The wrong comparison
An interim day rate compared against an annualized permanent salary always looks poor value. The correct comparison is against the cost of the vacancy: decisions deferred, programmes stalled, direct reports without direction, and the risk that a rushed permanent appointment fails. Priced that way, interim leadership is frequently the cheaper path.
Where interim is genuinely strong
Bounded tasks with fixed timelines: carve-outs, remediation programmes, systems transitions, and cover during a properly run permanent search. The interim's value comes precisely from having no long-term political stake in the outcome.
Where it goes wrong
Open-ended interim appointments made to avoid a difficult permanent decision. Without a defined exit and a written handover brief agreed at the start, the arrangement drifts, the organization adapts around a temporary leader, and the eventual permanent appointment inherits a structure built for someone else.
Conversion
Interim-to-permanent conversion can be an excellent outcome when it is assessed as a real appointment against a real market comparison. When it happens by default because the incumbent is present and the process is tiring, it produces the same failure rate as any unassessed hire.