Everyone in venture seems to says the same thing: “Our strength is the network”, and it’s usually (partly) true. But there’s a gap we don’t talk about enough: having a network doesn’t mean being able to use it.
Over the past year, the concept of Platform has started to come up more often in Italian VC. We’ve also written about it recently: “Platform” is everything that happens after the investment - the systems, the people and the processes that help startups grow. The idea is simple: shift from dealmaking to creating real value for your target.
Makes sense right? But if you move past the definition, a more practical question comes up: what does it actually look like, day to day?
Because if you zoom in on how things work in practice, most networks behave in a very similar way: they’re large, valuable… and not that easy to activate. You know the right people are there in your network, but you don’t always know who to call. This way, introductions happen only when something comes to mind, when you stumble on the right topic with the right person over dinner, by chance, when serendipity does its thing. In the end, support depends a lot on timing, context, and - let’s be honest - a bit of luck. There’s rarely a real system behind it.
I think I can speak for all Network Managers out there, when I say that the challenge is not access. It’s relevance.
This is where the conversation around Platform becomes more concrete - and interesting too. It’s not really about doing more events, or more community building, or adding new layers of “support”. It’s a lot more operational than that.
It starts from a very simple (and often underrated) question: what does this startup actually need right now? Not in broad terms, but in very specific ones: which new commercial channel do they need to open in the next month? Which corporate clients to they need to meet right now? Which market should they be testing? Once you look at it this way, the problem shifts. It’s no longer a matter of “who do we know?”, but rather: who can actually help on this specific need? How do we find them quickly? How do we make that connection happen in a meaningful way, so that it actually leads to something? How do we make this repeatable?
That’s the real difference between having a network and building a platform. A network is there. A platform is something you can actually use: it’s less about access, more about activation.
For us at IAG, this wasn’t a theoretical exercise. We’ve always had a strong network:
hundreds of angels, founders, operators, plus a much broader extended layer of connections. And still, a lot of that value was sitting there, not fully leveraged. Not because people weren’t willing to help - they were! But we were lacking a structured way to do these three simple, yet essential tasks:
- understanding our startup needs - not in a generic way, but in very specific terms;
- navigating the network: not only our angels, but their own valuable connections as well;
- activate the right people at the right time, to ensure the intro actually led to something.
So the work we’re doing now is less about growing the network, and more about making it usable.
Which, in practice, means: mapping skills, experience and relationships in a way that’s actually searchable; working closely with founders to understand their real priorities; activating targeted connections (not just “intro for the sake of intro”); and building a bit of visibility around what works, so it’s not just a one-off success story.
You start seeing the difference in small, very concrete situations. A founder is trying to enter a new vertical, but doesn’t have access to the right decision-makers: one targeted intro leads to a first pilot that would have taken months to unlock.
Another team is struggling to get in front of enterprise clients. Through the network, a few well-placed introductions turn into real conversations - and eventually into some of their most important customers.
Nothing extraordinary, on paper. But these are the moments where things actually move, and companies get real traction.
It’s still early, especially in Italy, where venture has historically been more focused on accessing deals than on building systems around them. But expectations have been changing lately. Founders don’t just look for capital anymore, they look for partners who can help them move faster - in very concrete ways. In the end, the difference won’t be who has the biggest network. It will be who knows how to use it.
Capital might get you into the best deals - but what you do after is what really makes you count as an investor.