Write Structural Actions

At Moonshot, we do not operate on abstract fundraising narratives. We define concrete structural actions.

The purpose of documenting a preparation item is simple: communicate a task that moves a company closer to institutional readiness. It must be clear enough for the responsible party to execute and precise enough for others to understand its relevance.

Capital preparation does not benefit from performative documentation.

Why Narrative Framing Slows Capital

Founders often describe readiness work in broad, aspirational terms. “Strengthen financial story.” “Improve investor positioning.” “Refine strategy.” These statements feel productive but obscure what must actually change.

Institutional capital does not evaluate stories. It evaluates structure.

Overly conceptual framing turns structural gaps into abstract discussions. It diffuses accountability and delays correction. The work required is rarely philosophical. It is mechanical.

Revenue assumptions must be reconciled.
Cost forecasts must be stress tested.
Cap table inconsistencies must be resolved.
Valuation methodology must be benchmarked.
Data room sections must be completed.

These are tasks, not narratives.

A Better Way to Define Preparation Work

Define specific structural outcomes.

Instead of “Improve valuation positioning,” write:
Validate comparable set and recalculate implied multiple range.

Instead of “Strengthen financial model,” write:
Reconcile revenue forecast to signed contracts and pipeline probability.

Instead of “Prepare for diligence,” write:
Complete legal documentation index and upload executed agreements.

If it is not a defined action with a measurable output, it does not belong in the readiness workflow.

There are exceptions. Exploration is sometimes required before execution. In those cases, define the deliverable explicitly:
Draft revised valuation memo.
Produce downside scenario model.
Outline governance restructure proposal.

Clarity precedes progress.

Write Clearly and Directly

Preparation items should be written in plain language.

Titles should state the action.
Descriptions should include only necessary context.
Supporting documents should be linked.

Avoid internal jargon. Avoid inflated phrasing. Precision accelerates review.

When referencing investor feedback or due diligence questions, quote directly where possible. Authentic scrutiny clarifies the real issue faster than interpretation.

Assign Ownership

Every structural correction must have a named owner.

Shared responsibility diffuses execution.
Single ownership increases speed and accountability.

The responsible party should define the task. The act of writing it forces clarity. It exposes missing assumptions and surfaces shortcuts.

In some cases, issues are raised by others. When that happens, frame the item as a problem statement. Allow the accountable owner to convert it into a defined structural action.

Keep Strategic Discussion at the Capital Level

Debate valuation posture, raise size, investor targeting, and capital deployment strategy at the mandate level, not inside individual tasks.

Once direction is defined, preparation work becomes execution.

Deep discussion precedes activation.
Execution follows clarity.

Institutional readiness does not require elaborate internal storytelling. It requires disciplined, traceable structural corrections.

Capital markets respond to clarity.

Execution plans convert direction into measurable progression.

Continue with:
• Manage Capital Preparation
• Generate Momentum
• Activate and Re-Activate