You may see the term entrepreneur in residence (EIR) bandied around from time to time. In the broad strokes, it simply refers to a person with extensive entrepreneurial experience interning with a private equity or venture capital fund to learn the game. The word interning is used loosely because EIRs (entrepreneur in residence) often have deep business experience and are really only interning to learn the distinct skills of a private equiteer or venture capitalist (deal making, running a fund, etc.)
The (entrepreneur in residence) EIR term triggers a question in my mind: how disparate are the skill sets of entrepreneurs and private equiteers? Also, irrespective of how disparate they are, how disparate should they be?
In times of unpleasantness (now), I really think private equiteers need to get their hands dirty. And, to be a part of the solution, rather than the problem, the private equiteer needs some serious entrepreneurial nous. Standing on the proverbial pedestal proclaiming to add value only via deal making is a sure way to differentiate your firm on the downside. Of course, someone still needs to run the fund from an administrative, regulatory and financial viewpoint, and this takes a specialist skill set, but your firm needs much more than that to differentiate in this market. Do you think an entrepreneur in residence make sense?