For fund managers launching and operating investment vehicles, partnering with an independent trustee is fundamental. External trustees provide governance, oversight and structural integrity. Yet beyond these technical functions sits a less tangible, but increasingly decisive factor: cultural alignment between trustee and investment manager. In an environment shaped by regulatory scrutiny, global capital mobility and long investment horizons, alignment influences not only how structures are built, but how risks are assessed and decisions are made.
This Q&A explains why culture has become central to SILC’s strategy and global expansion plans. It draws on SILC’s operating experience, insights from Harvard Business School’s Owner/President Management (OPM) program as well as recent Harvard Business Review research on family enterprise and customer alignment.
Q. How would you describe SILC’s culture, and how does it align with your fund manager clients?
SILC was founded in February 2011 to address a clear market gap for private markets and alternative fund managers seeking both trustee and administration capability within a governance-led framework. From inception, the business plan was deliberately structured to combine strategic discipline with flexibility, allowing the firm to remain opportunistic where outcomes were demonstrably value-accretive for clients, without compromising independence or standards.
Our culture is shaped by private ownership and founder leadership. That matters because it embeds long-term thinking into daily decision-making. Many of our fund manager clients are themselves privately owned or founder-led, which creates a natural cultural alignment. We tend to share similar perspectives on stewardship, reputation and the responsibility that comes with managing long-duration capital on behalf of investors.
Rather than operating as a transactional service provider, we invest time in understanding a manager’s strategy, governance philosophy and growth aspirations. This enables us to design fund and portfolio solutions that are fit for purpose today, but robust enough to scale over time. The objective is not volume, but durability with structures that support managers through multiple fund vintages and market cycles.
Another aspect that is not often recognised is that our activities as an independent trustee are often forward looking. We take preventative measures on behalf of investors, both through the fund establishment phase (for new funds) and on an ongoing basis. This is in contrast with many other fund service functions such as fund administration and auditing which deal with live or historical information.
Q. With increasing industry consolidation, do you see benefits or risks in moving from private ownership to a larger corporate model?
Scale can deliver short-term operational efficiencies and capital access. However, Harvard Business Review’s research on family enterprises highlights a recurring risk: in the pursuit of corporatisation, firms can unintentionally dilute the very attributes that differentiate them: trust, continuity and long-term relational capital.
SILC’s experience aligns strongly with this research. Our owner-led structure allows us to operate professionally without losing accountability or proximity to clients. We do not confuse professionalisation with bureaucratisation. Instead, we focus on building institutional-grade governance, systems and controls while preserving a culture of partnership and responsiveness.
Importantly, private ownership does not mean static ownership. In our global business plan, we are actively developing long-term incentive pathways to ensure key team members can participate in the firm’s success. This reflects a core OPM principle: sustainable enterprises balance founder vision with institutionalisation of talent, governance and incentives over time.
Q. How does company culture influence the type of clients SILC chooses to work with?
Culture is central to client selection. We are deliberate about prioritising long-term alignment over short-term revenue opportunities. Harvard Business Review’s analysis of “sales debt” underscores the risks of pursuing revenue without customer fit. These risks include increased complexity, hidden costs and ultimately weaker client outcomes.
In practice, this means we prefer to partner with fund managers who value governance, transparency and continuity. Managers who view governance as a compliance formality often struggle to extract full value from an independent trustee and administration relationship. Conversely, aligned managers tend to see SILC as a strategic partner, one that contributes to investment discipline, investor confidence and reputational resilience.
This selectivity has shaped SILC’s growth profile, but it has also contributed to strong client retention and the ability to support managers as they scale across jurisdictions and product lines.
Q. How do HBS OPM learnings influence your approach to growth and governance?
A consistent theme throughout the OPM program is the distinction between building revenue and building enterprise value. Sustainable firms invest early in governance, people, and infrastructure, even where that investment moderates short-term profit.
SILC’s business model reflects this philosophy. Rather than pursuing a “more deals” strategy, we are building an infrastructure-led platform designed to support the full fund lifecycle. This includes fund structuring, governance, administration, placement support through aligned partners and intended future capabilities in reporting and liquidity. The objective is to create a durable ecosystem that compounds value over time for clients, staff and investors.
Q. How do you define SILC’s service model — high-volume or high-touch?
We operate deliberately between the two extremes. The Australian trustee market is bifurcated between large, volume-driven providers and small specialist boutiques. SILC positions itself as a mid-market, institutional-grade provider, typically servicing fund managers with assets between $50 million and $1 billion.
This hybrid model combines scalable systems and global partnerships with a high-touch, relationship-driven service ethos. It reflects a conviction reinforced through both experience and research: complexity and fiduciary responsibility in private markets demand engagement and judgement that cannot be fully commoditised.
Q. How does this model support SILC’s global ambitions?
SILC’s global strategy is to extend this mid-market internationally through a carefully selected partnerships and federated network approach. The focus is on alignment and ensuring our partners share SILC’s governance standards, incentive structures and long-term orientation.
By prioritising cultural and strategic fit, we believe SILC can grow globally without sacrificing independence or service quality. This mirrors the “family-to-family” logic identified in HBR research, where shared values and long-term commitment create resilient cross-border relationships that outperform purely transactional models.
Q. How is SILC contributing to broader discussions on fund governance?
Recent industry failures and increasing regulatory scrutiny have sharpened focus on governance standards in private markets. As an independent trustee, SILC advocates for transparency, structural independence and clear accountability, particularly in the wholesale sector where investor protections can vary materially.
This philosophy extends beyond our own operations. SILC is a founding member of Wholesale Investor Advocacy Australia (WIAA) where I serve as Chairman, and is an industry initiative aimed at developing clearer governance benchmarks, certification standards and thought leadership for wholesale investment markets. The objective is not additional regulation for its own sake, but stronger industry-led standards that enhance confidence and long-term integrity.
For SILC, governance is a strategic asset — one that supports better decision-making, stronger partnerships and more resilient outcomes for fund managers and investors alike.
