← chintan shingala / home case study 1 of 4
  CASE STUDY — CO-INVEST

From a single-client service to a product four GPs are trialling on live deals.

Role
PM, leading the Co-Invest squad
Starting point
zero external adoption
Approach
prototype-led, paired with GTM
Status
4 GP trials: 1 live, 1 implementing, 2 queued

The situation

The platform I inherited had been built by transcription: the flagship client described their process, and the previous owner digitised it, screen by screen. Nobody had asked what problems the users were solving with that process — or which of those problems a platform could solve better. The result was a workflow tool one organisation could use and nobody else would buy.

note: visuals on this page are redrawn concept illustrations — the real client work stays confidential.

the domain, in a sentence: a co-investment is when a fund's investors (LPs) are invited to put money directly into a specific deal, alongside the fund. the fund managers (GPs) run these raises deal by deal, usually against the clock.
fig. 01 — the arc
Diagram: a twelve-week timeline. A prototype feeds an iterate loop gathering input from five GPs across the market, ending in a cobalt box labelled sellable platform, system of record — ready to become AI-native.
decision 01

Mapping the process, not the client

We started over from the real co-invest raising process — mapped what we knew, then filled the holes by asking how it differs between a huge, mature organisation and a smaller GP. That line, universal versus org-specific, became the product's foundation: features that work across both went to the core; the rest was treated as configuration, not product.

the alternative we rejected: keep extending the flagship client's digitised workflow and hope other GPs happened to work the same way.
decision 02

One feature, two verdicts

In-platform messaging made the tension concrete. Our flagship client was a hard no — easier questions meant more questions, and their IR team would drown. Smaller GPs loved it: for them, LP questions were a scattered, unmanaged mess, and one organised channel was the pitch. Same feature, opposite verdicts — and the resolution wasn't to pick a side. It became a core theme of the product: flexibility and configurability, so the platform holds both truths.

Getting those verdicts at all was its own decision: I paired with our GTM lead as one unit — every feature entering the prototype tied to the problem it solved, every demo framed to gather the next round of evidence.

the alternative we rejected: treat the flagship client's no as the market's no.
decision 03

The integrations line

Integrations impress — they show technical ability and feel like service. They're also where complexity compounds fastest, and we'd learned that the hard way. So we set a commercial rule and held it: no new integrations for trial clients. If a client is paying, we integrate; if they're trialling, the product has to win on what it is.

the alternative we rejected: build integrations to sweeten trials — and let four free clients each pull the roadmap in a different direction.

Where it landed

Relationships opened the doors — that credit belongs where it belongs. What converted conversations into commitments was the product: GPs who previously wouldn't engage described the prototype as a game-changer, and four have committed to trials on live co-investment deals — one live today, one in implementation, two queued. For organisations of this size, that's notable in itself: procurement normally takes a full RFP or implementation process. From zero external adoption, with the prototype doing the convincing.

A prototype in one room aligns a client. The same prototype in ten rooms reveals a market.
from: how i think about building