_edited.png){kind=small}
Selected internal judgement memos defining Glenmore's standards for capital readiness, sequencing, governance, and judgement.
Judgement Memo 1
Why Capital Destroys More Companies Than It Saves
On structural fragility, capital distortion, and irreversibility
Capital judgment cannot be articulated until the “capital = progress” reflex is dismantled. Liquidity is rarely a neutral accelerant. In practice, it functions as a distortion field - scaling flaws more efficiently than strengths. Control always fails before demand does. When capital is used to bypass the requirement for operational excellence, the result is not growth, but the engineering of collapse.
Capital destroys more companies than it saves because it enables the systematic avoidance of truth. It subsidizes inefficiency, erodes problem-solving capacity, and strips organizations of agency. By the time liquidity is exhausted, the structural ability to survive without it has already been removed. What remains is not an underfunded business, but an entity no longer capable of operating independently.
​
​
Three Failure Archetypes
​
1. The Subsidized Unit Model
-
Intent: Deployment of runway to achieve scale and eventual margin inversion.
-
Reality: The removal of solvency pressure enables the scaling of a loss-making transaction, codifying the deficit as a structural requirement.
-
Structural Failure - Solvency Inversion:
Negative unit economics are mathematically irreversible under scale without a fundamental shift in pricing power or cost structure. When growth is predicated on subsidy, runway does not extend survival - it increases the velocity of terminal impact.
​
2. The Fixed-Cost Machine
-
Intent: CAPEX-heavy asset acquisition to secure footprint and supply-chain dominance.
-
Reality: Financial engineering - specifically sale-leasebacks and debt-weighted restructurings—converts variable operating levers into rigid, fixed obligations.
-
Structural Failure - Operational Rigidity:
Flexibility is traded for upfront liquidity. The organization loses its ability to absorb shocks. This is a terminal architectural lock-in; by the time decline becomes visible, the inability to adapt is already encoded in the capital structure.
​
3. The Entropy-Weighted Entity
-
Intent: Organizational “professionalization” through specialized headcount and infrastructure.
-
Reality: Premature expansion introduces synthetic management layers and information silos, replacing process discipline with communication overhead.
-
Structural Failure - Complexity Stasis:
The entropy introduced by excess capital becomes a permanent operational tax. Agility is structurally precluded. The organization lacks the internal mechanics required to return to a lean state.
​
The Hidden Cost: Capability Atrophy
The primary casualty of capital is organizational agency. When problems are solved through engineering or process discipline, a firm builds a non-capital asset: survival muscle. When those same problems are solved by purchasing solutions - through headcount, vendors, or acquisition - that muscle atrophies.
This loss is asymmetric and irreversible. Discipline cannot be retroactively installed into a structure conditioned to bypass constraint with liquidity. Once internal problem-solving capacity is replaced by capital substitution, survival ceases to be an internal variable. The organization becomes a financial instrument - structurally incapable of sustaining its own cost base.
Closing Discipline
Glenmore operates as a gatekeeper, not a facilitator. Authority is established only after these distortions are removed. Companies are not evaluated on their ability to attract capital, but on their ability to withstand it. Machine throughput is verified at zero subsidy before any determination is made regarding the volume of fuel the system can safely process.
Capital is permitted only when its deployment no longer changes the nature of the business.
Judgement Memo 2
Mis-Sequencing Is the Primary Cause of Collapse
Most companies do not fail because they pursue the wrong strategy.
They fail because they execute the right actions in the wrong order
Mis-sequencing is a structural error, not a tactical one. Once embedded, it cannot be corrected by effort, talent, or capital. It hard-codes fragility into the organization. By the time the failure is visible, the sequence has already locked the outcome.
Capital is not the origin of this failure - but it is its most efficient amplifier.
The Sequencing Fallacy
Founders often assume that progress is additive:
​
hire → build → sell → raise → scale.
In practice, progress is conditional. Each step is load-bearing. When a later action is taken before its prerequisite has been structurally satisfied, the organization compensates by improvisation. Improvisation then becomes institutionalized. What follows is not growth, but accumulated distortion.
Capital deployed into a mis-sequenced system does not accelerate success. It stabilizes the error.
Three Structural Mis-Sequencing Patterns
1. Hiring Before Process
The Intent: Increase velocity by adding experienced talent.
The Reality: New headcount enters an undefined system and creates parallel workflows to survive.
The Structural Failure: Process Fragmentation.
Without explicit process discipline, each hire becomes a local optimizer. Decision paths multiply. Accountability diffuses. The organization grows in size but not in coherence. Capital converts this fragmentation into permanence.
2. Scaling Before Unit Proof
The Intent: Capture market share while demand is visible.
The Reality: Volume is added before pricing power, cost discipline, or repeatability is verified.
The Structural Failure: Margin Instability.
Unit economics that are unproven at small scale do not improve through expansion; they calcify. Growth amplifies variance, not certainty. Capital here subsidizes uncertainty until it becomes existential.
3. Capital Before Constraint Mastery
The Intent: Remove friction and “buy time” to mature the business.
The Reality: Constraints are bypassed rather than resolved.
The Structural Failure: Capability Erosion.
Constraints are not obstacles; they are diagnostic signals. When capital removes them prematurely, the organization never develops the internal mechanics required to operate under pressure. Judgment atrophies. The company becomes dependent on liquidity to function at baseline.
The Irreversible Cost: Sequence Lock-In
Mis-sequencing creates architectural lock-in. Once headcount, cost structure, governance, and expectations are established around an incorrect order of operations, reversal becomes politically and operationally infeasible.
This is why most turnarounds fail. They attempt to correct outcomes without reordering the sequence that produced them.
Capital cannot fix a sequencing error. It only increases the cost of discovering it.
The Glenmore Standard
Glenmore evaluates sequence before substance.
We do not ask whether a company is growing.
We ask whether it is growing in the correct order.
We assess whether each operational layer was earned, or merely funded. We look for evidence that constraints were metabolized, not avoided. Only when the sequence holds under zero-subsidization do we permit capital to enter the system.
Capital is introduced only when it no longer alters the order of operations.
Anything earlier is not acceleration.
It is distortion.
Judgement Memo 3
Governance Is a Scaling Function, Not a Control Function
​
Governance is most often misunderstood as a mechanism of restraint. In reality, governance exists to preserve decision quality as complexity increases. It is not installed to limit action; it is installed to ensure that action remains coherent under scale.
Most companies encounter governance too late. It is introduced reactively - after capital, headcount, and operational surface area have already expanded. At that point, governance is forced to act as a corrective system rather than a structural one. It becomes an instrument of friction, not alignment.
This is why governance is often blamed for slowing companies down. In truth, it is not governance that introduces drag - it is mis-sequenced governance, applied after judgment has already fragmented.
The Core Error
Founders frequently assume that control is the purpose of governance. As a result, they delay it until they feel control slipping. By then, the organization has already accumulated competing authorities, informal decision paths, and silent veto points.
Governance does not exist to override founders.
It exists to protect judgment from dilution.
When a company scales without governance, authority expands faster than accountability. Decision rights blur. Execution becomes dependent on personality rather than structure. Over time, the organization loses the ability to distinguish between a good decision that failed and a bad decision that succeeded temporarily.
This is not a cultural failure.
It is an architectural one.
Governance as a Scaling Function
Properly designed governance performs three critical functions under scale:
-
It stabilizes decision rights
Governance clarifies who decides what, under which conditions, and with what escalation path. This prevents decision-making from collapsing into consensus-seeking or executive fatigue.
-
It preserves signal integrity
As organizations grow, information becomes filtered, delayed, and shaped by incentives. Governance establishes formal pathways that protect critical signals from distortion before they reach decision-makers.
-
It enforces consequence alignment
Governance ensures that authority and accountability remain coupled. Without this coupling, organizations reward motion over outcomes and proximity over judgment.
None of these functions restrict growth.
They make growth survivable.
The Cost of Governance Avoidance
Companies that delay governance often cite flexibility as the reason. What they are actually preserving is discretion without structure. This works only while complexity remains low.
Once capital is introduced, discretion scales faster than judgment. Informal authority hardens into entitlement. Decisions begin to optimize for internal optics rather than external reality. At that point, governance cannot be added cleanly - it must be imposed.
Imposed governance always feels punitive.
Structural governance rarely does.
By the time founders complain that governance is slowing them down, the organization has already lost its internal coherence. Governance is not the cause of the slowdown; it is the visible symptom of accumulated misalignment.
The Glenmore Standard
At Glenmore, governance is evaluated as a precondition to scale, not a response to it. We assess whether a company can:
-
Articulate clear decision rights across capital, operations, and strategy
-
Maintain signal fidelity as information moves upward
-
Absorb disagreement without fragmenting authority
-
Preserve judgment under pressure, not just under consensus
If governance is absent, capital will not compensate for it. Capital magnifies ambiguity; it does not resolve it.
We do not view governance as an external imposition.
We view it as internal load-bearing structure.
Closing Discipline
Governance is not about control.
It is about continuity of judgment.
A company that cannot preserve judgment under scale is not ungoverned - it is unready. Capital will not fix this condition. It will lock it in.
Governance must arrive before complexity, or it will arrive as correction. The difference between the two determines whether scale becomes leverage or liability.