Role
People and Culture Director
Organisation
Series B SaaS company
Scale
Approximately 300 employees, multi-region, pre-Series C
Six credentialed CFO finalists reviewed over four months with no objective differentiation framework.
The company was twelve months from its target Series C raise, and the existing CFO had announced departure. The search produced six credentialed finalists, each with public-company or late-stage scale-up experience. References were uniformly strong. The CEO and board had spent four months deliberating without convergence.
The high-growth context demanded a CFO with demonstrable adaptability under financial pressure, the judgement to make capital allocation trade-offs under investor scrutiny, and the communication discipline to lead a fundraise narrative. Standard screening could not isolate these competencies at an evidence level. Reference checks measured reputation, not behaviour.
A mis-hire would have directly affected the Series C timeline, with downstream consequences for runway, valuation, and the credibility of the leadership team in front of incoming investors.
Athir applied a scenario simulation targeted at the two competencies the board identified as critical: financial acumen under pressure and adaptability in the face of shifting constraints. The simulation isolated behaviour rather than reputation, producing a scored, comparable evidence base across all six finalists in a single cycle.
Scenarios engineered to surface financial acumen and adaptability under genuine investor and cash-flow pressure.
Two candidates scored above 7 out of 10 on the critical competency, reducing the viable pool from six to two.
Supplemented four months of deliberation with a single, auditable comparison the board could reference directly.
A documented evidence base for board and investor review, structured to withstand diligence questioning.
- A cash-runway reforecast forced by a missed quarterly revenue target, requiring immediate capital reallocation
- A term sheet negotiation where investor preferences conflicted with founder and employee interests
- A due diligence request exposing a revenue recognition inconsistency the CFO must resolve under time pressure
- A board briefing on a strategic acquisition opportunity with incomplete financial data
Candidate D reallocated budget under constraint with explicit return-on-investment rationale and declined a high-profile initiative on financial grounds.
Candidate D updated their position within minutes of the diligence data changing, documenting the reasoning rather than defending the prior stance.
Candidate D led the board briefing with a structured narrative, pre-empting the obvious objections without deflection.
Candidate E surfaced the recognition inconsistency proactively but recommended a conservative correction that preserved investor trust.
Shortlist
6 to 2
Evidence-based shortlist for final referencing
Decision Timeline
6 weeks
From simulation to accepted offer, after four prior months of deliberation
Final Differentiation
Decisive
Separated the final two on financial acumen evidence
Series C
$80M raised
Post-appointment context
Result
Four months of deliberation converged within six weeks of receiving the behavioural evidence. The simulation reduced the viable pool from six to two and separated the final two candidates on financial acumen and decision quality, a differential that reference checks had not surfaced. The committee reached a final decision without the additional interview round it had originally planned.
The appointed CFO led the company's USD 80 million Series C raise during their first year. The raise is provided as post-appointment context rather than an outcome attributed to the assessment; the documented selection rationale was retained for board and investor review.
People and Culture Director
We had spent four months forming opinions and six weeks forming a decision. The difference was evidence.