://maven-associates.com/2020/05/21/a-clients-perspective-drew-clancy/

How Maven Supports Growth Decisions in the Mid-Market

At Maven, we treat growth decisions as a sequencing and decision-quality problem first.

Most teams can generate opportunities. The harder part is getting clear on which options the business can actually fund, absorb, and execute without weakening the core in the process.

That lens reflects mid-market reality. Leadership teams are lean, resources are limited, and growth initiatives rarely fail only on the merits of the idea. They fail when the organization is asked to carry more complexity than it is ready for, or when expansion begins before the business has clarified what can finance and support it.

Our work in these situations typically centers on a few core areas:

• Identifying where the core can fund the next move
  Bringing clarity to where profit can be unlocked so growth is backed by stronger economics rather than ambition alone.
  

• Separating reinforcing opportunities from distracting ones
  Helping leadership distinguish between ideas that extend existing strengths and ideas that create activity without durable advantage.
  

• Improving the sequence of the decision
  Clarifying what needs to perform better first, what assumptions matter most, and what the business can realistically absorb before expansion adds strain.

The goal is not to add process. It is to reduce noise and help leadership make a growth decision that holds up once execution begins.

If you are trying to determine whether the business should optimize the core first, expand first, or sequence both in a more disciplined way, that is the kind of work we do.

As always, you can send me a message on LinkedIn or visit maven-associates.com/contact-us to connect.

We’re Expanding Our Roster

A number of readers have reached out over the past few months asking how Maven works with independent consultants.

Our model is built around a small, trusted roster of former McKinsey, Bain, and BCG consultants who prefer focused, mid-market work without the overhead of large teams. Engagements are selective, collaboration is hands-on, and expectations are clear on both sides.

If you are an independent consultant with top-tier experience and are interested in work like the situation described here, you can learn more at maven-associates.com/recruitment

Here’s the Big Picture

Growth decisions like this rarely break down because the opportunity was not real.

They break down when the business tries to move before leadership is clear on what the core can fund, what the organization can carry, and what the next move actually requires.

That is why profit work matters more than it often gets credit for. At its best, it does not slow growth down. It gives leadership a clearer base from which to decide what deserves investment, what needs to improve first, and what is likely to create strain before it creates value.

In the mid-market, that kind of clarity is not a luxury. It is often the difference between a growth plan that compounds and one that quietly fragments the business.

If you are working through that kind of decision and want to explore how Maven could help, feel free to reach out. You can send me a message on LinkedIn or visit maven-associates.com/contact-us to connect.

Thanks for reading.

Cheers,
Mark Hess
Founder, Maven Associates
https://maven-associates.com/

Discussion Question for Readers

If you have been through a period where profit work changed the quality of the growth conversation, what shifted first.

Was it greater clarity on where the business was underperforming. Better visibility into what the company could fund. A clearer sense of which opportunities reinforced the core. Or something else entirely.

If you found a way to improve the sequencing, I would be interested to hear what helped.

Leave a comment

If this perspective was useful, sharing it with someone else working through a similar growth or sequencing decision would be the highest compliment.

Share Mid-Market Strategy & Insights

Know someone who thrives in mid-market execution work? We’re always looking to connect with experienced independent consultants. Learn more or refer a colleague by hitting the button below.

Join the Roster

Welcome back.

I hope the start of the year has been steady, even if it has not been simple.

One conversation keeps repeating with mid-market leadership teams. It is not about whether growth is possible. It is about what kind of growth actually makes sense now.

In many cases, the core business is still performing.

Customers are there. The engine still runs.

What has changed is how much advantage that engine creates as markets mature and competitors converge.

That is usually when the strategy discussion narrows to two reasonable paths. Expand the existing offering into new customer segments. Or build new products for the customers you already know well.

Both options sound incremental on paper. Both can be defended in a boardroom. The difficulty is that each one changes the business in subtle but meaningful ways.

For mid-market teams, those changes show up quickly.

Risk shifts. Economics evolve. Operating demands increase in places that are not always obvious at the outset.

This issue looks at how that tension surfaced at Best Egg, and why growth decisions in mature markets are often less about choosing the right answer and more about understanding what you are committing the organization to become.

Choosing a growth path in a mature category

In a recent engagement, we worked with Best Egg, a consumer lending platform backed by Marlette Funding, at a moment that will feel familiar to many mid-market leadership teams.

The business had executed well against its original strategy. Scale had been achieved, performance was strong, and the core product continued to work. What had changed was the market around it.

Competition had intensified, and the category had matured in ways that made growth harder to sustain through momentum alone.

This was not a turnaround situation. Management and the sponsor were aligned that the next phase of growth required a deliberate reset, not a reactive one.

As the work progressed, the discussion narrowed to a focused choice. Should Best Egg push its core product into new customer segments. Or should it expand its product offering for the customers it already served.

Both paths were credible. Both could be supported with analysis. Neither felt like an obvious misstep.

What made the decision difficult was what each option implied beneath the surface. Different risk exposure. Different operating demands. Different ways leadership attention would be consumed. For a mid-market team, those implications surface quickly.

The engagement became less about selecting a growth strategy and more about clarifying what kind of business Best Egg was committing to build as the market normalized.

Why Core Versus Adjacency Decisions Create Hidden Risk

Growth strategy in the mid-market rarely fails because teams lack ambition or ideas.

More often, it fails quietly. Through decisions that appear incremental on the surface but introduce new complexity beneath it. Changes in risk exposure. Shifts in operating demands. A different pull on leadership attention.

When markets are expanding, those effects can be absorbed.

Growth masks friction. Teams have room to adjust as new initiatives take shape.

As categories mature, that margin disappears.

In those conditions, the cost of an ill-defined growth path compounds quickly. What starts as a reasonable extension begins to strain systems, decision making, and management focus.

Leaders find themselves reacting to second-order effects they did not explicitly sign up for.

This is where many strategy refreshes break down.

Traditional approaches tend to frame the core versus adjacency question as a choice between opportunities. New segments. New products. Larger addressable markets. Those analyses are useful, but they assume the business can stretch without fundamentally changing.

In practice, what matters more is whether the organization is prepared for what each option requires. New risk profiles. New operating rhythms. New places where decisions slow or accelerate.

The strongest mid-market teams we see treat these choices less as growth debates and more as commitments about what kind of business they are building next.

In mature markets, strategy is not just about finding the next lever. It is about preserving coherence while deciding where to intentionally add complexity, and where not to.

If This Situation Feels Familiar, You Are Not Alone.

We are spending more time with mid-market leaders working through similar growth forks, often before the organization feels any real pressure.

These conversations tend to focus less on generating ideas and more on pressure testing assumptions before they solidify into a plan.

If it would be useful to talk through a decision like this, feel free to send me a message on LinkedIn or visit maven-associates.com/contact-us to connect.

When External Growth Masks Internal Strain

One thing that stands out in recent strategy research is how often growth in mature markets looks healthier than it actually is.

Expansion into new products or adjacent segments can create forward motion, even when the underlying business is under more strain than leadership realizes. The strategy itself may be sound.

The challenge is what happens once the organization has to carry that added complexity day to day.

In the mid-market, there is very little slack. Teams feel it when priorities multiply. Leaders notice it when they spend more time reconciling tradeoffs than moving the business forward.

The issue is not that growth initiatives fail outright. It is that they quietly demand more than the organization planned for.

That dynamic shows up clearly in external research as well. BCG’s recent work on organic growth in mature markets points to a widening gap between companies that extend themselves and those that reinforce the core before layering on change.

For readers who want to explore that research directly, the full publication is available here: https://www.bcg.com/publications/2025/global-wealth-report-2025-rethinking-rules-for-growth

How Maven Supports Strategy Refreshes in the Mid-Market

At Maven, we treat a strategy refresh as a decision integrity problem first.

Most teams can generate options. The harder part is getting crisp on what each option implies once it leaves the boardroom and hits the operating system.

That lens reflects mid-market reality. Leadership teams are lean, incentives are tight, and the organization cannot carry two strategies at once for very long.

Our work in these situations typically centers on a few core areas:

• Clarifying what changes, and what cannot change
  Bringing the hidden implications to the surface so everyone is aligned on what the choice actually commits the business to.

• Pressure testing the assumptions that matter most
  Focusing on the few beliefs that will determine success, not the ones that are easiest to analyze.

• Creating an operating narrative leadership can run
  Ensuring the decision is coherent enough to guide priorities, tradeoffs, and resource allocation once execution begins.

The goal is not to add process. It is to reduce noise and help leadership make a clean commitment that holds up as conditions evolve.

If you are working through a strategy fork where both paths sound reasonable, we are always open to comparing notes. You can send me a message on LinkedIn or visit maven-associates.com/contact-us to connect.

We’re Expanding Our Roster

A number of readers have reached out over the past few months asking how Maven works with independent consultants.

Our model is built around a small, trusted roster of former McKinsey, Bain, and BCG consultants who prefer focused, mid-market work without the overhead of large teams. Engagements are selective, collaboration is hands-on, and expectations are clear on both sides.

If you are an independent consultant with top-tier experience and are interested in work like the situation described here, you can learn more at maven-associates.com/recruitment

Closing Thoughts

Growth decisions like this rarely announce themselves as turning points.

More often, they show up quietly. In planning conversations that feel reasonable. In options that all sound defensible. In choices that look incremental until the organization starts living with them.

In the mid-market, where teams are lean and markets do not wait, that subtlety matters.

The growth paths that create lasting value tend to be the ones where leadership is clear early on about what the business can absorb, and what it cannot, even if that clarity limits near-term optionality.

If you are navigating a similar moment, slowing the decision down just enough to understand its implications can make the difference between extending the business and unintentionally reshaping it.

Thanks for reading.

Onward,
Mark Hess
Founder, Maven Associates
https://maven-associates.com/

Discussion Question for Readers

If you have faced a growth decision where both paths looked reasonable at the outset, what surfaced first once execution began.

Was it strain on the operating team. Changes in risk exposure. Shifts in where leadership attention was required. Or something else entirely.

If you found a way to regain clarity, I would be interested to hear what helped.

Leave a comment

If this perspective was useful, sharing it with someone else navigating a similar decision would be the highest compliment.

Share

Know someone who thrives in mid-market execution work? We’re always looking to connect with experienced independent consultants. Learn more or refer a colleague by hitting the button below.

Join the Roster

Welcome back!

In recent conversations with investors and operators, one theme has come up repeatedly as integrations get underway in less predictable conditions.

One of the patterns we are seeing more often in mid-market deals is a shift in how integration risk actually shows up.

In more stable environments, post-merger integration is often framed around speed. How quickly systems can be combined, synergies captured, and structures unified. When conditions are predictable, teams can afford to move fast and fix issues as they go.

That assumption is breaking down.

Across recent integrations, the bigger risk is not moving too slowly. It is losing visibility and coordination while the environment is still changing. When markets, customers, or cost structures are in flux, small disconnects compound quickly, and leadership teams struggle to see where attention is actually needed.

In those situations, integration becomes less about consolidation and more about maintaining control. Cadence, clarity, and disciplined communication matter more than aggressive timelines.

This issue looks at how that dynamic is showing up in practice, and why the most effective integrations we see today prioritize visibility and decision-making over speed.

Field Notes: Integration Without Losing Visibility

In a recent engagement, a mid-market leadership team acquired a similarly sized business and quickly ran into a familiar problem.

The strategic logic of the deal made sense.

The question was not whether the combination worked on paper. It was how to integrate two organizations without losing momentum in the business they were already running.

The acquisition introduced parallel integration efforts across operations, finance, IT, and product. Each team had real work to do, on top of their day-to-day responsibilities. What leadership lacked was a clear, current view of how all of it was progressing week to week.

The risk was not failure in any single area. It was that small issues would pile up quietly, decisions would lag, and leaders would spend more time chasing updates than running the company.

Our role was to help simplify that picture.

Rather than layering on heavy process, we focused on a few practical fundamentals:

• A consistent integration rhythm leadership could rely on

• Clear ownership so decisions did not stall between teams

• A shared view of progress, risks, and near-term priorities

That structure gave executives visibility without pulling them into the mechanics. Issues surfaced earlier.

Tradeoffs were clearer. Time spent in meetings went down, not up.

Just as importantly, it allowed the leadership team to stay focused on customers, employees, and performance while the integration moved forward.

The integration stayed on track not because it moved especially fast, but because leaders maintained control and clarity throughout the process.

If you are navigating an integration where the bigger risk is loss of visibility rather than lack of ambition, we’re always open to comparing notes.

If it’s useful to talk through how much structure is enough, feel free to send me a message on LinkedIn or visit maven-associates.com/contact-us to connect.

Why Integration Often Fails Quietly

Post-merger integration rarely fails because of a single, obvious mistake.

More often, it fails quietly. Through small disconnects that accumulate over time. Missed handoffs. Unclear ownership. Decisions that get delayed because no one has a complete picture of what is happening across the business.

When conditions are stable, teams can usually absorb that friction. Leaders have time to chase updates, correct course, and fill in gaps as they emerge.

When conditions are volatile, that margin disappears.

This is where many integration playbooks break down.

Traditional integration approaches tend to emphasize end-state design. Org charts. System migrations. Synergy targets.

Those elements matter, but they assume a level of predictability that often does not exist in the mid-market, especially immediately after a transaction.

What tends to matter more in practice is whether leaders have:

• A reliable cadence for reviewing progress

• Clear ownership for decisions and follow-through

• Defined escalation paths when something is at risk

These are not glamorous elements of integration. They do not show up as bold milestones. But they create the operating rhythm that allows a combined organization to function while change is still underway.

The most effective integrations we see today prioritize control before optimization. They focus first on visibility and decision clarity, then layer in consolidation and improvement once the ground is stable.

In uncertain conditions, integration is less about getting to the finish line quickly and more about making sure leadership can see the road clearly along the way.

Spotlight: Why Integration Is Becoming an Execution Discipline

Over the past year, a growing body of research has reinforced a shift many operators already recognize.

Integration outcomes are less correlated with deal rationale or synergy targets than with execution discipline in the early months after close.

The differentiator is not the strategy on paper, but whether leadership maintains visibility, clear decision ownership, and an operating rhythm while the organization is still in motion.

What causes integrations to break down is rarely a single failure. More often, it is the accumulation of small disconnects. Missed handoffs. Unclear escalation paths. Decisions that linger because no one has a complete picture of what is happening across the business.

This aligns closely with what we see on the ground in mid-market integrations.

Without large internal teams to absorb disruption, success depends on having experienced leaders who can translate high-level priorities into a practical cadence. Not by adding layers of process, but by creating just enough structure to keep decisions flowing and risks visible.

As more mid-market companies pursue acquisitions amid uncertainty, this execution layer has become the difference between integrations that feel chaotic and those that feel controlled, even when conditions are still shifting.

For readers interested in the broader research, McKinsey has published recent work on why integration outcomes hinge on early execution discipline rather than deal design alone: https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/m-and-a/our-insights/the-culture-compass-using-early-insights-to-guide-integration-planning

How Maven Supports Integration in the Mid-Market

At Maven, we approach integration as an information and decision problem first.

Rather than starting with end-state org charts or synergy targets, we focus on whether leaders have the visibility and structure they need to make good decisions while the business is still changing.

That approach reflects the realities of the mid-market. Leadership teams are smaller, internal integration resources are limited, and executives are still responsible for running the business alongside integration work.

Our work typically centers on a few core areas:

• Integration cadence and visibility
  Creating a reliable rhythm and shared view so leaders know what is moving, what is at risk, and where decisions are needed.

• Decision ownership and escalation
  Clarifying responsibility so issues surface early and do not stall between teams.

• Execution support that carries through
  Building structures that support the integration itself and continue to guide prioritization and execution after close.

The goal is not to add process. It is to reduce noise, preserve focus, and help leadership maintain control during periods of change.

If you are thinking through how much structure is enough during an integration, we are always open to comparing notes. You can send me a message on LinkedIn or visit maven-associates.com/contact-us to connect.

We’re also actively expanding our roster of independent consultants.

If you’ve led post-merger work or similar engagements and want to stay on our radar for future projects, you can fill out a short form here: https://maven-associates.com/recruitment/

We’re especially interested in operators with experience in integration, transformation, or hands-on execution across mid-market companies.

Closing Thoughts

Strong integration rarely feels dramatic in the moment.

More often, it shows up quietly. In fewer surprises. Clearer decisions. Leadership teams that stay focused on the business rather than chasing updates or resolving avoidable friction.

In the mid-market, where teams are lean and conditions are rarely static, that discipline matters. The integrations that create the most long-term value are usually the ones that prioritize control and clarity early, even if progress feels less visible from the outside.

If you are navigating a combination where uncertainty is still high, resisting the urge to move fast at the expense of visibility can be one of the most important decisions you make.

Thanks for reading.
Onward,

Mark Hess
Founder, Maven Associates
https://maven-associates.com/

Discussion Question for Readers

If you’ve been through an integration where the strategy made sense but execution started to drift, what showed up first?

Was it loss of visibility, unclear ownership, decision delays, or something else?
And if you found a way to regain control, what helped?

If you have anything to add or have gone through something similar, I’d be interested to hear your perspective.

Leave a comment

If this was useful, sharing this with your network or anyone else who might find it helpful would be the greatest compliment I could receive.

Share

Know someone who thrives in mid-market execution work? We’re always looking to connect with experienced independent consultants. Learn more or refer a colleague by hitting the button below.

Join the Roster

Welcome back!

One of the patterns we are seeing more often right now is not about the quality of businesses coming to market. It is about the difficulty of proving the market around them.

More deal teams are evaluating platform opportunities in fragmented or under-mapped sectors where traditional market data is thin, category definitions are unclear, and third-party benchmarks simply do not exist.

That was the situation Angeles Equity Partners faced when evaluating Solid Surface Care, a national provider of surface maintenance services.

The business had strong operations and a repeatable model, but no clear answer to a basic question. How big is the market, really?

In this issue, we walk through how we built the fact base from scratch, sizing demand across 11 sectors and 25 cities, and what this kind of work reveals about the limits of traditional diligence when the data is not there.

Building the Market from Zero in a Field Services Deal

Angeles Equity Partners asked Maven to support diligence on Solid Surface Care, a national provider of surface maintenance services.

The company operated in a fragmented industry with little structured data and no clear third-party benchmarks.

The investment case hinged on a key question: how big is this market, really?

Solid’s core value proposition—route-based service delivery to multi-site customers—was strong. But with operations spanning everything from bank branches to telecom stores to healthcare clinics, there was no single source of truth on market size, density, or service frequency.

Our job was to build that view from the ground up.

To do that, we:

• Scraped location-level data for national retail, banking, and healthcare brands

• Estimated square footage and visit frequency by facility type

• Mapped demand density across 11 verticals and 25 metro areas

• Modeled revenue potential and margin variability by segment

The result was a segment-level demand map that supported the deal thesis and informed the go-to-market plan.

The analysis gave Angeles a grounded view of market potential—and gave the management team a roadmap they could use from day one.

The takeaway: When no data exists, diligence doesn’t stop. It just shifts into build mode.

Thinking through a deal? Let’s talk.

If you’re evaluating a platform in a fragmented category or wrestling with a fuzzy TAM, we can help.

Want to talk through a strategic decision? Send me a message on LinkedIn or visit maven-associates.com/contact-us to connect.

Why Fragmented Markets Require a Ground-Up Approach

Many diligence efforts assume the data already exists. But in fragmented or underdeveloped sectors, that assumption falls apart.

In the case of Solid Surface Care, the challenge wasn’t evaluating the business—it was proving the market. With no third-party reports, no comps, and no centralized customer base, Angeles Equity Partners needed a custom solution.

And they’re not alone. We regularly see deals in categories where:

• Competitors are active, but no one knows the true TAM

• Customer buying behavior varies wildly by segment

• Market structure doesn’t show up in industry codes or databases

That’s when building your own demand map becomes essential. It’s not just about validating the deal—it’s about avoiding false positives. Without a grounded view, it’s easy to overestimate demand, misread margin potential, or chase segments that won’t scale.

Custom diligence doesn’t mean overcomplicating. It means designing the minimum viable fact base that can support a yes or no.

In a market where capital is tightening and diligence windows are shorter, knowing when to build the data is a competitive edge.

Ground-Up Insight for Low-Data Deals

At Maven, we specialize in bringing structure to markets that lack it. Whether it’s a platform in a fragmented sector, a niche service model without benchmarks, or a growth story with no clean comps, we help investors see the market clearly—and act decisively.

In the Solid Surface Care engagement, there were no reports to summarize. We built the fact base from scratch, helping Angeles validate the opportunity and guide the post-close plan.

What sets our approach apart:

• We don’t rely on third-party data When the data isn’t there, we construct it—using scraping, buyer proxies, and segment-level logic to build credible, actionable models.

• We break down demand by decision driver We size markets the way sales teams go after them, with real-world segmentation and margin sensitivity built in.

• We focus on execution, not just insight Our work supports diligence, but it also informs Day One priorities and go-to-market moves.

When the data’s messy or missing, we help clients build the model they need to move forward.

This is What We Do

We work with mid-market investors and management teams when the stakes are high and the data is unclear. That might mean building a market model from scratch, pressure-testing a platform thesis, or turning a segment map into a go-to-market plan.

Our role is to bring clarity to complex questions—and to help deal teams move from thesis to execution.

Here’s where we focus:

• Market insight and commercial strategy When you need to validate demand, size a niche, or build the roadmap post-close.

• Answering deal- or decision-critical questions We dig into the assumptions that matter most—whether it’s a TAM, a segment bet, or an expansion play.

• Execution-oriented support Helping investors and operators turn insight into action, with models that translate directly to real-world moves.

We’re not here to summarize data. We’re here to help teams build the model that gets the deal done—and drives value after close.

If you ever want to talk through a deal or strategy initiative you can DM me here on LinkedIn or go to https://maven-associates.com/contact-us/

Client Spotlight: Matt Smalley, Cambridge Capital

This month’s spotlight features Matt Smalley, Partner at Cambridge Capital, a specialized investment firm focused exclusively on software and services businesses across the supply chain.

Cambridge worked with Maven on a post-close engagement to help a portfolio company expand beyond a dominant core customer and align leadership around a clear, actionable growth strategy. The work combined market sizing, go-to-market prioritization, and hands-on facilitation to help the team move from debate to execution.

You can read Matt’s full perspective on Cambridge’s investment approach and the engagement with Maven here:

Read the full client spotlight on the Maven website →

In mid-market investing, the biggest risks often come from what’s missing—especially when entering markets without clear data or benchmarks.

The firms that get it right are the ones willing to pause, pressure-test, and build the fact base before committing capital.

If you’re looking at a platform in a fragmented or under-mapped market, and the data isn’t there—or isn’t telling the full story—we’d be glad to talk it through.

Thanks for reading, and as always, we appreciate your partnership.

Onward,
Mark Hess
Founder, Maven Associates
https://maven-associates.com/

A question for readers

In deals like this, we’re often asked to build the market view from scratch rather than rely on existing data.

If you’ve encountered a situation where the hardest part of diligence was proving the market — not evaluating the company — I’d be curious how you approached it. Feel free to leave a comment if it’s useful to share.

Leave a comment

Feel free to share

If this was useful, you’re welcome to share it with a colleague or forward it to someone who’s thinking through a similar question.

Share

Maven Associates helps leaders prioritize investments, shape strategy, and capture opportunities others miss. Learn more at www.maven-associates.com.

Welcome back everyone!

In mid-market companies, growth often outpaces the systems that support it.

We see it time and again. Businesses double in size while still running on legacy tools, ad hoc pricing, and outdated procurement processes. It’s a testament to grit and customer focus. But it also creates friction, margin leakage, and hidden risk.

Now is the time to reassess. With costs rising, AI-enabled tools reshaping workflows, and capital markets rewarding discipline, operational misalignment isn’t just a drag. It’s a liability.

This quarter, we’re sharing how Maven helped a fast-growing client tackle that exact challenge by driving improvements across IT, pricing, and SG&A.

If you’re scaling fast and sensing friction, this is the kind of moment that separates forward-looking operators from everyone else.

Field Notes: Turning Operational Friction into Scalable Growth

WorldStrides was growing fast. With hundreds of travel programs and a global customer base, the business had momentum, but also complexity.

Underneath the top-line growth, systems were aging.

• IT was fragmented across functions.

• Purchasing lacked coordination.

• Pricing varied widely by business line.

• The structure that once supported the company had started to constrain it.

Maven was brought in to run a full operational assessment. We worked with leaders across functions to pinpoint inefficiencies and build a roadmap to unlock value.

The results:

• A digital transformation strategy that consolidated systems and improved data access

• Streamlined SG&A that brought spending in line with business scale

• A pricing discipline framework that added structure and accountability across programs

These efforts didn’t just reduce friction. They created leverage. Within two years, WorldStrides grew from $300M to over $600M in revenue—this time with a cost structure and operating model built for scale.

The takeaway: In mid-market companies, growth often reveals what needs to change. The right strategy turns those pressure points into catalysts.

Thinking Through a Major Strategic Move?

Whether you’re reevaluating your footprint, assessing product-market fit, or considering how to position your business for the next phase of growth, we’d be glad to help.

Want to talk through a strategic decision? Send me a message on LinkedIn or visit maven-associates.com/contact-us to connect.

When Systems Stop Scaling

In many mid-market companies, legacy systems hang on longer than they should. They get patched, reconfigured, and extended to keep up with growth. And for a while, it works.

But eventually, these systems start showing their limits.

Teams rely on manual workarounds. Data gets siloed. Pricing models become hard to maintain. Decisions take longer.

The business scales, but the systems don’t keep up.

This creates two risks.

1. First, a drag on performance that shows up as margin leakage or customer friction.

2. Second, a structural risk that compounds over time, especially in businesses making acquisitions or entering new markets.

That’s why smart operators are no longer waiting for systems to break. They’re investing in visibility—scenario planning, operational diagnostics, and cross-functional audits—to see where the gaps are.

They’re also asking how to modernize in ways that create near-term efficiency and long-term flexibility.

With the rise of AI-native tools and integrated platforms, the economics of upgrading have changed. It’s no longer just a cost center. Done right, it becomes a strategic advantage.

If your systems are showing signs of strain, this is the moment to get ahead of it.

How We Uncover Value Others Miss

At Maven, we specialize in helping companies solve complex operational problems that sit beneath the surface.

Whether it’s misaligned systems, unclear pricing discipline, or SG&A layers that no longer fit the business, we help clients get clear on what’s holding them back—and what to do about it.

In the WorldStrides engagement, the question started with SG&A. But it quickly became clear that IT systems, purchasing, and pricing were all contributing to friction. Each issue on its own was manageable. Together, they were limiting scale

What sets our approach apart:

• Cross-functional diagnostics grounded in strategic logic We don’t just optimize a function. We uncover how inefficiencies interact—and where the leverage points are.

• Focused, execution-ready roadmaps We give clients practical, sequenced actions that teams can execute—not just analysis.

• We go beyond the original ask We identify value drivers others miss, from pricing discipline to technology modernization.

When clients need to rethink their structure, we give them more than a model. We give them a roadmap.

Want to talk through a strategic decision? Send me a message on LinkedIn or visit maven-associates.com/contact-us to connect.

This is What We Do

We work with mid-market companies when the stakes are high and the picture is unclear. That might mean untangling cost drivers in SG&A, evaluating whether a system upgrade is worth the investment, or aligning leadership around how to scale without losing margin.

Our role is to bring clarity to complex questions—and to help smart teams move from symptoms to strategy.

Here’s where we focus:

• Market insight and commercial strategy When you need to know if your market position still makes sense—or if it’s time to adjust.

• Answering deal- or decision-critical questions We dig into the assumptions that really matter, whether it’s about a forecast, a product bet, or a cost decision.

• Annual planning and team offsites Helping leadership teams get aligned on what matters and turn strategy into a practical game plan.

We’re not here to sell frameworks. We’re here to help smart people make better calls—when it counts.

Top-tier strategy talent, built for the mid-market.

One of Maven Associates’ greatest strengths is connecting clients with leaders who bring both strategic insight and operational depth. Huntley Tarrant is one such consultant.

With a career spanning Bain & Company, Vista Equity Partners, and leadership roles across SaaS, fintech, and consumer startups, Huntley combines analytical rigor with hands-on execution.

She has led strategy and operations for portfolio companies, run large P&Ls, and guided organizations through M&A integrations and systems overhauls.

At Maven, Huntley has been helping with AI readiness and operational transformation, helping mid-market companies assess data infrastructure, process maturity, and organizational design to unlock real business value.

As she puts it, “There’s no problem I can’t solve. There’s no project I can’t handle. There’s no program I can’t make work.”

Read Huntley’s full profile →

In mid-market companies, growth and margin often hide in plain sight—buried in outdated systems, loose pricing, or cost structures built for a different stage of the business.

The companies that win are the ones willing to step back, reassess, and realign before friction becomes failure.

If you’re thinking about pricing, SG&A, or whether your current systems are ready for what’s next, we’d be glad to talk it through.

Thanks for reading, and as always, we appreciate your partnership.

-Mark Hess

Maven Associates helps leaders prioritize investments, shape strategy, and capture opportunities others miss. Learn more at www.maven-associates.com.

Welcome back!

Late Q3 deal flow remains active, and expectations for value creation are rising. In many portfolio companies, the low-hanging fruit is gone.

What remains are tougher, more strategic questions:

1. How do we grow in a skeptical market?

2. How do we shift a business model without losing momentum?

This quarter’s edition focuses on one such case. StatRecovery, a PE-backed provider of a supply chain cost management tool, faced a unique challenge—growing when customers are skeptical that your solution actually works. Their biggest competitor wasn’t another vendor, it was lots of customers being “non-believers.”.

We’ll walk through how Maven Associates helped uncover hidden opportunities and build a roadmap for real, durable growth.

Field Notes: Rethinking Growth in a Complex B2B Market

StatRecovery supports suppliers to major retailers with .a platform that helps suppliers manage deductions and streamline receivables. With fresh investment behind them, leadership needed clarity: where should growth come from next?

The answer wasn’t obvious.

Despite a strong domain reputation, many prospective customers believed they’d already recovered all they could. This skepticism wasn’t just a sales hurdle—it was a market constraint. Growth would require more than a better pitch. It would require changing minds.

Maven partnered with Stat’s leadership to develop a comprehensive strategy. We sized the market from the bottom up, segmented customers, and prioritized growth options across expanding their platform to new retailers, adding new services and adding new customers.

One of the most impactful moves? Reframing go-to-market strategy to meet the market where it was.

They were competing against customers who thought they had recovered all that was possible. They needed a marketing approach to convince skeptical customers to give them a shot to prove what they could do.

We also helped evolve the revenue model from pure success-fee to more recurring revenue. Which would help the financials be less volatile, improve scalability and increase the valuation.

The result: a roadmap aligned with both investor outcomes and a defensible strategy.

See the full case study here.

Seeing Untapped Opportunity? Let’s Talk.

If you’re working with a portfolio company that’s struggling to unlock demand—or selling into a market where customers think the status quo is good enough—we can help.

Feel free to send me a message here on LinkedIn or connect directly at mark.hess@maven-associates.com

Why Some Markets Need Education Before Expansion

In many strategy scenarios, growth means expanding reach or deepening share. But sometimes, the real unlock is shifting perceptions before expanding reach.

StatRecovery’s challenge wasn’t competitive pressure or pricing missteps. It was that many of their ideal customers didn’t think they needed help. The market believed the problem was already solved. That belief was the barrier.

When growth depends on shifting perception, strategy has to start with education. We helped StatRecovery understand which segments were most open to change, and where messaging could create a credible case for action.

The insight: in a market shaped by complexity and incomplete information, trust-building is the strategy.

This is a lesson we’ve seen in other vertical SaaS and managed services businesses. Customers don’t just need solutions—they need to be convinced a solution work.

Smart growth strategies don’t just target demand. They create it.

How We Find Growth Where Others Don’t Look

At Maven, we specialize in uncovering opportunities that don’t show up on the balance sheet.

In StatRecovery’s case, that meant moving beyond financial metrics and into market psychology. We built a fact base rooted in customer behavior, not just investor logic. We didn’t just confirm there was a market—we showed how to reach it.

This is what makes our work different:

• Strategic synthesis: We don’t just collect interviews, we turn them into growth blueprints.

• Market empathy: We identify where assumptions about the customer are holding a business back.

• Owner’s mindset: We think like investors, which means we focus on what drives enterprise value.

• Fact-driven evolution: From revenue model shifts to GTM pivots, we back change with data.

For companies stuck between ambition and execution, we bridge the gap. Feel free to send me a message here on LinkedIn or contact me on the Maven website here.

How We Find Growth Where Others Don’t Look

Maven helps investors and operators see clearly—when the data is murky, the market is opaque, or the story just doesn’t add up.

Our core focus is commercial diligence and growth strategy for mid-market transactions. We don’t just analyze—we design paths to value.

What we deliver:

• Commercial Diligence & Market Studies Fast-turn analysis of market size, competition, and customer demand to validate the deal thesis. When the investment case hinges on one big assumption, we test it with precision.

• Portfolio Strategy Support Post-close strategy design, annual planning, and offsite facilitation to align teams and accelerate value creation.

Whether you’re investing in a deal or rethinking growth in a portfolio company, Maven delivers insight that drives confident decisions.

Top-tier strategy talent, built for the mid-market.

At Maven, our consultants come from Bain, BCG, and McKinsey. They’ve worked inside the playbooks of global leaders, and now bring that rigor to the unique challenges of mid-market diligence.

People like Anuja Burns, an MIT and Stanford grad who started in tech, moved through BCG, and eventually founded and sold an education business. She brings a rare mix of operational experience and strategy depth—helping clients connect bold ideas with what actually works on the ground.

We staff every engagement with senior consultants who think like investors and know how to build value. Because when the right questions get asked, better decisions follow.

Let’s Continue the Conversation

Every market has its blind spots. The most valuable growth opportunities are often hidden behind assumptions, incomplete data, or outdated thinking.

If you’re thinking about footprint, product mix, or other structural moves, send me a DM or reach out via our contact page. Happy to connect.

Thanks for reading.

This newsletter is for operators, executives, and investors navigating complex decisions in growing mid-market businesses. Each edition, we’ll share field-tested strategies, valuation perspectives, and lessons from real-world engagements.

As we approach the end of Q2, many of the mid-market leaders we work with are balancing confidence with caution: how to stay aggressive on growth without misreading the market, and how to align structure with strategy before momentum turns into misalignment.

This quarter, we’re spotlighting a client story that illustrates how smart alignment can unlock meaningful value.

AirBoss, a rubber compounding manufacturer with operations across North America, asked Maven to help them evaluate their manufacturing footprint.

The core question was simple: is our structure aligned with where the market is going?

The answer led to a smart, forward-looking strategy with real bottom-line impact. We’ll walk through the highlights below, and share our perspective on why more mid-market companies are taking a fresh look at their geographic, product, and operational alignment.

If you’re in the middle of that conversation—or need to be—we’d love to help.

Field Notes: Realigning a Manufacturing Footprint for Future Growth

AirBoss, a leading North American rubber compounding company, was facing a familiar but complex challenge.

Over the past two decades, much of their traditional customer base had migrated to the Southeastern U.S., leaving parts of their manufacturing footprint underutilized and misaligned with future demand.

Maven was brought in to help the executive team evaluate strategic options. Working over a focused engagement, we modeled the financial and market implications of several scenarios, including plant consolidation, product mix optimization, and potential acquisitions.

Each option was assessed not just for cost impact, but for customer and market risk.

The final recommendation was a combination of consolidation and targeted acquisition—one that would realign AirBoss’s footprint with shifting demand and unlock over $16M in after-tax cash flow improvement.

The lesson: When structural misalignment creeps in over time, the solution often isn’t a single fix. It’s a coordinated, forward-looking strategy that positions the business for the next decade—not the last one.

Thinking Through a Major Strategic Move?

Whether you’re reevaluating your footprint, assessing product-market fit, or considering how to position your business for the next phase of growth, we’d be glad to help.

Send me a message on LinkedIn or visit maven-associates.com/contact-us to connect.

Tariffs and Trade Policy: What Mid-Market Leaders Need to Watch

Tariff policy doesn’t grab headlines like it used to—but for manufacturers and importers, it remains a sleeper issue with real strategic weight.

Recent signals from Washington and global trade partners suggest we could be in for another round of adjustments. Sectors like industrials, chemicals, and automotive are likely to see movement first, but ripple effects often reach broader supply chains quickly.

For mid-market companies, the challenge isn’t just the cost of a tariff itself—it’s the uncertainty. Changes in trade policy can throw off sourcing plans, compress margins, or create pricing gaps competitors can exploit.

At Maven Associates, we’re seeing smart clients take a two-pronged approach:

1. Scenario-readiness. Building models that show how cost structures shift under different tariff assumptions. The goal isn’t to predict the future—it’s to stay a step ahead of it.

2. Strategic sourcing reviews. Re-evaluating supplier concentration, regional dependencies, and nearshoring opportunities—not just to mitigate tariff risk, but to build long-term resilience.

If tariffs aren’t on your radar right now, they should be. Because even when they’re not the headline, they’re often the hidden variable in your margin equation.

How We Align Strategy with Structure

At Maven, we specialize in helping companies untangle complex structural questions—ones that don’t have obvious answers. Whether it’s a manufacturing footprint, product portfolio, or market expansion path, we help clients move from gut feel to clarity.

In the AirBoss engagement, we didn’t just run numbers. We evaluated how consolidation, acquisition, and mix optimization would play out financially, operationally, and in the market. Each scenario was assessed not just for efficiency, but for strategic fit.

What sets our approach apart:

• Scenario modeling grounded in strategic logic We weigh upside and risk across multiple paths—not just the one that looks best on paper.

• Integrated customer and market input We factor in how each move will be received in the field—not just how it looks in a boardroom.

• A bias toward action We deliver not just insights, but options that are execution-ready.

When clients need to rethink their structure, we give them more than a model. We give them a roadmap.

This is What We Do

We work with mid-market companies when the stakes are high and the path forward isn’t obvious. That might mean reevaluating a go-to-market strategy, pressure-testing a major investment, or aligning leadership around what needs to happen next.

Our job is to bring clarity to the hard stuff—especially when internal data, customer feedback, and market signals don’t all point in the same direction.

Here’s where we focus:

• Market insight and commercial strategy When you need to know if your market position still makes sense—or if it’s time to adjust.

• Answering deal- or decision-critical questions We dig into the assumptions that really matter, whether it’s about a forecast, a product bet, or a cost decision.

• Annual planning and team offsites Helping leadership teams get aligned on what matters and turn strategy into a practical game plan.

We’re not here to sell frameworks. We’re here to help smart people make better calls—when it counts.

Top-tier strategy talent, built for the mid-market.

Maven engagements are staffed by consultants who bring both boardroom thinking and frontline experience. Many come from Bain, BCG, and McKinsey, and have worked inside operating companies across manufacturing, industrials, and supply chain.

One example is Lan Harrington, a former Bain consultant with a Stanford MBA and 12 years in investment banking. Since joining Maven in 2021, she has led diligence and strategy engagements across sectors, including a recent project in commercial refrigeration where she helped a PE client navigate a complex acquisition.

Lan blends structured thinking with grounded execution—and exemplifies the caliber of insight we bring to every engagement.

Wrapping Up

Structural alignment isn’t just a cost exercise—it’s a strategic one.

The companies that grow with confidence are the ones that regularly step back, assess fit, and realign for where the market is going, not just where it’s been.

If you’re thinking about footprint, product mix, or other structural moves, send me a DM or reach out via our contact page. Happy to connect.

Thanks for reading, and as always, we appreciate your partnership.