The difference at a glance
What a provider does, and what it costs
Interim providers hold a pool of a few hundred to a few thousand interim managers, take a requirements profile from you and deliver two to four profiles within days. They handle the pre-selection, the contract, the invoicing, and they supply a replacement if the manager drops out. For all of that they take a margin on the day rate, usually 20 to 35 percent. The manager receives the remainder.
That is a real service, not a con. A company that fills ten interim mandates a year needs a provider, because nobody in procurement wants to search individually every time. A company looking for a rare specialisation, say payroll expertise for a specific system in a specific country, needs the pool. And a company whose procurement rules require a framework agreement with a service company, because sole traders cannot be contracted, has no choice. For international subsidiaries this last point often comes from headquarters, and it is worth checking early whether the rule is a rule or a habit.
What runs differently on the direct route
30 minutes, not with an account manager describing my profile. You notice yourself whether it fits.
The day rate is the day rate. No stage in between that needs a share.
A service agreement between your company and Nick's Advisory. What it says, we both negotiated.
Feedback, changes and conflicts go direct. No provider moderating or delaying between us.
The honest disadvantage: you see one profile, not three. If I am not the right fit, I say so on the first call, but I cannot push a colleague from a pool after me. If I am absent, I am well enough connected to propose someone, but I do not promise a guaranteed replacement.
Which route fits when
How to check the fit without a provider
A provider filters, but it does not know your company. In 30 minutes you can check more than a requirements profile does. Ask about a concrete situation from an earlier mandate that resembles yours, and listen for whether a story comes back or a slide. Ask what I do not do, and whether an answer comes. Read the case studies and the reviews, both public. And use the trial phase: the first four weeks can be ended by either side at short notice. A provider promises a replacement. The direct route promises that after four weeks you know whether it fits.
Worked on both sides: as a permanent employee who commissioned interim providers, and as an interim manager who works direct. More about me
Frequently asked questions
What does an interim provider actually do?
It places managers from a pool and takes a margin for it, usually 20 to 35 percent on the day rate. Contact runs through the provider, not directly, and the provider supplies a replacement if the manager drops out.
When does a provider still make sense?
When you want to compare several candidates side by side, when you need a rare specialisation that a single interim manager does not cover, or when your procurement department insists on a framework agreement with a service company.
Do I lose quality assurance without a provider?
References and experience can be checked directly on the first call, without a provider filtering for you. You speak from the first minute with the person who takes on the mandate and see for yourself whether it fits.
What happens if you are unavailable and no provider supplies a replacement?
For a short illness nothing is charged, because only days worked are invoiced. For a longer absence I am well enough connected to propose a colleague, but I do not promise a pool. That is the honest disadvantage of the direct route.
Can I combine both?
Yes. Some companies request two profiles through a provider and a third directly, and compare. That is legitimate, and I am happy to lose to a better profile.