Interview Q&A

‍

1. You did three deals as an Independent Sponsor before founding Access Holdings in 2013 - what made you decide to build a dedicated firm rather than stay deal-by-deal?

I had a few experiences early on that really clarified the limitations of the deal-by-deal model.

We struggled with three issues:

1. Raising while executing created bandwidth challenges and often inhibitied securing capital and supporting our platforms the best way possible

2. We and our platform partners early on worked with many fee-for-service providers to help drive value creation, we ran into real agency issues. You’re asking people to operate like owners, but the structure doesn’t always support that.

3. And as an Independent Sponsor, it was also difficult to recruit high-quality talent into something that was episodic versus a platform they could build within, and offer persistance.

Stepping back, it became clear that, while the model works for getting deals done, it’s harder to consistently resource and align the business building and scaling processes.

That’s what pushed me to build Access - to create a platform where we could align capital properly, bring capabilities in-house, and attract talent into something more durable. It was really about moving from a series of transactions to a system for building companies over time.

‍

2. What did those early IS deals teach you that shaped how you built Access Holdings?

Those early deals were a crash course in what actually drive outcomes.

You see very quickly that alignment matters - who shows up when things get difficult, and who doesn’t. But just as importantly, you realize how much of the work starts after the deal closes.

We also saw that relying on external operators or traditional operating partner models can create distance from execution or misaligned incentives.

That’s what led us to build functional capabilities inside the firm - not as an overlay, but integrated with the investment team. If you want to consistently drive value, you need people who are accountable for building, not just advising.

I'm sure most deal professionals will agree overtime we are solving for the same opportunities over and over, systematizing and modernizing the value creation approach makes sense. It's just hard to build the machine!

‍

3. Over a decade into building Access, how has your investment philosophy evolved from where you started?

Early on, it was more opportunistic - you’re focused on finding a good business, backing a strong team, and getting the deal done.

Over time, we’ve become much more intentional about what we want to own. We spend more time upfront defining where we have a right to win and building conviction around specific themes.

At the same time, we’ve built the infrastructure to execute more consistently - organizing data earlier, incorporating exogenous data sets, and developing tools that allow us to clearly map the growth plan and rescue and enable with proprietary tools the business build and modernization.

The philosophy is consistent, but the level of precision and repeatability has advanced meaningfully.

‍

4. What's one thing you believed about the Independent Sponsor model early on that turned out to be wrong?

I thought the model would scale more easily than it does.

It’s a very effective model for sourcing and executing deals - often with more proprietary access and better alignment than traditional processes. But most Independent Sponsor teams are not resourced to help build and scale a platform business post-close.

That gap becomes very real as you try to build consistency across a portfolio.

That’s what led us to invest heavily in building out our value creation teams and the Access Acceleration Center (A2C) - to institutionalize and automate the capabilities needed to consistently execute, not just transact and eventually commercialize and fortify those capabilities and services.

‍

5. How do you think about team-building and culture inside a firm that grew out of the IS model?

We’ve approached building the firm the same way we approach building our portfolio companies - start small and scale deliberately.

A big part of that is access to talent. Where you build matters. We’ve been very intentional about positioning ourselves in locations that allow us to attract high-quality people as we grow.

You see that in our portfolio as well. With American Student Transportation Partners (ASTP), we chose not to build the business in Punxsutawney, PA, where the initial platform partnership was formed, but rather in the Philadelphia metro area - which allowed us to tap into a strong talent base while still being within reach of a major market. That balance matters more than people think.

We've built Access with value creation at the heart of everything we do, so that every engagement is backed by the A2C's proprietary research, proven playbooks, and targeted campaigns, and every member of our team shares accountability for helping portfolio company leadership scale their platforms from $5M to $50M.

Culturally, it’s about combining ownership with a system mindset. The IS model leans toward independence, but building a firm requires people to operate in a coordinated and persistent way while still being accountable for outcomes.

‍

6. What made a capital partner truly valuable to you back when you were raising deal by deal - and how do you think about that differently now?

Back then, you really valued speed, certainty, and flexibility. You needed partners who could evaluate quickly and commit.

But you also become very aware of where alignment can break down over time.

Today, we still value those attributes, but we spend more time thinking about long-term alignment and how partners engage beyond the transaction - whether that’s around strategy, scaling, or supporting the business over time. It’s a more integrated partnership.

‍

7. Where are you seeing the most interesting opportunities in the market right now?

We spend a lot of time in areas where demand is durable but complexity is increasing.

That includes what we think of as HALO businesses - heavy assets, low obsolescence - as well as recurring service models across consumer and financial services. We also like multi-site and experience-based businesses with recurring characteristics.

Another area we’re spending time on is the Independent Sponsor ecosystem itself. As that market continues to grow, we think there are ways to build around it that are increasingly attractive from an investment standpoint.

We believe our legacy gives us a deep perspective and empathy to be accretive.

‍

8. Beyond deal structuring, where do you feel you genuinely move the needle on value creation post-close?

One of the things we saw early is that most businesses don’t struggle because of strategy - they struggle with execution.

To address that, we built the A2C as a structured system for driving value across four core verticals: Strategic Execution, Organic Growth, Inorganic Growth through M&A, and Platform Infrastructure and Systems.

Strategic Execution is about setting clear direction and governance - making sure the company is focused on the few things that actually drive value. Organic Growth is about building repeatable engines to acquire, convert, and retain customers. Inorganic Growth is about sourcing, executing, and integrating acquisitions in a way that accelerates scale. And Platform is about putting in place the systems, processes, and controls that allow the business to operate efficiently.

Underpinning all of this is Talent and Insights. In the lower middle market, you need a comprehensive and well-documented set of tools so that when you provide direction, it can be understood, contextualized, and therefore be actionable at a granular level that removes ambiguity and makes the objective clear.

We've learned so much from the mistakes we've made. This is a deep scar and stove behind most of no just what we do but why we do it.

That’s how you drive activity consistently and at scale - not just having the right strategy, but having a system that ensures it actually gets executed.

‍

9. What do you know now that you wish you knew going into your very first deal?

How important talent is - and how specific you need to be in what you’re looking for.

Early on, I underestimated how much outcomes are driven by having the right people in place. Not just experience, but people with high urgency, strong processing ability, and the ability to solve problems in a non-linear and human way. The objective is often clear it's the method and change management that supports the outcome.

If you get that right, a lot of other things become easier. If you don’t, it’s very hard to overcome and likely means making hard choices and changes. I'm still working on moving faster and getting my partners and team to have conclusions for actions more quickly.

‍

10. For an Independent Sponsor thinking about making a similar transition - what's the one thing they need to get right?

You need to be clear on what you’re building.

That means doing the work upfront, not figuring it out as you go. A few things that matter:‍

• Have a defined thesis - know what you want to buy and why, not just what you’re willing to look at ‍

• Build a real business plan - think through how you create value and give yourself enough runway, typically 24-30 months ‍

• Be honest about your gaps - you’ll figure out quickly who your real partners are and where you need help ‍

• Surround yourself with the right people early - mentors, advisors, and capital partners who can help you navigate the transition.

A lot of people try to scale before they’ve done that work. If you don’t get this right upfront, it’s very hard to build something durable.

‍

Bonus: We always leave room for the one thing we didn't think to ask - what didn't we ask that you actually wanted to answer/share?

One thing we didn’t touch on is how the model is evolving from here.

There’s a broader shift happening where the lines between capital, capability, and operating infrastructure are blurring. Historically, firms were defined by one of those. Going forward, I think the firms that win are the ones that can integrate all three in a way that actually drives outcomes.

That’s a big part of how we’re thinking about building Access today.

‍

Feature in ISN: ISN interviews Independent Sponsors from across the ecosystem. To be considered for a future feature, please contact us here.

‍

Editorial Disclosure: Kevin McAllister is the Founder and Managing Partner of Access Holdings, the private equity firm that founded ISN. ISN is a subsidiary of Access Holdings but operates as an editorially independent business. This interview was selected and conducted solely on its news and educational value to the Independent Sponsor ecosystem.