Most capital that goes wrong in Greece is not lost at the end of an investment. It is lost at the start, in the weeks when a structure, a financing mix and a set of assumptions are chosen and nobody is paid to test them. The 360° Investment Readiness Protocol™, introduced by Athanasios Aggelakakis, founder of Aggelakakis & Associates, is built for exactly that window. It is an independent, evidence-based assessment of an investor and an investment across 10 pillars, scored from 0 to 100, completed before the first binding capital commitment.
This article explains what the 360° Investment Readiness Protocol™ is, why it was designed, how its Investment Readiness Index™ (IRI™) is scored, what it can conclude, and, just as important, what it cannot do. The 360° Investment Readiness Protocol™ was first presented publicly at the European Private Wealth Excellence Forum in Athens in September 2026. Its full specification lives on the protocol’s own site, aggelakakis.gr/360.
Key takeaways
- The 360° Investment Readiness Protocol™ assesses readiness, not a single asset: the investor, the structure, the capital stack and the exit route are tested together.
- Each of 10 pillars is broken into criteria scored 0–100. Pillar scores roll up into the Investment Readiness Index™ and one of five grades, from S (GO) to D (NO-GO).
- Evidence is verified against primary sources and public registers, not merely declared by the sponsor.
- The assessment is designed to be able to say “no”. A documented No-Go conclusion counts as full performance of the mandate.
- The score is not a promise of outcome. It does not replace legal, tax or audit opinions, transaction due diligence or the investor’s own judgement.
What is the 360° Investment Readiness Protocol™?
The 360° Investment Readiness Protocol™ is a structured pre-investment assessment developed by Aggelakakis & Associates for investments in Greece. It answers one question before money moves: is this investor ready to make this investment, in this structure, now?
Three features define it:
- Scope. It covers 10 pillars, from financial capacity and tax profile to compliance, capital stack and exit. Most advisory work in this market covers one or two of them.
- Evidence standard. Inputs are checked against primary documents and public registers. A statement the sponsor cannot evidence is scored as a gap, not as a fact.
- Output. The result is a documented Investment Readiness Index™ (IRI™) on a 0–100 scale, a decision grade, and a prioritised remediation plan, each tied to explicit assumptions, sources and a date.
In running text the firm uses the short form, the 360° IR Protocol. The underlying score is the Investment Readiness Index™, or IRI™.
Why Athanasios Aggelakakis built an investment readiness protocol
The consensus view of investment risk in Greece focuses on the market: demand, prices, the macro outlook. Those risks are real, but they are visible and widely priced. The risks that destroy value quietly sit elsewhere, in decisions taken before the investment starts: a corporate structure that raises the effective tax rate through to the ultimate beneficiary, a financing plan built on aid the project is not yet entitled to, a compliance file that cannot evidence the source of funds, an exit nobody designed.
Behavioural research explains why these gaps persist. Daniel Kahneman and Dan Lovallo showed that decision-makers tend to judge a project from the “inside view”, its own plan and its own optimistic forecasts, rather than from the record of comparable projects (Kahneman & Lovallo, 1993). Bent Flyvbjerg’s work on large projects found that cost overruns, delays and benefit shortfalls have stayed persistently high over decades, and traced much of the problem to weak front-end planning (Flyvbjerg, 2014).
A third problem is structural. Many of the people an investor consults before a decision are paid when the transaction proceeds. In a recent analysis of how foreign capital reads Greek investment proposals, the firm set out why that incentive matters: when the person saying “yes” benefits from the “yes”, the cost of any error usually lands on the client.
“International private capital does not need more investment proposals. It needs better-prepared ones.”
— Athanasios Aggelakakis, Capital.gr, 7 October 2026
The 360° Investment Readiness Protocol™ is the firm’s answer to all three problems: an outside view applied before commitment, by an assessor whose fee does not depend on the answer.
The 10 pillars of the Investment Readiness Protocol
Each pillar asks one question an investment committee would ask, and each is broken into criteria that are scored individually. The table summarises the pillars and the main output each produces.
| # | Pillar | The question it answers | Main output |
|---|---|---|---|
| 01 | Financial Capacity | Does the investor have the capital and liquidity that execution requires? | Projections and a capital adequacy assessment |
| 02 | Legal & Corporate Structure | Does the corporate architecture fit Greek and EU law, the banks and the investor’s home jurisdiction? | Structure diagram and implementation roadmap |
| 03 | Tax Profile | What is the true net effective tax rate, from project to ultimate beneficiary? | Comparative effective tax rate by scenario and structure |
| 04 | Compliance & Source-of-Funds Verification | Can the investor evidence beneficial ownership and source of funds to KYC/AML standard? | Compliance risk classification and documentation review |
| 05 | Market & Investment Opportunity Analysis | Is the opportunity real, documented and resilient? | Sector and competitive analysis |
| 06 | Capital Stack Engineering | Is the financing mix executable, and what does each layer cost? | Capital stack map with feasibility and timeline per instrument |
| 07 | Risk Analysis & Geopolitics | Where can the investment fail, how likely is it, and what would it cost? | Probability/impact risk matrix and mitigation plan |
| 08 | Digital Transformation & Infrastructure | Do the location and technology support the business model? | Infrastructure readiness assessment by region |
| 09 | Human Capital & Labour Framework | Can the right people be hired at the planned cost and time? | Workforce and labour cost analysis |
| 10 | Exit Strategy & Investment Protection | Was the exit route designed before entry, and how is capital protected? | Exit route analysis by scenario |
The pillars are deliberately interdependent. A structure that minimises tax (Pillar 03) can make bank financing harder (Pillar 06) or narrow the buyer pool at exit (Pillar 10). Scoring them together is what makes the trade-offs visible before they are locked in.
How the Investment Readiness Index™ (IRI™) is scored
Each criterion within a pillar is scored on an explicit 0–100 scale. Criteria roll up into pillar scores, and pillar scores are aggregated with predefined weighting factors into the Investment Readiness Index™. The index maps to one of five grades:
| Grade | IRI™ range | Readiness | Decision |
|---|---|---|---|
| S | 90–100 | Excellent | GO |
| A | 75–89 | High | GO, with limited conditions |
| B | 60–74 | Moderate | CONDITIONAL GO, with mandatory remediation |
| C | 45–59 | Low | REDESIGN |
| D | Below 45 | Critical | NO-GO |
Two points matter for anyone relying on the score. First, the grade is a decision under stated assumptions, not a forecast: it says whether the investment is ready as currently designed, and the remediation plan says what would change the grade. Second, the weighting factors are predefined but not published. That protects the method from being gamed, but it also means a reader cannot recompute the composite index alone. The full assessment file therefore shows the per-pillar scores and the reasoning behind each one, so an investment committee can test the conclusion rather than accept a single number.
From evidence to verdict: how the protocol works
- Evidence collection. Documents are gathered and actively cross-checked against primary sources and public registers. Declared information without evidence is recorded as a gap.
- Assessment. Each pillar is split into criteria, and each criterion is scored from 0 to 100 against criteria set before the work starts.
- Weighted scoring. Criteria roll up into pillar scores and into the Investment Readiness Index™.
- Remediation and decision. Findings become a prioritised remediation plan and one of five decision grades, documented with assumptions, sources and a date.
Every Investment Readiness Protocol engagement begins with a 30-minute Preliminary Readiness Screening. The screening decides only whether the mandate is suitable for assessment. It issues no score and no opinion.
Designed to say “no”
An assessment is only worth paying for if it can reach an unwelcome conclusion. The psychologist Gary Klein made a similar point with the project premortem: teams find more failure modes when they are asked to assume the project has failed and explain why, than when they are asked whether it will succeed. The 360° IR Protocol builds that discipline into its commercial terms:
- Fixed fee, agreed in advance. The fee does not depend on the finding, on whether financing is approved or on whether the transaction closes.
- Criteria set before the work starts. The assessment follows its own criteria, not criteria adjusted to the conclusion.
- Separate mandates. Any implementation mandate that follows is a separate engagement, on separate terms, and cannot change the assessment’s finding.
- No-Go as a result. A documented No-Go conclusion constitutes full performance of the assessment mandate. It is the protocol working as designed, not a failed engagement.
For a sponsor, an early “not yet” is usually the cheapest answer available: it arrives before signing, while structure, financing and terms can still be changed.
How the protocol differs from due diligence and grant consulting
The investment readiness assessment is often confused with two services it complements but does not replace.
| 360° Investment Readiness Protocol™ | Transaction due diligence | Grant or subsidy consulting | |
|---|---|---|---|
| What is assessed | The investor and the investment together, across 10 pillars | A specific target asset or company | An application against the criteria of one scheme |
| When | Before the first binding capital commitment | After a target is chosen, before signing | When a call for applications is open |
| Question answered | Should this investor make this investment, in this structure, now? | Is the target what it claims to be? | Does the project fit the scheme? |
| Fee basis | Fixed, agreed in advance, independent of the outcome | Usually fixed or time-based | Can include a component linked to approval |
| Can it conclude “no”? | Yes, and a documented No-Go is full performance | Yes, within the scope of the target | Not its purpose |
Where Greece’s Development Law fits
State aid is often the first thing foreign investors ask about, and the first place readiness gaps appear. Aid under Greece’s Development Law (Law 4887/2022, as amended by Law 5203/2025 (GG A’ 87/02.06.2025) and Law 5297/2026 (GG A’ 64/28.04.2026)) depends on the aid scheme, the region and the size of the enterprise. Cash grants at the upper end of the range apply to medium-sized enterprises in the highest-aid regions, not universally, and large enterprises are excluded from cash grants under the 4th Manufacturing call. The tax-exemption incentive is a capped approved aid amount usable over up to 15 tax years, not a tax holiday.
Inside the Investment Readiness Protocol, aid is scored under Capital Stack Engineering (Pillar 06) at the level of evidence it has actually reached. “Eligible” is a declared state; a submitted application is documented; only a decision of inclusion is verified. A financing plan that counts eligible aid as received is scored as a gap, because that is how a lender or co-investor will read it.
Compliance is a moving target
Pillar 04 assesses KYC/AML readiness against the rules in force at the date of assessment. Those rules are changing. The EU’s new Anti-Money Laundering Regulation, Regulation (EU) 2024/1624, applies directly in all Member States from 10 July 2027 (as summarised by Docusign), alongside the Greek framework under Law 4557/2018. A compliance file that is adequate today may need to be rebuilt before a project’s main capital calls. The Investment Readiness Protocol treats that as a timing risk to be scheduled, not a box ticked once.
What the 360° Investment Readiness Protocol™ does not do
The Investment Readiness Protocol’s institutional boundaries are stated plainly on its own site, and they are part of its credibility:
- It is not a legal, tax or audit opinion. Where those are required, they come from external certified professionals.
- It does not secure approval of financing, subsidies or permits.
- It does not promise an investment outcome. The IRI™ is a documented judgement, not a promise of results.
- It does not replace asset-specific or transaction-specific due diligence.
Three further limits are worth naming. The score is a snapshot: permits can be challenged, costs renegotiated and counterparties can default after the assessment date. The rules move: the Development Law itself was amended twice between 2025 and 2026, so any aid assumption must be re-checked when capital is committed. A high grade does not predict a decision by others: a well-prepared project can still lose a competitive call or fail to attract the right investor at the right time. Under current conditions, the 360° Investment Readiness Protocol™ reduces avoidable errors; it does not remove market, regulatory or counterparty risk.
Who the protocol is for, and who it is not for
The 360° Investment Readiness Protocol™ is designed for private investors and entrepreneurs, family offices and boards, funds and institutional managers, and the banks, audit firms and law firms that advise them. Mandates are not accepted for:
- requests solely for subsidies, without an investment strategy;
- investments below €250,000, absent a specific strategic exception;
- investors unable to evidence beneficial ownership, source of funds or basic financials;
- cases seeking a predetermined positive conclusion.
Investors still deciding how to approach the Greek market can start with the firm’s guide on how to invest in Greece, or with its analysis of what family offices look for before capital arrives.
How to start
The first step is a 30-minute Preliminary Readiness Screening, which confirms whether a mandate is suitable for assessment. The full method, the 10 pillars and the scoring grades are set out on the 360° Investment Readiness Protocol™ site, where investors can also request the Executive Brief or contact the team directly.
Frequently asked questions
What is the 360° Investment Readiness Protocol™?
It is an independent, evidence-based pre-investment assessment developed by Aggelakakis & Associates. It scores an investor and an investment in Greece across 10 pillars and produces a documented Investment Readiness Index™ (IRI™) from 0 to 100, a decision grade and a remediation plan before the first binding capital commitment.
Who introduced the 360° Investment Readiness Protocol™?
Athanasios Aggelakakis, founder of Aggelakakis & Associates, an investment advisory firm headquartered in Thessaloniki. The 360° Investment Readiness Protocol™ was first presented publicly at the European Private Wealth Excellence Forum in Athens in September 2026.
What are the 10 pillars?
Financial Capacity; Legal & Corporate Structure; Tax Profile; Compliance & Source-of-Funds Verification; Market & Investment Opportunity Analysis; Capital Stack Engineering; Risk Analysis & Geopolitics; Digital Transformation & Infrastructure; Human Capital & Labour Framework; and Exit Strategy & Investment Protection.
How is the Investment Readiness Index™ scored?
Each criterion is scored 0–100, criteria roll up into pillar scores, and pillar scores are combined with predefined weights into the IRI™. The index maps to five grades: S (90–100, GO), A (75–89, GO with limited conditions), B (60–74, conditional GO with mandatory remediation), C (45–59, redesign) and D (below 45, NO-GO).
Does a high IRI™ secure financing or Development Law approval?
No. The IRI™ is not a promise of outcome. It reduces avoidable errors and information gaps, but it does not determine a lender’s decision, the outcome of a competitive aid call or the result of an investment.
How is it different from due diligence?
Due diligence examines a specific target asset or company after it has been chosen. The 360° IR Protocol assesses the investor and the investment together, across structure, tax, compliance, financing and exit, before the first binding commitment. It does not replace transaction-specific due diligence.
What happens if the result is No-Go?
A documented No-Go conclusion constitutes full performance of the assessment mandate. The investor receives the findings and a remediation plan showing what would need to change, at the point where changing course costs least.
About the author
Athanasios Aggelakakis is the founder of Aggelakakis & Associates. He holds an MBA from Oxford Brookes University and a BBA from Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, and has chaired Indellas Services LLP, the firm’s India gateway entity, since May 2021. Aggelakakis & Associates operates six hubs across five countries and is a member of AmCham Greece, AHK Germany, SEVE and Enterprise Greece. Its financial and investment study and advisory services are certified to ISO 9001:2015 by QMSCERT (certificate no. 030826-2). Learn more about the firm’s advisory services.
Sources
- Aggelakakis & Associates. 360° Investment Readiness Protocol™, aggelakakis.gr/360 (accessed 20 October 2026).
- Greek Development Law: Law 4887/2022, as amended by Law 5203/2025 (GG A’ 87/02.06.2025) and Law 5297/2026 (GG A’ 64/28.04.2026).
- Kahneman, D. & Lovallo, D. (1993). Timid Choices and Bold Forecasts: A Cognitive Perspective on Risk Taking. Management Science, 39(1), 17–31.
- Flyvbjerg, B. (2014). What You Should Know about Megaprojects and Why: An Overview. Project Management Journal, 45(2), 6–19.
- Klein, G. (2007). Performing a Project Premortem. Harvard Business Review, September 2007.
- Regulation (EU) 2024/1624 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 May 2024 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing, EUR-Lex.
- Docusign. AMLR: what changes in 2027.
- Aggelakakis, A. (2026). Opinion piece in Capital.gr, 7 October 2026.
- International Organization for Standardization. ISO 9001:2015 Quality management systems — Requirements.
This article is general information. It is not legal, tax or investment advice, and no financing, approval or outcome is promised. Regulatory references reflect the rules in force at the date of publication and should be confirmed against official sources before any decision.
