Financial Gravity Assessment

01 / 07

Where is your organisation right now?

The window to build structural protection gets narrower as investors and boards accumulate expectations. Where you are determines what is still possible.

Pre-funding -- about to raise or have not yetNo institutional capital in. You are building before the first check arrives.

Seed or Series AFirst institutional capital in. Board is forming or in place.

Series B or beyondMultiple rounds in. Investor expectations are set. Board has real power.

SMB or revenue-fundedNo VC. Funded by customers, revenue, or private equity.

02 / 07

How much of your revenue or funding comes from a single source?

Think about your largest customer, investor, or funder. If you have not raised yet, think about what that first relationship might look like.

No revenue yet -- pre-fundingStill building. No customers or investors generating meaningful income yet.

Under 20%No single source dominates. Revenue is reasonably spread.

20 to 40%One stakeholder has real weight. Not the whole story, but a significant part of it.

40 to 60%This stakeholder shapes a lot of decisions, even ones that are not explicitly about them.

Over 60%One source is effectively the financial centre of gravity for the whole organisation.

03 / 07

When a key stakeholder pushes for something you did not plan for, what actually happens?

This could be an investor, a major customer, or a board member -- or someone you are about to take money from. If you have not raised yet, think about what you expect that dynamic to look like.

We push back without much anxietyThe relationship is strong enough to hold honest disagreement.

We negotiate -- they usually get somethingNot a full yes, not a clean no. Middle ground, most of the time.

We feel the pull to say yesEven when it is not what we would choose. The pressure is real and we feel it.

Saying no feels genuinely riskyWe accommodate because the alternative could unravel something we cannot afford to lose.

This dynamic does not exist yet -- we have not raisedNo investors or dominant stakeholders in the picture. That is about to change.

04 / 07

What is actually in place to protect your ability to make decisions if a new investor comes in, the board shifts, or you are not in the room?

Founders get squeezed out and companies change direction for the same reason: nothing was written into the structure to prevent it.

Nothing formalControl lives in relationships and trust. Nothing is written into the governance structure.

Some informal commitmentsVerbal agreements or a values document -- nothing legally binding.

Some structural protection in placeAt least one formal mechanism -- a charter provision, voting structure, or decision protocol.

Multiple layers of protectionLegal structure, governance architecture, and decision protocols working together.

05 / 07

What is the honest reason governance or structural protection is not already sorted?

Most founders know this matters. Something is in the way. Naming it is the first useful step.

Too much else going on right nowThis is real work for later. There are bigger fires at the moment.

The investors and board are aligned -- it feels fineEveryone is on the same page. Hard to see why you would formalise something that is working.

It would complicate the round or the relationshipThe timing feels wrong. Too much is at stake to introduce friction right now.

Already working on it -- figuring out where to startIt is on the agenda. The gap is clarity and sequencing, not intention.

06 / 07

If you weren't in the room for the next big decision, what would actually decide it?

Not your mission statement. What the people making the call would actually reach for when it's their name on the outcome, not yours.

Our stated priorities, and everyone knows itThe team has made this call before without me and landed in the same place I would have.

Mostly our priorities, with some judgment callsClose enough, most of the time. Not something we've actually stress-tested.

Whatever feels defensible in the momentSomeone can make a reasonable case after the fact. Nobody's checking it against anything written down.

Whoever's asking, and what's on the tableThe loudest stakeholder or the biggest deal tends to win the argument, priorities or no.

07 / 07

Think of the last person who got promoted or got a bonus for one specific call. Was that call also the one most aligned with what you say you stand for?

The real audit isn't what's in the values deck. It's what actually gets rewarded when the deal, the hire, or the resourcing call has real stakes attached.

Yes, and that's not an accidentWe built the incentive to point the same direction as what we say we stand for. It shows up in who gets recognized.

Mostly, though we've never actually checkedMy gut says yes. Nobody's gone back and looked at the pattern across more than one decision.

Not really -- results and values are separate conversationsWe reward the outcome. Whether it lined up with what we claim to stand for wasn't really part of the decision.

Honestly, no -- I can think of a case where the opposite happenedSomeone got rewarded for a call that worked against what we claim matters most.

Your Financial Gravity Reading

Based on your seven answers

Gravity Score

--out of 100

Resource concentration

Relationship pressure

Structural protection

Decision coherence

What this means for you

Unlock your full results

See what's driving your score

Your breakdown unlocks instantly. We'll also follow up with one email — thoughts on your score and what founders at your stage typically do next.

First name

Last name

Work email *

Company (optional)

No sales calls. Unsubscribe any time.

How much financial gravity
are you under?

Your Financial Gravity Reading

What this means for you

See what's driving your score

Unlocked.

How much financial gravityare you under?

Your Financial Gravity Reading

What this means for you

See what's driving your score

Unlocked.

How much financial gravity
are you under?