Agree on the founder before the funding round.

Before a funding round, the slide deck (presentation materials for investors) is usually prepared in advance. But what investors really check is whether the founding team tells the same story: they will ask each person individually and listen for consistency in their answers. If there are discrepancies, no slide can fix that.

Why founder alignment must come before the slides

Most early failures of startups do not come from the product but from issues among the founders. According to Noam Wasserman in The Founder's Dilemmas, conflicts over expectations, roles, and interests often simmer early on and erupt when external pressures are highest: precisely when fundraising rounds are underway.

Agreement here means three specific things. First is positioning: who we are, who we sell to, and how we differ from the alternatives customers are using. Second is the story: the version the entire team agrees on and dares to present consistently to investors. Third is roles and decision-making authority: who is responsible for what, and who has the final say when opinions are divided.

Factors to check in the founding team

• True consensus level on positioning: Ask each founder separately the question "What do customers give up to choose us?" and compare whether the answers align.
• The motivations of each person: one founder wants to control the company long-term, while the other wants to maximize value for an early exit; these are two different strategies, and investors will sense that misalignment.
• Who makes the final decision: a model where everyone votes may seem fair but often leads to gridlock. Bain & Company suggests the RAPID framework, where each major decision has exactly one decision-maker, while others can provide input and narrow veto rights based on their area.
• Distance between the fundraising story and the sales story: if these two stories are too different, either investors will be skeptical, or customers will be disappointed after signing the contract.

Common mistakes before the funding round

• How to create slides before the founders actually sit down to check if the story aligns?
• Confusing silence in the room with consensus. Silence often means holding back, not agreeing.
• Positioning based on product features rather than on customers' alternatives. April Dunford in Obviously Awesome points out that correct positioning must start with the question, "What are customers using before us?" not from a list of features.
• To postpone the issue of equity and shares due to reluctance. As the valuation increases, unanswered questions will become much heavier conflicts.

Uncomfortable area: don’t avoid

Sam Kaner, in Facilitator's Guide to Participatory Decision-Making, refers to the stage of clashing perspectives as the "groan zone". This is where many groups try to escape quickly by agreeing superficially, instead of staying long enough to truly converge. The external facilitator's role is to keep the group in that zone long enough to produce a shared version that the whole team genuinely believes in, rather than a version that everyone can tolerate.

Most startup failures stem from interpersonal issues among co-founders, not from the product. Dividing roles and expectations before the pressure of fundraising hits will help avoid conflicts at the most critical moments.

Noam Wasserman, The Founder's Dilemmas

Sinh Vũ's viewpoint

Sinh Vũ enters the room with the founders not to impose a pre-existing positioning, but to uncover the areas where there are differing understandings about the same company. As an outsider, Sinh Vũ can ask the questions that the internal team often hesitates to address: who truly decides what, how we differ in specific terms, and what customers are leaving behind to choose us.

The working session is data-driven, not emotion-driven, and concludes with a shared story that the entire team believes in and is willing to use for fundraising. This is essential before any investor meeting.