Portfolio CFOs now arrive with a team, not alone. In a growing number of PE-backed deals, the CFO joins alongside a financial controller and an FP&A lead they have worked with before, because the hold period is too short and the reporting demands too heavy for one person to carry from a standing start.
This is a real shift in how mid-market and PE-backed businesses build finance leadership. The single hero hire, dropped into a business to fix everything, is losing ground to the small, pre-tested unit. Here is what is driving it, and what it means for how you plan your next appointment.
What does "moving in threes" actually mean?
It means the CFO is not the only hire. When a strong finance leader is appointed into a portfolio company, the board increasingly funds two more roles at the same time, or within the first ninety days.
The usual shape is a CFO, a financial controller who owns the numbers and the close, and a Head of FP&A who owns forecasting, board packs and the value creation model. Sometimes the third seat is a systems or transformation lead instead.
The three do not always come from the same past employer. But the CFO almost always has a strong view on at least one of them, and wants the right to bring a known quantity into a key seat.
Why has the single CFO hire stopped being enough?
The hold period is the simplest answer. A three to five year hold gives a CFO very little runway. Month one is diligence clean-up. By month six the board wants a credible plan. By month twelve the reporting has to be investor grade.
A CFO who spends the first two quarters recruiting a controller, then waiting for that controller to learn the business, has lost half a year they did not have.
The reporting burden has also grown. PE-backed boards now expect monthly management accounts within days of close, a rolling forecast, covenant tracking, cohort and unit economics, and a value creation dashboard tied to the investment thesis. That is more than one person can build and run while also managing the relationship with the sponsor.
There is also a trust factor. A CFO who trusts the person closing the books can spend their own time on strategy, M&A and the exit narrative. A CFO who does not trust the close ends up doing the close themselves. That is expensive use of the most senior person in the room.
What problem does the team hire solve for the board?
Speed and risk. A pre-tested trio compresses the time to reliable reporting, which is the single thing sponsors care most about in the early months.
It also reduces key-person risk. If your entire finance function sits in one head, a single resignation can stall a deal. Spread that across three, and the function keeps running.
We see this most clearly in buy-and-build. When the plan is to acquire and integrate several bolt-ons, one CFO cannot personally integrate every target's finance function. They need a controller who can standardise the close across entities and an FP&A lead who can rebuild the consolidated model after each deal.
For a fuller view of how we structure these mandates, our team at Harper May works with sponsors and boards on the whole leadership layer, not just the top seat.
Does hiring three people at once actually cost more?
On a single line, yes. On a total cost of ownership basis, often no.
The hidden cost of the lone CFO is the drag. Late board packs, forecasts the sponsor does not trust, a rushed hire made in month four out of desperation, and a CFO doing controller work at a CFO's price. Those costs rarely appear on a budget line, but they show up in a delayed exit or a discounted one.
The team approach front-loads spend to protect the timeline. Boards that think in terms of the whole hold period, rather than a single year's cost, tend to find the maths works.
The risk to manage is over-hiring. Not every business needs three. A stable, single-entity company with clean systems may need a CFO and one strong number two, no more. The discipline is matching the shape of the team to the complexity of the plan.
How should a board plan for this?
Decide the shape before you start the search. Map the value creation plan against the finance workload, then decide how many seats it truly requires. Bring that view to the CFO conversation early.
Give the incoming CFO a real say in the second and third hires, and a budget line that is already approved. Nothing frustrates a strong CFO faster than being promised a team and then made to fight for each role.
Start the wider search in parallel, not in sequence. If you wait until the CFO is in the door to begin, you have already lost the time advantage the model exists to create. You can see the kind of roles we run across the finance function on our current mandates.
The lesson is simple. In a short hold, finance leadership is a function, not a person. The boards getting clean reporting fast are the ones who hire it that way.
Common questions
Should every PE portfolio company hire a finance team of three?
No. The trio suits complex, fast-moving or acquisitive businesses. A single-entity company with clean systems and a stable plan may only need a CFO and one strong deputy. Match the shape to the plan.
Do the three hires have to come from the same previous employer?
Not at all. The common pattern is a CFO who brings one trusted person and hires the others fresh. What matters is a tested working relationship in at least one key seat, not a wholesale team lift.
When should the second and third roles be recruited?
Ideally in parallel with the CFO, or within the first ninety days. Waiting until the CFO has fully settled removes the time advantage the model is built to deliver.
