Skip to main content
TransferOS · Free self-assessment

Key-Person Risk Scorecard

Key-person risk is the chance that a business's performance depends on one person's judgment and relationships — usually the owner's — rather than on transferable systems. This scorecard measures it for owner-dependent SMB acquisitions, before close or in the first 90 days: fifteen questions, answered at the pattern level, scored 0–100.

Please do not paste customer names, employee communications, transcripts, contracts, invoices, account exports, payroll, health, or payment records anywhere. This scorecard collects nothing — scoring happens entirely in your browser and nothing you select is sent to us.

1.Does the seller personally approve exceptions, discounts, refunds, or special terms?

0 = not present · 5 = deal-shaping

2.Would employees struggle to override normal pricing without the seller?

0 = not present · 5 = deal-shaping

3.Are important customer relationships handled differently from what records show?

0 = not present · 5 = deal-shaping

4.Are rework, complaint, or escalation decisions routed through the seller?

0 = not present · 5 = deal-shaping

5.Are vendor choices, credit, delivery timing, or trust rules mostly informal?

0 = not present · 5 = deal-shaping

6.Does scheduling or dispatch depend on tacit knowledge of crews, customers, or routes?

0 = not present · 5 = deal-shaping

7.Are there workflows where "ask the seller" is the real process?

0 = not present · 5 = deal-shaping

8.Would exporting the last 50 examples of key workflows from your systems be hard?

0 = not present · 5 = deal-shaping

9.Are invoices, estimates, jobs, tickets, or CRM notes too inconsistent to reconstruct cases?

0 = not present · 5 = deal-shaping

10.Is seller/operator time for targeted correction limited after close?

0 = not present · 5 = deal-shaping

11.Is the buyer under LOI, close to closing, or within the first 90 days post-close?

0 = not present · 5 = deal-shaping

12.Could findings affect price, holdback, earnout, APA terms, transition support, or go/no-go?

0 = not present · 5 = deal-shaping

13.Is the authority path for a metadata review unclear or not yet established?

0 = not present · 5 = deal-shaping

14.Would the first read need to touch sensitive data classes to be useful?

0 = not present · 5 = deal-shaping

15.Is post-close operating continuity a top-three concern for this deal?

0 = not present · 5 = deal-shaping

How to read your score

0–29 · Low urgency
Key-person diligence probably is not urgent for this deal, or the timing is not right yet.
30–49 · Worth watching
Real dependency signals that may not be deal-shaping yet — a short conversation can tell you whether a narrow first read makes sense.
50–74 · Real risk
Owner dependency is likely to affect price, holdback, transition support, or post-close stability — a Qualification Audit can tell you what is reconstructable before you rely on it.
75–100 · Acute dependency
The seller may effectively be the operating system. Before close is the time to test what can be reconstructed — after close, leverage and memory both fade fast.

/100

0/15 answered

This score is a conversation starter, not advice. It is not legal, valuation, quality-of-earnings, lending, HR, tax, or operational guidance, and a high score does not mean “do not buy” — it means key-person risk may be deal-shaping and worth testing with evidence.