Let's Talk →M Search Methodology
The FACT Framework
M Search's candidate evaluation methodology for GTM leadership in PE-backed and VC-backed software. Four dimensions, each weighted and assessed against the specific mandate — not the generic role.
Functional
Achievements
Customer
Technical
Why Standard Evaluation Fails GTM Leadership Searches
Most executive search processes evaluate candidates on credentials and experience — the right title, the right logos, a strong interview. Those are necessary but not sufficient conditions for a successful GTM leadership hire.
The failures M Search has seen most often share a pattern: the candidate had done the job before — just not this version of it. They were strong on the dimensions that were easy to see and short on the one that actually mattered for this mandate, or they were simply built for a different stage of the company's journey. They fit the title, not the reality of the business.
FACT exists to make all four dimensions explicit, weight them to the specific mandate, and assess candidates against the reality of the business — not the generic role.
Functional Capability
Has this candidate actually done the operating job this mandate requires — and at what scale? Functional Capability is about direct leadership experience: have they led real sales or GTM teams, at what size and complexity, and can they run the core operating cadence of hiring, forecasting, pipeline discipline, and RevOps? It is not a proxy for the title on the resume. It is whether they have personally built and run the machine this company needs.
Assessment Signals
- —Has led GTM teams directly — team size and complexity that match this mandate
- —Hiring, onboarding, and enablement built into a repeatable process
- —Forecast discipline and genuine pipeline qualification rigor
- —RevOps and tech-stack foundation — the infrastructure to track, forecast, and decide
- —Can define ICP from first principles, not just inherit a playbook
Achievements & Attitude
Repeated, quantifiable growth outcomes across different environments — plus the intangibles that decide whether the candidate holds up. Achievements do double duty: they prove a candidate can do the job, and they tell us what stage they are built for. A leader who took a company from $0 to $10M has builder DNA; a leader who took one from $250M to $300M is a fundamentally different operator. Neither is better — they are matched to different legs of the journey, and this is where stage fit gets qualified. The A dimension also separates pattern from coincidence: growing revenue once may be timing, but doing it across two or three companies, products, and market conditions is a repeatable skill. And attitude — coachable, accountable, resilient under board pressure — is the catch-all that often determines whether a technically qualified leader actually succeeds.
Assessment Signals
- —Quantifiable outcomes (ARR growth, quota attainment, team scale) that prove the result and signal the stage
- —Stage fit: builder (entry to ~2x), operator (~2x to 3x), or scaler (~3x to exit) — matched to where the business actually is
- —Repeated growth across different companies, products, and market conditions — pattern, not one lucky line
- —Coachable when the board pushes back; accountable when the quarter goes sideways
- —Resilient enough to hold a team together through the rough patches of a hold period
Customer Domain
Does this candidate genuinely know the buyer — this segment, this ACV band, this buying motion — or will they need six months to learn it? Customer Domain is market credibility and buyer knowledge. In heavily regulated industries like healthcare, financial services, or government, it is non-negotiable: the buying dynamics, compliance constraints, and language of the buyer have to walk in the door on day one, because there is no time on a five-year hold to learn them.
Assessment Signals
- —Direct experience in the same segment, ACV band, and buying motion
- —Credibility with the specific buyer — knows how they evaluate and decide
- —Understands the sales cycle and where deals actually stall
- —In regulated markets, already fluent in the compliance and procurement realities
- —Existing relationships and reputation in the relevant vertical
Technical Acumen
Does this candidate understand the product category and the competitive landscape — why customers buy, how the product fits the broader stack, and how to translate technical value into business outcomes? For technically complex products — AI/ML infrastructure, data tooling, developer platforms — Technical Acumen is the gating criterion. A leader who is strong on every other dimension but needs a year to learn the category has cost the business a year it does not have.
Assessment Signals
- —Understands the product category and how it fits the customer's stack
- —Can translate technical value into business outcomes a buyer cares about
- —Knows the competitive landscape and where the product wins or loses
- —For complex or infrastructure products, fluency that lands on day one — not a six-month learning curve
- —Credibility with technical buyers and with product and engineering peers internally
FACT Is a Weighting Exercise, Not a Checklist
Not every dimension carries equal weight in every search. Before mapping the market, M Search identifies which dimensions are mandatory and which are trainable — the complexity vector is different for every company. A business selling into a heavily regulated industry weights Customer Domain as non-negotiable. A business selling technically complex infrastructure — AI/ML, data tooling, developer platforms — weights Technical Acumen most heavily, because a six-month learning curve on the product category is not affordable on a five-year hold.
Getting the weighting right up front is what turns FACT from a scorecard into a search strategy. It defines who is genuinely in the pool and who only looks qualified on paper.
Stage Fit: Hire for the Leg You're On
The A in FACT is where stage fit gets qualified. Achievements are quantifiable proof points that do double duty — they show a candidate can do the job, and they tell us what stage they are built for. A leader who took a company from $0 to $10M has builder DNA. A leader who took one from $250M to $300M is a fundamentally different operator. Neither is better; they are matched to different legs of the journey.
Broadly, GTM leaders fall into three profiles: the builder (entry to ~2x ARR — ICP clarity, process from scratch, foundational hiring), the operator (~2x to ~3x — second-line leadership, quota attainment, rep productivity), and the scaler (~3x to exit — margin efficiency, predictability, exit readiness). Most firms default to hiring the scaler when the business actually needs a builder — and that mismatch is the root cause of most failed GTM hires.
This matters more than most firms plan for. Average GTM-leader tenure at a PE-backed software company is roughly 18 months — on a five-year hold, you should expect to make this hire more than once. Hiring correctly for the first leg de-risks the entire journey: you build the foundation from momentum, and if a transition comes, you make it from a position of strength rather than from crisis.
How the Framework Is Applied
FACT runs through the whole M Search process. In mandate definition, each dimension is translated into weighted, specific criteria for the search, and the mandatory-versus-trainable calls are made. In assessment, structured interviews and back-channel references — people who have worked with and for the candidate, not just the names they provide — are designed to surface evidence on each dimension. In presentation, every shortlisted candidate is documented against all four dimensions and the scorecard co-designed with the client, with an explicit recommendation rather than a ranking.
The framework earns its keep on the trade-offs — a candidate with exceptional Functional Capability who is light on Customer Domain, or one with deep Technical Acumen who has only done a partial version of the mandate. Making those trade-offs explicit lets the client and M Search make a genuinely informed hire instead of defaulting to whoever interviewed best.
At 90 Days: What the Framework Predicts
FACT was designed to predict 90-day performance, not interview performance. A hire who is strong across all four dimensions — correctly weighted — should be surfacing the real issues early, working from a fact-based assessment, and building the right peer relationships before the honeymoon ends.
The most common 90-day failures map directly onto FACT gaps. A leader whose forecast slips and pipeline hygiene breaks down (Functional gap). A scaler dropped into a builder's mandate, waiting for infrastructure that was never there — or someone who will not own it when the quarter turns (Achievements & Attitude gap). A leader still learning the buyer six months in (Customer Domain gap). A leader who cannot speak the product credibly to a technical buyer (Technical Acumen gap).
Getting these right before the hire is made is the only way to avoid them.
Running a GTM leadership search?
Graham Locklear
Founder & CEO, M Search
Graham developed the FACT Framework over a decade of GTM leadership searches. It is the evaluation methodology used in every M Search engagement.
Book a 30-minute call with Graham to discuss how the FACT Framework applies to your specific mandate.