Fundraising Process

Objection Handling Framework

Systematic approach to addressing common LP concerns: team track record, fund size, fee structure, timing mismatches, portfolio construction fit.

Preparing evidence-based responses to predictable objections accelerates decision-making and demonstrates GP maturity.

Expanded Definition

Common objections include: track record ("first-time fund manager"), team ("key person left"), strategy ("too broad" or "too narrow"), fund size ("too small for our ticket" or "too large for strategy"), fees ("2/20 is expensive"), timing ("not allocating to this asset class this year"), fit ("doesn't match our mandate perfectly"). Each requires category-specific response frameworks.

Objection handling approaches: validate concern (acknowledge legitimacy), provide evidence (data addressing concern), reframe (show concern from different perspective), compare (how you stack up vs alternatives), acknowledge limitation (when objection is valid, explain how you mitigate). Avoid: dismissing concerns, over-defending, or pivoting without addressing.

Signals & Evidence

Objection handling preparation:

  • Track record concerns: Document attributable performance, team member contributions, relevant experience before fund
  • Fee objections: Prepare fee offset disclosures, benchmark comparisons, performance justification, willingness to negotiate for right LP
  • Size concerns: Demonstrate capacity discipline, capital deployment plan, why this size optimal for strategy
  • Timing objections: Understand allocation pacing, offer to stay engaged for next allocation cycle
  • Fit objections: Acknowledge edge cases, explain why still good fit despite minor misalignment

Decision Framework

  • Objection anticipation: Prepare responses to top 5-10 predictable objections before pitch meetings
  • Response framework: Validate → Evidence → Reframe → Compare → Mitigate (use as needed, not all steps every time)
  • Escalation strategy: Some objections can't be overcome (hard mandate conflict); acknowledge and move on vs over-persist

Common Misconceptions

"Objections = rejection" → Often LPs voice concerns to help you address them, not to say no. "Perfect response overcomes all objections" → Some objections reflect real dealbreakers; acknowledge and move on. "Objections mean poor qualification" → Even well-qualified LPs raise concerns; it's part of normal diligence.

Key Takeaways

  • Objection handling framework (validate → evidence → reframe → compare → mitigate) addresses predictable LP concerns systematically
  • Prepare evidence-based responses to top objections (track record, fees, size, timing, fit) before pitch meetings
  • Some objections reflect real dealbreakers (hard mandate conflicts)—acknowledge and move on rather than over-persist