Not all interims are created equal. If you are hiring interim change or project expertise, the difference between a good one and a poor one is not visible on a CV – and it will cost you a quarter of the programme to find out.
Here is what actually separates them.
They hit the ground running
A good interim needs context, not handholding. They should be productive inside a fortnight – reading the landscape, identifying who actually makes decisions, and working out where the real constraints sit. If someone still needs managing after a month, you have hired capacity rather than capability.
They bring solutions, not just issues
Anyone can produce a RAG-rated list of what is wrong. That is the easy half, and it is often what a struggling programme already has plenty of. A good interim arrives with the problem and a recommended route through it, having already worked out what it would cost and who would need to agree.
They fit the culture, but are not afraid to challenge
This is the hardest balance. An interim who cannot read the organisation will be ignored. One who assimilates completely stops being useful – you brought them in precisely because they can see what people inside cannot.
The good ones earn enough credibility to be listened to, then spend it on saying the thing nobody in the room wants to say.
They focus on outcomes, not politics
Every large programme has politics. A good interim understands them well enough to navigate, but is not participating in them. They have no career to protect inside your organisation – which, handled properly, is one of the most valuable things about them.
They leave your team stronger, not dependent
This is the one that matters most, and the one least often checked for. The test is simple: when the interim leaves, can your team carry on?
A good interim transfers method, documents decisions, and makes sure someone internal owns each thing they set up. A poor one becomes indispensable – which looks like value while they are there and like a problem the day they leave.
The wrong interim
The warning signs are consistent:
- Talks a good game but cannot evidence delivery when asked for specifics
- Spends more time managing perceptions than moving the work forward
- Creates dependency rather than capability
- Presents problems upward without having thought about the answer
How we approach it
Change Specialists supplies proven change and project people into complex environments. Our test is the last one on the list: clients should be better equipped after an engagement than before it. We supply the capability; the client keeps the reins.
See how CS Flex works, or talk to us about the capability you need.
Further reading: Association for Project Management: what is change management