Our sector itself demands agility. Grants come and go, projects have their peaks and troughs, and opportunities arise with tight deadlines. We want to direct every euro we can toward what really matters: the people we work for. We embrace the sharing economy for cars, meeting rooms, accounting software, and joint purchasing cooperatives. We know that we can’t train, mentor, and help someone grow in every discipline.
And yet we hesitate when it comes to temporary leadership or expertise. Bringing in an external leader or senior expert on a temporary basis is still uncommon in many nonprofits and social-profit organizations, or is seen as a last resort. That’s hard to reconcile with the logic we apply in all other areas. It’s time to turn that hesitation into action.
Many forms, one logic
Hiring interim leadership or senior expertise comes in many forms. Sometimes it involves someone temporarily filling a vacant position: the CEO who is leaving, the business leader who is retiring, or the operations manager who is taking a sabbatical. Sometimes someone joins for a defined sprint: a fundraising specialist who launches a major campaign, a business developer who secures new partnerships, a CFO guiding an organization through a transition, a specialist leading an audit process, or someone implementing new legislation. Sometimes, someone supports the initiation of a merger, the launch of a new product line, or the rollout of a revised strategy.
And sometimes it involves periodic involvement: a senior finance professional who joins the management team for two days each month and keeps the CEO focused on the numbers, or an HR professional who works with the team one day a week. Same logic, different frequency: full-time presence for a defined period, or limited presence on an ongoing basis.
What all these roles have in common is that they are senior positions, closely aligned with the executive board or management team, with the authority to help make decisions or see them through. These roles often hold titles such as “head of,” “director,” or “lead specialist.” The specifics vary by organization and at any given time. The role adapts to whatever is needed.
Temporary and part-time: both have their place
Temporary presence and part-time presence are often mentioned in the same breath, and it’s helpful to consider them separately. Temporary means being fully present for a defined period—often a few months, sometimes longer. The arrangement has a clear beginning and end. Part-time means being present on a limited basis on an ongoing basis—a fixed day per week, two days per month—an arrangement that can last for years.
Both forms are valuable, and organizations often combine them. Temporary employment works well for sprints, transitions, and defined projects. Part-time employment works well for expertise you need on an ongoing basis but where a full-time hire isn’t the right fit, or for a role that will never be filled full-time in your organization. And a temporary assignment can, provided both parties agree, evolve into a longer-term commitment with a different schedule.
My own practice illustrates this. I’ve been working with four organizations for more than five years now, taking on assignments that expand and contract in line with the organization’s needs. Sometimes it’s intense for a few months; other times, it’s just a few days a month. Officially “temporary,” but in practice a long-term partnership. Quite consistent for someone who is formally designated as “external.”
“I’ve been working with four organizations for more than five years, taking on assignments that expand and contract depending on the organization’s needs.”
What Your Organization Gains
Bringing in an outside leader or expert on a temporary basis pays off in several ways.
- Speed of deployment. A recruitment cycle can easily take four to six months. For a project with an approaching deadline, that’s simply not feasible. An experienced external consultant can be at the table within a week, bringing a proven track record with them. They’ve already mastered the basics, so they can focus immediately on your specific challenge.
- Keeping up with deadlines that keep shifting. Project bottlenecks often arise because the existing team is already overloaded. The external consultant focuses their attention and time on a single specific project and meets the deadline that the internal team had been pushing back for months.
- A breather for the team. Preparing for an audit, drawing up a multi-year budget, translating new legislation—it’s always one more thing to deal with. Whoever takes on that burden gives employees the breathing room they need to focus on the work they’ve chosen to do.
- Independence and a fresh, critical perspective. An external party operates outside the organization’s sphere of influence. As a result, it asks questions that have long been avoided internally, brings to light issues that had been left unaddressed, and identifies patterns that were dismissed internally as self-evident. Confidentiality is strictly maintained.
- Recognizing patterns from other contexts. Anyone who has worked with multiple organizations knows how similar challenges have been addressed elsewhere. That frame of reference often saves months of research and helps you get to the heart of the matter more quickly.
- Knowledge that sticks. A good external consultant comes in to make herself redundant. She helps design the process, writes templates, trains internal staff, and establishes a rhythm that continues even after she leaves. What was initially dependent on a specific person becomes the organization’s own.
- A bridge to a permanent solution. If it turns out that a new hire is needed later on, you’ll have bought yourself some time in the meantime to refine the job profile. The external contractor documents her work, hands it over to the new colleague, and ensures a smooth transition.
- More robust management information. An audit process or multi-year budget developed under external guidance often provides the first genuine management information that the board and executive management can use to steer the organization consistently. That quality endures, even after the process is complete.
Not a wolf in sheep's clothing
The hesitation I often hear sounds like the fear that you’re bringing in something that appears harmless but ultimately undermines your autonomy, drains your budget, or leaves your organization disengaged. The image of a wolf in sheep’s clothing. In practice, however, the opposite is true—but on one condition: you establish the framework in advance.
Putting the Contest in Perspective
An external expert costs more per hour than a permanent employee. At first glance, that seems correct. But when you add up the total cost, a different picture emerges. A permanent employee costs much more than the gross salary listed on the pay stub. Employer contributions, vacation pay, year-end bonus, sick days, training budget, laptop, cell phone plan, insurance, onboarding, support from HR and accounting—it all adds up. Factor in the time it takes for someone to get up to speed, transition back after leave, or leave the company.
An external provider sends a single invoice. That invoice covers the entire cost. You pay for what you use. What you don’t use stays out of your budget. Given the rates that apply in our industry, that counts double. And when the expertise lasts for two to three months, any comparison becomes irrelevant anyway.
Loyalty is at the heart of the relationship
We automatically associate intention, loyalty, and knowledge with an employment contract. Those who hire full-time get someone who “truly chooses the organization.” Those who hire temporary workers get someone who “is just here for a little while.” That reflex runs deep in our industry, yet reality points in the opposite direction. Loyalty lies in people, in the relationship, and in the work you do together. A dedicated contractor who has been working with your organization for years often provides more continuity than an employee who leaves within six months.
The Sharing Economy Paradox Within Our Own Ranks
In the nonprofit and social profit sectors, we’re fans of the sharing economy as long as it happens outside our own organizations. For our target groups, we advocate for sharing rather than owning, for collaboration rather than fragmentation, and for solidarity rather than every man for himself. At the same time, we want every manager on our own payroll, and we feel uncomfortable when a fellow organization shares a director or expert. That paradox contributes to our hesitation, and it’s healthy to acknowledge it honestly.
A good framework makes all the difference
Temporary leadership or expertise is most effective when clearly defined: a clear mandate, agreed-upon start and end dates, and a focus on the handover from day one. Without those parameters, even the best approach will fizzle out into a non-committal arrangement, or it will imperceptibly turn into a permanent stopgap solution that neither party wants. A good external consultant will ask for those parameters herself, because her business model stands or falls on the value she leaves behind. So, not a wolf—but a professional who leaves as soon as the work is done.
The pitfalls I see in practice are always linked to a lack of that framework: a mandate that’s too broadly defined, a deadline that keeps getting pushed back, insufficient alignment with the company culture, or no plan for what comes after the external consultant’s engagement. If you agree on these four points in advance, you’ll avoid most of the risks.
What This Work Brings Me
To be honest: this work helps me grow, too. With every new organization, I see different systems, different choices, and different challenges. I’m able to understand more quickly what’s specific to each organization and where the sector as a whole is struggling. I share best practices whenever possible; confidential information stays within the walls where it belongs.
I enjoy working on an interim basis as a managing director, business leader, and sometimes in an operational role. I like to get my hands dirty. That brings dynamism, speed, and the feeling that I can truly make a difference. It allows me to forge business connections between organizations that need each other.
Why Choose S&L
The fact that I’m doing this through S&L is a conscious choice. It’s a collaborative space where a group of experts work together for the benefit of the sector. In practical terms, that means: learning from colleagues, being able to call on a colleague when the assignment calls for it, and checking in with someone who has different experience. Working strategically while strengthening organizations from within—all in one go. I strongly believe in that. Together, we’re helping to build a different narrative for and with civil society. Today’s society demonstrates the need for this every single day.
In conclusion
Which positions require continuity on the payroll? Which temporary leadership roles or areas of expertise are fully staffed or have limited availability? That question deserves an open discussion at the boardroom table. The answer varies by organization.
The internal logic of our sector has been pointing in the same direction for years. We demand flexibility, we channel every euro we can toward content, we can’t train someone for every discipline, and we believe in sharing. Hiring temporary leadership and expertise fits into this same line of reasoning. Our reservations don’t fit with it.
Let's put our hesitation aside. It's just common sense, and it's high time we dared to call it that.
