£180k CIO vs £25k Fractional: Why Smart UK Businesses Choose the Latter
The recruitment consultant's email landed in my inbox last Tuesday with the subtlety of a brick through a window: "CIO position, London-based financial services firm, £230,000 basic plus benefits package."
I forwarded it to a client who'd been debating whether to hire a full-time technology leader or continue with fractional services.
His response was immediate: "That's more than our entire technology budget for the next three years."
Welcome to the strategic technology leadership dilemma that's keeping UK small business owners awake at night.
You know you need a proper IT strategy. You understand that "Dave from IT handles the computer stuff" isn't sustainable as you scale from 20 to 50 employees. But the financial reality of C-level hiring makes your accountant develop a nervous twitch.
Here's the conversation most business owners never have: what if the expensive option isn't actually the better option?
Please pull up a chair, it’s time for some uncomfortable mathematics.
The £250,000 Question Nobody Wants to Answer
When you see that recruitment email advertising £230,000 for a CIO position, you're not just looking at salary numbers. You're staring at opportunity cost, cash flow impact, and recruitment risk all bundled into one expensive decision that could define your business trajectory for years.
Let's examine what £250,000 actually buys you in today's UK market. An experienced CIO in London commands between £180,000 and £250,000 in base salary. If you want someone with both IT and security strategy expertise, add another 20-30% to those figures. Then comes the multiplication effect that catches most business owners off guard.
Employer National Insurance contributions add 13.8% of the salary. Pension contributions range from 3-12% depending on your scheme. The benefits package includes healthcare, a company car (if applicable), and professional development costs. Recruitment fees typically run 15-25% of the annual salary for senior roles. Then there's office space, equipment, and the administrative overhead that nobody calculates until it's too late.
Your total annual commitment? Somewhere between £220,000 and £350,000 for genuinely experienced technology leadership.
But here's the question that should make every business owner pause: when you're investing that much money, what percentage of their time actually delivers strategic value to your business?
What Your Quarter-Million-Pound Executive Does All Day
I spent two decades as that expensive full-time executive. Government departments, private sector organisations, the entire corporate technology leadership journey. I know exactly where those costly hours disappear, and the reality might shock you.
Pure strategic thinking occupies maybe 20-30% of a full-time executive's schedule at best. This includes technology roadmap development, vendor strategy, risk assessment, and the future-focused planning that actually moves your business forward. The remaining 70-80% of their time gets consumed by corporate overhead that doesn't advance your strategic objectives.
Administrative activities dominate 30-40% of most executives' calendars. Internal meetings, status updates, budget reporting, HR-related activities, team management, governance compliance, audit preparation, and endless documentation. Then there's operational firefighting, which typically consumes another 20-30% of their time. Escalation handling, crisis response, vendor issues, project oversight, and day-to-day problem solving that keeps systems running but doesn't create a strategic advantage.
Political positioning rounds out the schedule, unavoidably consuming 10-20% of their time. Board presentations, relationship building, external networking, industry engagement, and corporate representation activities that maintain their executive status but don't necessarily benefit your business objectives.
The uncomfortable truth? You're paying £250,000 annually for roughly 50-75 hours of actual strategic thinking per month. The rest is administrative theatre and corporate maintenance that doesn't move your business forward.
The Fractional Alternative That Changes Everything
Now imagine what happens when you strip away everything except pure strategic value delivery. The fractional model eliminates corporate overhead and focuses exclusively on the strategic thinking you actually need.
A fractional CIO engagement typically involves 8-10 hours monthly of 100% strategic focus. No administrative overhead, no corporate politics, no time wasted on internal positioning. When they're working on your business, they're solving strategic problems and making decisions that impact your competitive position.
The annual investment ranges from £15,000 to £30,000, depending on complexity and scope. When you calculate the cost per hour of actual strategic thinking, the mathematics becomes fascinating. You're paying roughly the same hourly rate for strategic expertise, but you're not subsidising corporate bureaucracy and political manoeuvring.
The fractional provider delivers immediate access when strategic decisions require expert input, scalable engagement that grows with your business needs, and concentrated expertise without the overhead that dilutes value in traditional employment arrangements.
Why the Best Executives Often Choose Fractional Work
Most business owners assume that fractional providers represent some "second choice" professionals who couldn't secure full-time positions. That assumption reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of what drives senior executives toward fractional engagement.
“After 20 years in corporate leadership roles, I made a deliberate transition to fractional work. Not because full-time opportunities weren't available, but because I preferred solving strategic problems over managing internal politics. The fractional model attracts result-focused executives who value intellectual challenge over corporate security.”
Fractional work provides exposure to diverse business challenges across multiple industries, a focus on results and problem-solving rather than corporate positioning, variety and intellectual stimulation from different business models, merit-based relationships where value delivery determines success, and professional autonomy that enables strategic decision-making without bureaucratic interference.
Traditional full-time roles appeal to executives who prefer embedded company culture and long-term relationships, enjoy corporate security and structured career progression, find satisfaction in team building and internal organisational development, and want to dedicate themselves to single-company strategic evolution over extended periods.
Neither approach is inherently superior. They attract individuals with diverse personality types and professional motivations. The key insight is that fractional work often attracts the most results-oriented executives who prefer strategic impact over administrative management.
The Tale of Two Strategic Approaches
Last year, I observed two remarkably similar organisations make different leadership choices. The contrast highlighted exactly why smart businesses are increasingly choosing fractional over full-time technology leadership.
A Leeds law firm with 45 employees hired an experienced IT Director at £140,000 annually. Exceptional professional with a strong technical background, but they spent six months learning the company operations and culture before developing comprehensive strategic plans. By month 9, they had delivered solid strategic roadmaps. The Year 2 outcome showed that excellent strategic leadership was fully embedded within the organisation.
Their total Year 1 investment reached £180,000, including recruitment, benefits, and setup costs. Strategic output during Year 1 remained moderate due to learning curve impact, but Year 2 delivered high-value strategic leadership with complete organisational integration.
Meanwhile, a Manchester consultancy with 50 employees engaged a senior fractional CIO at a rate of 10 hours per month. They began with a comprehensive current-state assessment and delivered a strategic roadmap within 8 weeks. Ongoing strategic guidance and vendor management continued throughout the engagement period.
Their total Year 1 cost was £24,000 for fractional services. Strategic output during Year 1 was high with immediate impact, and Year 2 continued delivering high-value strategic evolution without embedding costs.
Both approaches succeeded, but the speed of impact and cost-effectiveness created dramatically different value propositions. The Leeds firm got embedded leadership that grew with their culture. The Manchester firm got immediate strategic results that accelerated their competitive position.
When Full-Time Leadership Becomes Essential
Understanding when full-time technology leadership becomes genuinely necessary helps clarify when fractional approaches deliver superior value. Full-time leadership becomes essential when complexity exceeds what a fractional capacity can manage effectively.
This includes multiple major technology projects that require daily coordination, highly regulated industries that demand dedicated compliance oversight, complex legacy system integrations that necessitate full-time management attention, and large-scale cybersecurity operations that require constant monitoring and response capabilities.
Internal dynamics sometimes demand embedded leadership for significant organisational change management requirements, complex stakeholder relationships that require daily relationship building and maintenance, large internal teams that need continuous development and skills building, and company cultures that require embedded technology advocacy and educational leadership.
Scale considerations justify full-time investment when technology budgets exceed £500,000 annually, IT teams grow larger than 8-10 people requiring management coordination, multiple locations require technology strategy coordination, and revenue models depend directly on technology innovation and competitive advantage.
For most UK SMBs with 10-100 employees, these conditions don't exist. What you need is strategic guidance, vendor management, risk oversight, and expert decision-making support. What you don't need is someone managing internal politics or attending three daily meetings about procurement processes that could be handled more efficiently.
The Quality Assumption That Costs Money
Business owners often assume that full-time executives automatically provide higher quality than fractional providers. This assumption deserves careful examination because it's frequently wrong and always expensive.
High-calibre full-time executives typically choose organisations aligned with specific career objectives, often specialise in particular industries or company sizes, may prefer corporate security and structured advancement paths, and sometimes avoid the uncertainty and variability that characterises fractional work arrangements.
High-calibre fractional executives typically prefer variety and exposure to diverse business challenges, often possess broader experience across industries and company sizes, focus on results-driven work rather than corporate administration, and must deliver immediate value to maintain ongoing client relationships that depend entirely on performance outcomes.
Both models attract excellent professionals with different motivations and working preferences. The strategic question becomes which model provides better value for your specific business requirements and growth trajectory, not which produces inherently superior professionals.
The Hybrid Approach That Maximises Value
The most effective technology leadership often combines internal capability development with external strategic expertise in ways that amplify both components. Your internal team handles day-to-day operations, system administration, user support, technical troubleshooting, and implementation of strategic decisions. They develop company-specific knowledge and relationship management while focusing on operational excellence and continuous improvement initiatives.
The fractional executive contributes strategic planning, roadmap development, vendor evaluation, risk assessment, compliance oversight, procurement guidance, technology trend analysis, future-focused recommendations, crisis response support, and escalation decision-making that requires senior expertise.
This hybrid model delivers strategic expertise without full-time salary overhead, internal capability that understands your business context intimately, a scalable approach that adapts to changing business requirements, and professional development opportunities for internal staff that wouldn't exist with purely internal or purely external approaches.
The Evaluation Process: Most Businesses Mishandle
If you're considering fractional technology leadership, the selection process determines whether you receive transformational value or expensive disappointment. Most businesses approach this evaluation incorrectly, resulting in poor outcomes that reinforce negative assumptions about fractional services.
You need to evaluate genuine senior-level experience rather than rebranded consulting, specific examples of strategic decisions and measurable outcomes rather than theoretical knowledge, industry knowledge relevant to your business challenges rather than generic expertise, a communication style compatible with your organisational culture, and a demonstrated track record of cost optimisation and vendor management that produces measurable results.
Conduct meaningful evaluation by beginning with a specific project like current state assessment, requesting detailed recommendations with clear business justification, evaluating communication clarity and strategic thinking quality, checking references from organisations similar to yours, and assessing cultural alignment with your internal team dynamics.
Warning signs include generic recommendations that could apply to any business, an inability to provide specific strategic examples with measurable outcomes, a primary focus on selling additional services rather than solving immediate problems, template-driven approaches without consideration of business context, and unrealistic promises of immediate transformation that indicate a poor understanding of strategic implementation realities.
The Birmingham Manufacturing Success Story
Six months ago, a Birmingham manufacturing company faced exactly the decision you might be considering. Their technology landscape included a legacy ERP system that constrained business growth potential, inconsistent cybersecurity across multiple operational locations, a lack of a strategic plan for technology investments or evolution, and IT support from an external MSP with minimal strategic input capabilities.
Three options demanded consideration. Hire a full-time IT Manager at £80-100,000 annually with limited strategic experience but dedicated availability. Engage a senior fractional CIO at £28,000 annually with a proven track record and strategic expertise. Continue the current approach and hope for gradual improvement through existing arrangements.
They chose fractional strategic leadership. Results after six months included a comprehensive technology roadmap aligned with business growth objectives, an ERP replacement strategy with a clear implementation timeline and budget planning, a cybersecurity framework meeting insurance and compliance requirements, and vendor relationship optimisation that saved £15,000 annually in redundant services and improved contract negotiations.
Investment analysis showed £14,000 in fractional services over six months, £7,500 in immediate vendor savings during the same period, creating net strategic investment of £6,500 for transformational strategic guidance. The comparative value represented a technology strategy that would require £80,000 or more in full-time hiring to achieve similar outcomes.
The business owner's assessment was unequivocal: "Best technology investment we've ever made. We accessed senior-level strategic thinking without senior-level salary commitment, and the results exceeded our expectations in both speed and value delivery."
Your Strategic Decision Framework
Choosing between full-time and fractional technology leadership requires an honest assessment of your actual business requirements rather than assumptions about what you think you need. Choose full-time leadership when technology is fundamental to your business model and revenue generation, you manage large internal teams requiring dedicated leadership development, complex regulatory requirements demand embedded daily expertise, and strategic projects require constant management oversight and coordination.
Choose fractional leadership when you need strategic guidance more than daily administrative availability, budget constraints make full-time hiring financially challenging, current technology requirements don't justify full-time investment, and you want to evaluate strategic leadership quality before making permanent commitments.
Choose a hybrid approach when you have capable internal technical staff needing strategic direction, a business growth trajectory may eventually justify full-time leadership, and you want to develop internal capabilities while accessing external expertise that accelerates strategic development.
The Investment Mindset That Changes Everything
Stop thinking about technology leadership as a personnel expense. Please start thinking about it as a strategic business investment that determines your competitive position and growth potential.
Full-time technology leadership represents high upfront investment with embedded organisational capability, long-term commitment with gradual strategic development, and comprehensive coverage with administrative overhead inclusion that may or may not benefit your strategic objectives.
Fractional technology leadership represents a scalable investment with immediate strategic impact, delivery, flexible engagement, and results-focused value delivery, along with strategic expertise without unnecessary administrative overhead that dilutes value and increases costs.
No technology leadership represents hidden costs through poor strategic decisions and reactive responses, missed opportunities due to inadequate strategic planning, and increased risk exposure from inadequate expert guidance that could threaten business continuity.
The fundamental question becomes whether you can afford to continue making technology decisions without strategic expertise, not whether you can afford to invest in strategic guidance.
Your Decision Point Assessment
Use this framework to evaluate your technology leadership requirements systematically. Assess your current state by examining whether technology decisions align strategically with business objectives, whether you have comprehensive plans for technology evolution and scaling, whether security and compliance requirements receive adequate attention, and whether current systems will support your business growth projections effectively.
Evaluate your requirements by determining how many hours of strategic guidance you actually need monthly, what level of daily availability is essential versus merely convenient, whether your internal dynamics are complex enough to require embedded leadership, and whether your technology complexity justifies dedicated full-time management.
Analyse the economics by calculating the true total cost of full-time hiring, including all overhead, identifying what strategic problems fractional services could address immediately, determining the current price of technology inefficiencies and poor decisions, and projecting how much improved strategic decisions would save annually.
Validate your approach by engaging fractional services for a specific project or comprehensive assessment, evaluating strategic thinking quality and practical recommendation value, assessing cultural compatibility with your internal team dynamics, and measuring immediate impact on technology decision-making effectiveness.
The Reality Smart UK Businesses Recognise
Technology leadership isn't optional for growing businesses. The choice is between strategic guidance and expensive reactive mistakes that compound over time and limit growth potential.
Full-time executives provide embedded capability at premium investment levels. Fractional executives provide focused expertise at practical investment levels. Both approaches can succeed, but the question is which provides superior value for your specific business requirements and growth trajectory.
What's increasingly clear is that the assumption that higher cost equals better quality is often fundamentally wrong. Strategic thinking quality matters more than administrative availability or corporate positioning.
The smartest UK businesses are discovering that technology leadership effectiveness isn't determined by investment level. It's determined by accessing appropriate strategic guidance when and how you need it most.
Your competitors are making this strategic decision right now. The question is whether they'll choose more effective strategic guidance than you do, because in business, the company with better strategic thinking usually wins.
The £250,000 Reality Check
Let's start with the brutal economics of hiring a full-time CIO in the UK market.
Base salary expectations:
Experienced CIO, London: £180,000-250,000
Experienced CIO, regional UK: £120,000-180,000
Someone with both IT and security strategy expertise: Add 20-30%
Additional costs:
Employer National Insurance contributions: 13.8% of salary
Pension contributions: 3-12% depending on scheme
Benefits package: Healthcare, company car, professional development
Recruitment fees: 15-25% of annual salary for senior roles
Office space, equipment, and administrative overhead
Total yearly investment: £220,000-350,000 for a genuinely experienced technology leader.
But here's the question nobody asks: what are you actually buying for that investment?
What £250k Actually Gets You (Spoiler: It's Complicated)
I've been that full-time executive. Twenty years of corporate technology leadership across government and private sector organisations. I know exactly how those expensive days get filled.
A realistic breakdown of full-time CIO activities:
Strategic work (20-30% of time):
Technology roadmap development
Vendor strategy and procurement
Risk assessment and compliance planning
Business alignment and requirements gathering
Administrative overhead (30-40% of time):
Internal meetings and status updates
Budget management and reporting
HR-related activities and team management
Corporate governance and compliance theatre
Operational support (20-30% of time):
Escalation handling for technical issues
Project management and delivery oversight
Vendor relationship management
Crisis response and firefighting
Politics and positioning (10-20% of time):
Board presentations and stakeholder management
Cross-departmental coordination
External relationship building
Professional development and industry engagement
Notice something interesting? Only 20-30% of that expensive time gets spent on pure strategic thinking.
The rest is overhead, administration, and corporate maintenance activities that don't directly contribute to better technology decisions.
The Fractional Alternative Nobody Talks About
Now consider the fractional model—same level of expertise, radically different resource allocation.
Fractional CIO engagement (8-10 hours monthly):
100% strategic focus during engagement hours
No administrative overhead or corporate politics
Direct access when you need strategic guidance
Scalable based on business requirements
Annual investment: £15,000-30,000 depending on complexity and hours required.
Value comparison:
Full-time: £250k for 20-30% strategic work (50-75 strategic hours monthly)
Fractional: £25k for 100% strategic work (8-10 strategic hours monthly)
The mathematics are sobering: You're paying roughly the same per hour of actual strategic thinking, but you're not subsidising corporate overhead you don't need.
Why Fractional Executives Might Actually Be Better
Here's where this gets really interesting. The assumption that full-time equals better quality is often completely wrong.
Many of the best fractional executives are individuals who have deliberately chosen variety over corporate politics.
I transitioned to fractional work after 20 years in full-time leadership roles. Not because I couldn't get full-time positions, but because I preferred focusing on strategic problem-solving rather than internal company dynamics.
What fractional providers often bring:
Broader industry experience across multiple organisations
Exposure to diverse business models and challenges
Focus on results rather than political positioning
Updated knowledge from working with multiple technology stacks
Motivation to deliver immediate value (no job security safety net)
What full-time executives sometimes bring:
Deep knowledge of company culture and politics
Availability for day-to-day operational decisions
Long-term commitment and relationship building
Integration with internal team dynamics
Dedicated focus on a single organisation
The trade-offs are clear: Full-time gives you dedicated availability. Fractional gives you focused expertise.
The Leeds Law Firm Case Study
Last year, I assessed two similar organisations: a Leeds law firm considering full-time CIO hiring, and a Manchester consultancy using fractional services.
Leeds law firm (45 employees):
Hired a full-time IT Director at £140k annually
Excellent professional with a strong technical background
Spent the first six months learning company operations
Developed a comprehensive technology strategy by month 9
By year 2: delivering solid strategic leadership
Total investment year 1: £180k including recruitment, benefits, and setup costs
Strategic output year 1: Moderate (learning curve impact)
Strategic output year 2: High (fully embedded and effective)
Manchester consultancy (50 employees):
Engaged fractional CIO at 10 hours monthly
Started with a comprehensive current-state assessment
Delivered a strategic roadmap within 8 weeks
Ongoing strategic guidance and vendor management
Total investment year 1: £24k for fractional services.
Strategic output year 1: High (immediate impact)
Strategic output year 2: High (continued strategic support)
Both approaches worked. But the cost-effectiveness and speed of impact were dramatically different.
When Full-Time Makes Sense (And When It Doesn't)
Full-time technology leadership becomes genuinely necessary when:
Complexity exceeds fractional capacity:
Multiple major technology projects are running simultaneously
Highly regulated industry requiring dedicated compliance focus
Complex legacy system integration requiring full-time management
Large enough to need dedicated cybersecurity leadership
Internal dynamics require embedded leadership:
Significant change management requirements
Complex stakeholder relationships needing daily attention
Team development and skills-building priorities
Company culture requires embedded technology advocacy
Scale justifies the investment:
Technology budget exceeding £500k annually
IT team larger than 5-8 people requiring management
Multiple locations requiring coordination
Revenue is directly dependent on technology innovation
For most UK SMBs (10-100 employees), these conditions don't apply.
You need strategic guidance, vendor management, and risk oversight. You don't need someone managing internal politics or attending three meetings daily about IT procurement processes.
The Quality Question Nobody Asks
"But surely full-time executives are higher quality than fractional providers?"
This assumption deserves brutal examination.
High-quality full-time executives:
Choose organisations aligned with their career objectives
Often specialise in specific industries or company sizes
May prefer corporate security and structured environments
Sometimes, avoid the uncertainty of fractional work
High-quality fractional executives:
Choose variety and diverse challenge exposure
Often have broader experience across industries and sizes
Prefer results-focused work over corporate administration
Must deliver immediate value to maintain client relationships
The market reality: Both models attract excellent professionals, but they're different personality types with different motivations.
The question isn't whether full-time or fractional executives are "better." The question is which model provides better value for your specific business requirements.
The Hybrid Model Smart Businesses Use
The most effective approach often combines internal capability development with fractional strategic guidance.
Internal team focuses on:
Day-to-day operations and system administration
User support and technical troubleshooting
Implementation of strategic decisions
Company-specific knowledge and relationships
Fractional executive provides:
Strategic planning and roadmap development
Vendor evaluation and procurement guidance
Risk assessment and compliance oversight
Technology trend analysis and recommendations
This hybrid model delivers:
Strategic expertise without full-time overhead
Internal capability that understands business context
Scalable approach that grows with business requirements
Professional development for internal staff
The Procurement Process Most Businesses Get Wrong
If you're considering fractional services, the evaluation process matters enormously.
What to assess:
Genuine senior-level experience (not just consulting background)
Specific examples of strategic decisions and outcomes
Industry knowledge relevant to your business
Communication style compatible with your organisation
Track record of cost optimisation and vendor management
How to evaluate:
Start with a specific project (current state assessment)
Request detailed recommendations with business justification
Evaluate communication style and strategic thinking
Check references from similar-sized organisations
Assess cultural fit with the internal team
Red flags:
Generic recommendations applicable to any business
Inability to provide specific strategic examples
Focus on selling additional services rather than solving problems
Template-driven approaches without business context
Promises of immediate transformation
The Birmingham Manufacturing Company Result
Six months ago, a Birmingham manufacturing company (35 employees) faced the full-time vs fractional decision.
Their technology challenges:
The legacy ERP system is limiting business growth
Inconsistent cybersecurity across multiple locations
No strategic plan for technology investments
IT support provided by an external MSP with limited strategic input
Options considered:
Hire full-time IT Manager (£80-100k) with limited strategic experience
Engage senior fractional CIO (£28k annually)
Continue with MSP and hope for improvement
They chose fractional services. Six months later:
Strategic outcomes:
Comprehensive technology roadmap aligned with business objectives
ERP replacement strategy with implementation timeline
Cybersecurity framework meeting insurance requirements
Vendor consolidation saves £15k annually
Cost comparison:
Fractional investment: £14k (6 months)
Vendor savings: £7.5k (6 months)
Net strategic investment: £6.5k
Value delivered: Technology strategy that would cost £80k+ full-time
The business owner's assessment: "Best technology investment we've ever made. We got senior-level strategic thinking without senior-level salary commitment."
Making the Decision That's Right for Your Business
The choice between full-time and fractional technology leadership depends on an honest assessment of your actual requirements.
Choose full-time when:
Technology is core to your business model
You need dedicated leadership for large internal teams
Complex regulatory requirements demand embedded expertise
Strategic projects require daily management oversight
Choose fractional when:
You need strategic guidance more than daily availability
Budget constraints make full-time hiring challenging
Current technology requirements don't justify a full-time investment
You want to evaluate strategic leadership before permanent commitment
Choose hybrid when:
You have capable internal technical staff needing strategic direction
Business growth may eventually justify full-time leadership
You want to develop internal capability while accessing external expertise
The Strategic Investment Perspective
Here's the mindset shift most UK business owners need: stop thinking about technology leadership as a personnel cost. Please start thinking about it as a strategic investment.
Full-time technology leadership: High upfront investment, embedded capability, long-term commitment.
Fractional technology leadership: Scalable investment, immediate strategic impact, flexible engagement.
No technology leadership: Hidden costs through poor decisions, reactive responses, missed opportunities.
The question isn't whether you can afford strategic guidance. The question is whether you can afford to continue making technology decisions without it.
Your Strategic Decision Framework
If you're evaluating options for technology leadership, use this framework:
Assess your current state:
Are technology decisions aligned with business objectives?
Do you have strategic plans for evolving your technology?
Are security and compliance requirements properly addressed?
Will current systems scale with business growth plans?
Evaluate your requirements:
How many hours of strategic guidance do you actually need monthly?
What level of availability is essential vs convenient?
Are internal politics complex enough to require embedded leadership?
Does technology complexity justify dedicated management?
Calculate the economics:
What's the true cost of full-time hiring (salary plus overhead)?
What strategic problems could fractional services address immediately?
What's the cost of current technology inefficiencies?
How much would better strategic decisions save annually?
Test your assumptions:
Engage fractional services for specific project or assessment
Evaluate the quality of strategic thinking and recommendations
Assess cultural fit with internal team
Measure immediate impact on technology decision-making
The Reality Smart UK Businesses Face
Technology leadership isn't optional for growing businesses. The choice is between strategic guidance and expensive mistakes.
Full-time executives provide embedded capability at premium cost. Fractional executives provide focused expertise at practical cost.
Both models work. The question is which provides better value for your specific business requirements and growth stage.
What's clear: The assumption that more expensive equals better quality is often wrong. Strategic thinking matters more than seat time.
The smartest UK businesses are realising that technology leadership isn't about how much you spend. It's about getting strategic guidance when and how you need it.
Your competitors are making this decision too. The question is: will they choose better strategic guidance than you do?
| Source | Article |
|---|---|
| Robert Half UK | CIO Salary Guide 2025 |
| IT Jobs Watch | UK CIO Salaries and Trends |
| Hays UK | Technology Leadership Salary Guide |
| CIO Magazine UK | The Rise of Fractional Technology Leadership |
| Tech UK | Small Business Technology Investment Trends |
| Equate Group | Fractional CIO and Technology Leadership Services |
