We’re happy to share the latest in AltsTech’s series profiling how investment managers are using AI, tech, and analytics to generate alpha. We’re fortunate to interview Noriatsu Furukawa, Founder & CEO of Growth Partners Co., Ltd. We met via Coolwater Capital, where I was formerly a Partner.
David Teten: Please share an overview of your firm.
Growth Partners is a private equity firm founded in 2022 focused on the Japanese middle market. Based in Tokyo, we invest in both listed and unlisted companies and combine capital with hands-on value creation support.
Our core themes include succession solutions, group carve-outs and restructurings, MBOs, and growth capital for companies stepping into their next stage. Rather than simply providing capital, we work closely with management teams on strategy, M&A, organization and HR, operational improvement, and digital transformation, with the aim of driving sustainable, long-term value creation.
Our PIPEs Fund I was $USD62m. We are currently fundraising for Buyout Fund I: $USD10m committed to date + approx. $USD14m in co-investments (total currently ~USD 86m including co-investments). We are sector-agnostic within the Japanese middle market.
David Teten: Who are your peers/competitors, and how do you differ?
Our natural peer group is Japan-focused middle-market private equity managers and engagement-style funds investing in Japanese listed companies.
Within that landscape, we emphasize three things in particular:
- Integrated capital and hands-on support
We do not stop at executing investments. We stay deeply involved in designing and implementing mid-term business plans and key strategic initiatives.
- Flexible structuring across listed and private situations
We can work across minority stakes in listed companies, full buyouts of private businesses, and situations that may move between listed and unlisted status, tailoring structures to the needs of each company.
- A genuinely long-term orientation
We think on a 10-year horizon rather than optimizing for a short-term window. That means we focus not only on quick fixes or cost reductions, but also on growth investments and organization-building that matter over the long run.
David Teten: What’s your background? How and why are you in your role today?
I studied astrophysical fluid dynamics at the Department of Earth and Planetary Physics, Faculty of Science, the University of Tokyo, and then moved on to the Graduate School of Information Science and Technology at the same university, where I researched high-speed robot hands and high-speed vision. My work received several awards at international conferences, and I also spent time conducting research at MIT’s Computer Science & Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CSAIL).
I joined McKinsey & Company in Japan in 2007, where I advised clients across a range of industries—semiconductors, electronics, pharmaceuticals, retail, financial services (banking and insurance), and private equity—on topics such as corporate and international strategy, productivity improvement, supply chain management, and commercial due diligence.
From 2010, I served as an investment professional at Advantage Partners / Advantage Advisors, working as a lead investor on multiple funds with approximately $USD 533m in total AUM. Over the years, I have led around 40 investments with roughly JPY 100 billion of capital deployed, and have served as a board member for both listed and private companies. My focus has been on value creation: strategy development, add-on acquisitions, international expansion, new business launches, operational improvement, cost reduction, and management control enhancement.
I founded Growth Partners in September 2022 and currently serve as CEO. Drawing on both my consulting and private equity experience, I try to design “strategy, capital, and execution” as one integrated system—leading the full cycle from investment thesis formation and execution through to hands-on value creation.
David Teten: What are the tools you’re using for your front office: sourcing, LP relations, investing analysis, etc.? What are the strengths and weaknesses of these providers?
We use slightly different approaches and tools for listed versus private opportunities.
- Listed company research
For listed companies, we primarily use Shikiho Online and SPEEDA. These tools allow us to analyze earnings trends, valuation metrics, industry structure, and news flow, and to screen for candidates that fit our investment themes. The depth of Japan-specific data and ease of use are key strengths. At the same time, we believe that qualitative aspects—such as governance, management’s appetite for change, and alignment—can only be truly understood through direct dialogue with management teams.
- Private and succession deal sourcing
For private and succession situations, we mainly rely on introductions from Japan M&A Center, other M&A intermediaries, and our broader personal and professional networks. Trusted intermediaries and individual introductions help us deeply understand business owner backgrounds and motivations. The trade-off is that the timing and richness of information can be highly dependent on counterparties.
- LP relations
For LP relations, we do not yet use a dedicated CRM system. We manage communication history and meeting notes primarily via email and Excel. This is simple and flexible, but as we grow, we see clear benefits in moving toward a more structured, sharable CRM environment.
- Investment analysis
Our investment analysis and financial modeling are performed almost entirely in Excel. Excel remains very flexible and well-suited to the nuances of Japanese accounting and deal structuring. However, we are keenly aware of the risks of personalization and version control, and are therefore working on template standardization and review processes to mitigate those risks.
David Teten: As you research CRM options, I suggest look at What is the Best CRM and Marketing Tech Platform for a New Private Equity/Venture Capital Fund?
What are the tools you’re using for supporting your portfolio companies? What are the strengths and weaknesses of these providers?
 When supporting portfolio companies, we care less about “which tool” and more about “whether everyone is looking at the same numbers and facts.”
For management control and KPI visibility, we primarily use Excel today. Each portfolio company has different accounting systems and reporting practices, so we usually start by creating a common Excel format to capture revenue composition, profitability, and key KPIs. Once that foundation is in place and the need becomes clear, we consider introducing BI or more advanced tools at the portfolio company level.
For communication and project management, we try to adapt to each portfolio company’s existing environment. For chats and online meetings, we commonly use Microsoft Teams, Zoom, Google Meet, or whatever tools the portfolio company already uses. Project management is often handled with simple Excel-based task and progress lists at this stage.
For document sharing, we mainly use OneDrive and SharePoint. Internally, we use Teams for meetings, LINE WORKS for internal chat, and Slack for communication with external advisors, while storing files centrally on SharePoint. The goal is to make it as easy as possible to find “where the relevant materials live” for any given project.
David Teten: What technologies/databases have you found helpful in winning LPs? (I wrote about this in Why Isn’t Sales As Efficient As Online Dating and Fundraising hacks for VC and private equity funds.)
In fundraising, relationships still matter more than technology. At present, many of our LP conversations originate from our existing network and direct introductions.
At the same time, we are gradually expanding our global LP network. For example, we recently participated in a cohort program run by Coolwater Capital, often described as a “Y Combinator for emerging fund managers.” Coolwater provides an institutional-grade training platform for building and scaling investment firms, and through that program we joined LP events in New York. These opportunities help us understand how international investors view the Japanese middle market, while also allowing us to introduce our strategy and track record.
We are not yet using sophisticated newsletters or marketing automation at scale. For now, we emphasize high-quality, one-on-one communication through meetings and emails.
David Teten: What tools do you find helpful for expediting due diligence?
For both listed company investments and buyout transactions, we follow a standardized due diligence (DD) process. While each deal is tailored to its specific context, the core steps, reference materials, and role allocation are defined in advance in our internal manuals and sample documents.
For accounting, tax, and legal DD, we rely on request lists prepared by external experts. For business DD, we prepare our own request lists. In both cases, we leverage request lists and Q&A from prior deals as templates, then add deal-specific topics on top. This “standard template + deal-specific add-ons” approach helps us balance speed with thoroughness.
For information sharing, we typically use a virtual data room (VDR) arranged by the financial advisor in buyout deals. For listed company situations and other cases, we sometimes use SharePoint or other cloud storage. In either case, we define folder structures and file naming conventions upfront to avoid confusion about “who puts what, where.”
For long, text-heavy documents—such as contracts and internal policies—we sometimes use ChatGPT to generate first-pass summaries and surface potential issues. Humans still make all final judgments, but AI helps reduce the initial review burden and flags points that deserve closer attention.
David Teten: What are the tools you’re using for your middle office: tracking, risk management, etc.? What are the strengths and weaknesses of these providers?
Our middle office primarily focuses on (1) process management from DD through closing, and (2) maintaining key information about portfolio companies and the fund.
At the deal level, for both listed and buyout transactions, we use our internal manuals to drive a consistent process. We create Excel-based checklists on SharePoint that cover:
- key stakeholders at the DD kick-off stage,
- timelines for legal, financial, and business DD, and
- milestones from contract drafting and negotiations through documentation and closing.
Clearly defining “who does what, by when” in advance makes it easier to manage toward closing, especially when multiple internal and external parties are involved.
At the fund level, we currently manage basic data such as investment amounts and ownership percentages in Excel, and aggregate by sector or deal type as needed. Rather than introducing a dedicated portfolio management system from day one, we are first focusing on process, folder structure, and template standardization so that information is consistently stored in the same format and location.
David Teten: What are the tools you’re using for your back office: settlements, records maintenance, accounting, human resources, etc.? What are the strengths and weaknesses of these providers?
Our back office team consists of two people, but most recurring tasks are already automated. Manual work is largely limited to truly one-off or highly bespoke tasks.
We use freee Accounting for our bookkeeping and financial reporting, and freee HR & Labor for payroll and HR-related processes, managing everything from journal entries and financial statements to payroll and social insurance procedures in the cloud. For time and attendance, we use Air Shift to manage shifts and working hours, again with a focus on minimizing manual input.
For overall back-office task management, we use Microsoft Planner, sharing ownership, deadlines, and progress between the two team members. We have also integrated Planner with Power Automate, so that emails in Outlook or messages in LINE WORKS that meet certain conditions automatically generate tasks. This reduces the need to manually register tasks after reading messages and helps prevent things from falling through the cracks.
For highly specific, one-off tasks, we still rely on flexible tools such as Excel. Over time, we aim to identify patterns even within those tasks and progressively expand the scope of automation.
David Teten: A huge amount of valuable data flows through your pipes. What are you doing to capture that data and mine it? Can you share any patterns you have identified?
We would not claim to have a fully built, advanced analytics database yet. Instead, our current priority is to standardize processes and deliverables for each type of deal, and to store them in a way that is easy to reuse.
For both listed and buyout transactions, our internal manuals link:
- each step in the process,
- the relevant templates and examples from past deals (presentations, Excel models, memos, etc.), and
- the appropriate storage locations on SharePoint.
When a new deal starts, this manual serves as the starting point.
For deal pipeline and post-investment KPIs, we are similarly focusing on standardizing Excel formats and data fields so the same items are captured in a consistent way. The number of completed deals is still not large enough to run highly rigorous statistical analysis, so we see this as groundwork for future analytics rather than an already-complete system.
That said, from a practitioner’s perspective, we are seeing some emerging patterns, such as:
- deals where roles, responsibilities, and processes are clearly written down and shared in advance tend to experience less confusion and smoother execution;
- portfolio companies that regularly review KPIs and action items in a structured management meeting setting are less likely to deviate significantly from the original value creation plan.
Going forward, we hope to combine this “on-the-ground intuition” with the data accumulated through our manuals and templates, and validate these patterns more systematically.
David Teten: Do you see any room to use AI to exploit your dataset? If so, what are you doing to move that forward?
We see significant potential for AI and have already begun integrating it into day-to-day work.
We use the ChatGPT Team plan to ensure that internal information does not leak externally. Usage frequency varies by individual, but we strongly encourage active use. Typical applications include drafting emails and English-language content, performing first-pass reviews of contracts and internal policies, and generating draft code for automating back-office tasks.
Looking ahead, we would like to structure and index our deal memos, DD reports, and board materials so that we can quickly answer questions like, “What did we discuss in similar past cases, and what actions did we take?” In that sense, we see AI not as a replacement for human decision-making, but as a tool to organize knowledge and provide recommendations.
David Teten: What are the most creative or unusual ways you’re using AI & analytics in your organization?
We might not have any “headline-grabbing” use cases yet, but we are steadily accumulating small, practical applications.
For meetings, we use Teams Maestro to automatically transcribe and summarize discussions, and then use those outputs as the basis for organizing action items and key takeaways. For written materials, we often ask ChatGPT to generate first drafts of investment memos or email texts, and then refine them ourselves. This reduces time spent on “blank page” work and frees up more time for actual thinking and discussion.
In short, we try to let AI handle document drafting and organization, so that humans can focus on judgment and communication.
David Teten: What are your unmet technology needs? Places in your firm where you’re seeking a solution and haven’t found an appropriate one?
Our biggest technology challenge is that we still rely heavily on Excel. Across front, middle, and back office, Excel’s flexibility is extremely valuable—but for that very reason, complexity and personalization can easily build up around it.
Ideally, we would like a platform that can natively integrate data along four axes—deals, funds, LPs, and portfolio companies—in a structured way. However, given the bespoke nature of private equity work and the specifics of Japanese accounting, tax, and governance, it is not straightforward to cover everything with off-the-shelf software.
David Teten: What processes are you focused on improving?
Our primary focus right now is knowledge management. As our team has grown this year, we have been creating manuals for each deal type that outline the standard process, key checkpoints, and reference documents.
This helps ensure that past learnings do not remain only in the heads of specific individuals, but can be reused as an organizational asset. It also makes it easier and faster for new team members to ramp up. Over time, we would like to combine these manuals and deal records with AI tools so that we can quickly answer questions such as, “What are the relevant precedents for this deal?” and “What risks should we pay particular attention to in this kind of situation?”
David Teten: The US and Europe have a vibrant ecosystem of technology service providers who are happy to automate many aspects of the investment process. Does Japan lack that ecosystem? If so, does that imply a Japan-specific market white space that founders should be filling?Â
Compared to the US and Europe, we feel that Japan still has relatively few technology and service providers that are vertically focused on the needs of middle-market private equity managers. There are plenty of horizontal tools available – cloud storage, e-signature, collaboration platforms, generic workflow tools – but there are not many truly end-to-end solutions that natively fit Japanese PE workflows, regulations, and local accounting/tax practice.
In that sense, we see several clear areas of white space in Japan, for example:
–integrated deal and portfolio management systems that can properly handle Japanese GAAP and tax concepts;
– tools that make it easy to collect standardized data even from mid-sized companies that may not yet have sophisticated internal systems; and
– knowledge management and search platforms that handle Japanese-language documents and content at a high level.
From a user’s perspective, we would very much welcome more Japan-specific solutions in these areas in the coming years.
David Teten: To what extent are Japanese LPs nudging, pushing, or requiring Japanese investors to use modern analytics and AI internally?
At this point, we have not had Japanese LPs explicitly ask us to use particular analytics or AI tools, nor have we seen formal requirements in that direction. The main focus from LPs is still on governance, alignment of interest, track record, and the quality of the team.
That said, based on what we see in global markets, we expect that questions around how managers collect and use data will gradually become more common. For example:
–how we monitor portfolio KPIs;
–how we understand and manage risk at the fund level; and
–how we ensure consistency and traceability in our decision-making processes.
Our intention is not to wait until these become formal requirements. Instead, we would like to build our data and technology infrastructure ahead of time, so that when LPs do start asking more detailed questions, we are already in a position to provide clear, well-documented answers.Â
David Teten: How are you looking to raise your level of internal use of tech? Hiring different staff, hiring consultants, bringing in trainers, etc.?
Given our current size, our first priority is to raise the digital and AI literacy of the existing team, rather than immediately building a large in-house engineering organization. We are doing this in three main ways:
- Embedding tools directly into daily workflows.
We use tools such as ChatGPT Team, Teams Maestro, and Microsoft Power Automate in very concrete day-to-day tasks – drafting investment memos and emails, summarizing meeting discussions, and automating back-office workflows. The idea is that people “learn by doing” as part of their normal work, rather than treating these tools as something separate to study.
- Codifying and standardizing processes and templates.
We are standardizing deal manuals, Excel formats, and document structures so that information is captured in consistent locations and formats. This makes it much easier to layer automation, search, and analytics on top of those processes. Our focus is first on “getting the basics organized” before building more sophisticated systems.
- Building automation mostly in-house while actively using SaaS.
For workflow automation and simple tooling, we currently design and implement most of the solutions internally, rather than outsourcing to external developers. At the same time, we actively use external SaaS products where it makes sense, such as freee Sign for electronic signatures, and integrate them into our internal processes to improve productivity.
Over the medium term, as our AUM grows, we expect to consider hiring team members with stronger data or engineering backgrounds and providing more formal training where appropriate. Even then, our philosophy is that technology should be tightly linked to real day-to-day workflows, rather than being run as a separate “IT project” on the side.
