🤖 #41: Vivian's Deeptech Insider: Your decisions are smarter than your strategy

Hello and welcome to the #41 edition of the fortnightly Vivian's Deeptech Insider.

I've been thinking about patterns a lot in the new year.

Have you ever looked back at your last five years of decisions and realised they were all pointing towards the same thing - even though you had no idea at the time?

I didn't grow up thinking "I want to bridge science and commerce." That wasn't a career plan I wrote down at 18.

But when I look back now? Every single decision connects.

I started in VC at Uniseed, investing in university spinouts. Then I left to do my PhD at Cambridge - went deep into the science world. Then I became an entrepreneur, built businesses, learnt what actually moves commercial needles. And now I'm coaching, sitting on boards, helping technical founders make that same translation from lab to market.

It all connects around one thread: translating complex science into commercial outcomes.

But I didn't see it whilst I was living it.

When I made the decision to leave VC and do a PhD, I wasn't thinking "this will complete my journey." When I started my first company, I wasn't thinking "this will teach me lessons I'll distil into a methodology." I was just following what felt right.

The story was writing itself the whole time. I just couldn't see it from inside it.

Why this matters for you

I see the same thing with the technical founders I work with.

Not the story they tell about their journey. The story their actual decisions reveal.

And here's what's interesting: sometimes the pattern they're living is smarter than the plan they're executing.

A founder will tell me they're building towards one outcome - usually whatever they wrote in their pitch deck. But when I look at what they're actually prioritising, where they're spending time, what they keep coming back to even when it "doesn't make sense" - it reveals something different.

Not wrong. Different.

The founder who discovered her actual path

I worked with a healthtech founder who was convinced she was building a B2B diagnostics platform for hospitals. That's what her pitch deck said. That's what made logical sense.

But every time we talked, she kept circling back to the patient experience. She'd get animated talking about direct-to-consumer applications, then catch herself: "but that's not the business model."

When I asked her to map her last 18 months of actual decisions - not the strategic plan, but what she actually chose to do - a pattern emerged:

• The features she prioritised: patient-facing UX

• The partnerships she pursued: consumer health apps

• The conversations that energised her: direct patient impact

• The team she hired: consumer product specialists

Her decisions were writing a DTC story. Her pitch deck was telling a B2B story.

What if your instincts are smarter than your strategy? What if you've been telling the wrong story the whole time - telling the story you think investors want to hear, instead of the story you actually want to build?

Six months later, she pivoted. Raised a seed round specifically for DTC. Her energy completely shifted.

The pattern was there the whole time. She just needed permission to see it.

What your decisions are telling you

This is the work I find myself doing more and more: helping technical founders look at the decision trail they've actually created and figure out what they actually want and if the story they’re telling matches with their actions.

Because sometimes the pattern reveals:

"You're building towards a different exit than you think." Your pitch deck says technical trade sale, but every decision optimises for commercial scale and IPO. Maybe that's misalignment. Or maybe your instincts know something your strategy hasn't caught up to yet.

"The 'distraction' is actually your direction." You keep getting pulled towards partnerships that don't fit your current business model. What if that's not distraction? What if that's signal?

"You're following inherited advice instead of your own pattern." Everyone said you need commercial traction, so you're building sales infrastructure. But every decision that actually excites you is about technical validation. Maybe "everyone" is wrong for your specific path.

The three questions that matter

When I work with technical founders, this is where we start:

1. What have you actually been choosing?

Not what your strategic plan says. What have you genuinely been prioritising when you had limited time and resources?

Look at:

• Where you spend your time naturally (not where you force yourself)

• What conversations energise you vs. drain you

• Which opportunities you say yes to even when they're "off strategy"

• What you keep coming back to even when it doesn't make sense

2. What pattern does that reveal?

When you look at those actual choices, what thread connects them?

Sometimes it's obvious: "I keep gravitating towards technical depth over commercial breadth."

Sometimes it's subtle: "I keep saying yes to B2B deals but all my energy goes to consumer insights."

Sometimes it's uncomfortable: "The exit I'm building towards doesn't match what I told my investors."

3. Is that pattern something to lean into or course-correct?

Sometimes the pattern reveals you're on exactly the right path - you just haven't articulated it clearly. The work is naming it and making it your explicit strategy.

Sometimes the pattern reveals you're being pulled somewhere that doesn't serve your goals. The work is recognising it and choosing to course-correct.

And sometimes the pattern reveals your goals are wrong. Your decisions have been smarter than your plan. The work is updating the plan to match reality.

Why this is strategic, not philosophical

You might think this sounds like navel-gazing. It's not.

This is the most strategic work you can do.

Because misalignment between your stated strategy and your actual decision pattern means:

• You waste time executing a plan you're not committed to

• You waste money building capabilities that don't serve where you're going

• You confuse your team about what actually matters

• You frustrate your board who watch you say one thing but prioritise another

• You miss your exit because you spent years building the wrong proof points

This is expensive. And entirely preventable.

Where exits come in

The most common pattern I see? Technical founders whose decision trail reveals they're building towards a fundamentally different exit than they've articulated.

They say "technical trade sale to pharma" but every decision optimises for commercial scale.

They say "commercial exit or IPO" but every decision optimises for technical depth and academic validation.

None of these are wrong. But the misalignment is expensive. That’s why it’s never too early to have clarity on what “success” looks like (both commercial aka exit and from your vision/mission perspective).

Because here's what most technical founders don't realise: there are fundamentally different types of exits, and they require completely different proof points.

A technical trade sale needs scientific superiority, defensible IP, and the right team. Revenue is often noise. Commercial infrastructure might hurt you.

A commercial exit needs market demand, scalable operations, and growth trajectory. Your IP matters as a moat - they're buying your business model.

An IPO needs governance, predictable revenue, institutional investor story. Your tech matters, but so do your financials.

Same company. Completely different decision trails.

Most founders don't realise they've been walking down the wrong path until they're 18-24 months in and someone asks "why did you prioritise this?" and they don't have a good answer.

What to actually do with this

In this new year, do this exercise:

Map your last 12 months of decisions.

Not your strategic plan. Your actual choices.

• What did you hire for?

• What features did you prioritise?

• What partnerships did you pursue?

• Where did you spend your runway?

• What conversations excited vs. drained you?

• What "distractions" kept pulling you away?

Look for the pattern.

What thread connects these choices? Not the thread you wish was there. The thread that's actually there.

Ask: Is this pattern something to lean into or course-correct?

Three possibilities:

The pattern is right, your articulation is wrong. Your decisions are smarter than your pitch deck. Update your strategy to match where you're actually going.

The pattern is wrong, your goals are right. You're being pulled off course. Consciously course-correct towards your stated exit.

Both are wrong. Your stated strategy doesn't match your actual goals, and your decisions reveal confusion. The hardest place to be - but most valuable to recognise.

All three are valid. What's expensive is operating with misalignment and pretending it's not there.

My question for you

As we start 2026:

What story are your decisions telling?

Not the story in your pitch deck. Not the story you think you're supposed to be living.

The actual story your choices have been writing.

Because that thread? That's what you're building towards - whether you've named it yet or not.

And the clearer you can see it, the more strategic every decision after this becomes.

What story are your decisions telling? Hit reply and let me know what you're discovering.

Until then,

Vivian

P.S. Applications for the March 2026 Capital Catalyst cohort have opened. If you're realising there's misalignment between your stated strategy and your actual decision pattern - or you're not sure what your realistic exit options are - that's exactly what we fix. We help technical founders (who's raised $250K–$5M) see the pattern their decisions are revealing and build strategic clarity around where they're actually going. Limited to 10 founders - check the link.

P.S.S. Was this forwarded to you? Read past issues and subscribe here.

P.S.S.S. Are we connected on LinkedIn? I’m here.

If you have gotten value out of Vivian’s Deeptech Insider, please help us grow by sharing it with your friends!