Barry Ritchie is the Chief Investment Officer at a London-based firm, Norn Ventures specialising in venture and private capital. With over 20 years of global investment experience, he has led capital deployment strategies across healthcare, technology, and emerging markets. Barry has a proven track record of raising and managing multi-million-pound funds, sourcing high-growth opportunities, and working closely with founders to scale disruptive businesses. His work spans both institutional and private investors, and he plays a key role in structuring complex deals and forming long-term capital partnerships. Barry is also actively involved in thought leadership and market commentary, sharing insights on innovation, capital formation, and the evolving role of alternative investments in the global economy.
In an era where capital flows freely across asset classes and borders, investment funds remain a mainstay of diversified portfolios. From private equity to venture capital, infrastructure to real estate, funds offer access to opportunities otherwise unreachable by individual investors. But as the market matures and investor expectations sharpen, a quiet shift is underway — one that raises fundamental questions about how capital is pooled, managed, and deployed.
The traditional fund structure, despite its ubiquity, is increasingly being scrutinised. It’s not that funds are inherently flawed — far from it — but that the assumptions underpinning them often lag the expectations of today’s investors. CIOs, family offices, and private clients are becoming more selective, not only about the assets they back but the structures through which they invest.
The Transparency Challenge
One of the most significant issues is transparency. Many investors in closed-ended or blind pool funds have little insight into how their capital is allocated until long after commitments are made. The standard quarterly reporting cycle, while familiar, often lacks detail and context. By the time problems emerge — a missed milestone, a write-down, a change in management — the capital is already locked in.
In a world driven by real-time data, the opacity of fund reporting feels increasingly out of step. Investors are asking sharper questions: What is the deal pipeline? Who are the decision-makers? How are investment opportunities sourced, and what filters are applied?
The demand isn’t unreasonable. In public markets, visibility is near-instant. Shouldn’t private capital begin to mirror that expectation, at least in principle?
Fee Structures and Alignment
The second key concern is alignment of interest. Traditional “2 and 20” models — 2% management fees and 20% carry — were originally designed to incentivise performance. But they’ve also drawn criticism for allowing managers to profit regardless of outcome. In tough market cycles, some investors feel they’re underwriting overheads more than performance.
What many investors are now seeking is a genuine risk partnership. That could mean reduced base fees, greater emphasis on performance-based incentives, or co-investment by managers alongside LPs. In other words: don’t just manage our capital — treat it like your own.
To their credit, some newer funds are experimenting with more investor-friendly models. Deferred fees, hurdle rates, and clawback mechanisms are becoming more common, but progress remains uneven across the industry.
Sourcing: The New Differentiator
In private markets, especially in venture capital and early-stage investing, deal flow is everything. Historically, LPs have had limited access to the inner workings of sourcing and selection. That’s changing. As capital becomes more commoditised, access to high-quality, proprietary opportunities is now the key differentiator.
Investors increasingly want to know: Is this fund participating in oversubscribed rounds, or leading them? Are the opportunities inbound, or the result of decades of relationship-building? Are managers chasing trends, or cultivating overlooked areas with real, patient conviction?
This is particularly relevant in sectors such as healthcare, deep tech, or climate, where domain expertise and long-term networks are essential for successful navigation.
The Rise of Strategic Capital
Another emerging theme is the rise of strategic capital — investors who want more than just financial exposure. Increasingly, CIOs and sophisticated LPs seek insight, influence, and proximity to innovation. They want to sit closer to the action: joining advisory boards, contributing market knowledge, or forming strategic partnerships that benefit both capital and company.
This preference stands in contrast to traditional blind pools, where the investor experience can feel abstract and detached. As a result, more capital is moving toward direct deals, syndicates, or bespoke mandates that offer control, flexibility, and a front-row seat to value creation.
Time Horizons and Liquidity
It’s also worth considering the tension between illiquidity and trust. Investors understand that private market investing requires patience. But the decision to lock up capital for 8–10 years (or longer) requires an unusual degree of confidence — not just in the strategy, but in the individuals behind it.
This is why team composition and track record have become more important than ever. Investors are less swayed by brands and more focused on people: Who is actually managing my capital? What’s their background, their reputation, their network?
Where trust is strong, investors are more comfortable with long-dated strategies. But where opacity persists, the desire for liquidity — or at least optionality — grows louder.
What Comes Next?
None of this is to suggest the fund model is obsolete. But the market is clearly asking for more evolved, investor-aligned structures. That includes:
- Increased transparency into pipeline, process, and performance
- Flexible fee models that better match risk and reward
- Visible alignment between managers and investors
- Stronger access to high-quality deal flow, particularly in niche sectors
- More optionality in terms of liquidity and co-investment rights
While these changes are gradual, they reflect a deeper shift in how sophisticated investors view their capital — not just as a passive allocation, but as a strategic instrument.
A Final Word
As CIOs, we are stewards of capital — not just for returns, but for the values and principles our capital represents. In an increasingly complex world, it’s not enough to chase yield or diversify risk. We must also consider how we invest: the structures, relationships, and philosophies that shape each commitment.
The good news? A new generation of fund managers is emerging — more transparent, more aligned, and more investor-centric. For those of us entrusted with deploying capital at scale, now is the time to engage with these innovators, ask the hard questions, and champion models that truly reflect the best of what long-term investing can be.