This episode of BTG Insights on Demand features a compelling conversation between Sunny Ackerman, Global Managing Partner, On‑Demand Talent at Heidrick & Struggles, and Sandra Pinnavaia, Global Head of Strategy & Innovation for On‑Demand Talent and Partner at Heidrick & Struggles.
Together, they dive deep into how interim executives are being deployed to meet critical leadership moments head-on, build organizational resilience, and drive purposeful transformation in today’s volatile business landscape. Using real-world examples from across industries, Sunny and Sandra offer insights into why interim talent is increasingly seen as a strategic advantage, not just a stopgap.
Listen to the episode, read our lightly edited transcript, or jump to a specific section of the conversation below:
Interview Highlights:
- Trends in today's volatile market
- The strategic value of on-demand talent
- How interim talent boosts resilience and supports overloaded leaders
- Using interim execs for more than gap-filling
- When and why organizations turn to interim leaders
- Which industries are leaning into on-demand talent for more than filling gaps
- Advice for executives considering interim talent
- The future of interim leadership
Sunny Ackerman (01:37)
Hi, I'm Sunny Ackerman, Global Managing Partner for On-Demand Talent at Heidrick & Struggles. Today I'm sitting with Sandra Pinnavaia, our Global Head of Strategy and Innovation, and we're going to talk about a talent tactic that most leaders overlook during times of unpredictability—and that is using interim executives on demand. Sandra, welcome.
Sandra Pinnavaia (02:05)
It's my favorite topic.
Sunny Ackerman (02:06)
I know! Both of ours, of course. Let's start with the big picture. What are you hearing from clients during conversations that we're having these days around the current environment and what they're experiencing?
Sandra Pinnavaia (02:19)
Well, it's clearly an unusual time. The team is hearing at least three or four themes that I think are all related to uncertainty. The first one that we hear is the emergence of really tough problems that were not anticipated. We have a couple of clients where the collision of declining customer demand with the impact of the tariffs have led to literally immediate crises around the operations of the business. That's a little bit of an extreme case, but the team is out there hearing those really tough problem situations just emerging in real time.
The second thing that we're hearing is companies really working hard on shuffling their resources in response to the unexpected pressures on the business. One example of that is one of the major diagnostics companies—a global diagnostics company—who has simultaneously in the same division had some programs literally go to zero as a result in changes of federal funding policy in the United States, and others explode. But being able to move resources quickly is limited by their ability to transfer skills from area A to area B.
Those are two big things that we're seeing in response to this current moment. I'd say overall—and our colleagues in executive search are also hearing—that the decision-making processes have slowed down in many cases around hiring.
What else would you add, Sunny? What are you seeing?
Sunny Ackerman (04:01)
Yeah, I think it's very much the same thing you're saying, Sandra. I think the volatility right now is creating a lot of discussion. People are really being challenged with the current workload that they have and the environment in which they're working in. I think everyone's looking at options in terms of how they can access talent differently. And areas like on-demand talent definitely give organizations a different way of looking at bringing talent in quickly at the right time.
Sandra Pinnavaia (04:26)
Totally agree. While all well-run companies do scenario planning as a matter of course and have contingency plans, I think we're just at a stage where it's more than average. It is really atypical, and some of the things companies are responding to leaders have literally never seen before.
Sunny Ackerman (04:45)
Absolutely. Yeah that's a really good point. From your perspective, when you think about this unpredictability, how is it shaping the talent landscape right now?
Sandra Pinnavaia (04:55)
Well, I think we are seeing a number of things—some of which were already in process before, and others that are new in nature. Certainly we see clients pausing hiring, pausing some essential work streams while they're waiting to see what's going on.
I think what's interesting is we're also seeing talent—and I think I'd comment on this from the search side as well—hunkering down a little bit. People have become less eager to make changes because they see that as risk to themselves. We're seeing a lot of things that are actually counter to the need for business agility that's out there to respond to the market. The talent world is a little bit hesitant and frozen right now.
On the other side, the world of independent executives is getting busier than ever. The need for them—which I think we'll start to talk about—has shifted from perhaps more long-range planning to immediate operational experience that companies need to bring in right away.
Sunny Ackerman (06:11)
Yeah, absolutely. When you think about on-demand talent and the value of that during these times of volatility and transition, it’s just what you said, it's so important. Why do you think it is so valuable?
Sandra Pinnavaia (06:26)
Well, during volatility…actually I'd love to ask you the same question in terms of your experience as an executive. But I think right now it really boils down to three things. First of all is the idea of true immediacy. The idea that when you have an immediate problem or immediate opportunity, you can immediately resource it with high-skilled leaders using a variety of interim roles. That is just a game changer.
Immediacy is super valuable. I think it's the next evolution of what we used to call agility. Agility being a generally good thing in business, but right now we need super agility. We need immediacy.
The second thing is optionality. We see a lot of businesses now saying, "Ehh I'm not sure what Q3, Q4 is going to look like. Not sure yet if I want to pull the trigger on launching this product, on moving to this geography, on making this new investment in a new division or a new function in the company."
One of those right now, which is really interesting, is that a lot of companies are rethinking their head of their information and technology group. What does that role look like? Are we ready to make the big upgrade to someone who brings very commercially oriented AI experience or not?
That sort of optionality—we're not sure yet whether we're going to go all in on some of these decisions—on-demand talent helps buy that time and gives companies a tool to get from now to that period in the future.
We've talked about immediacy and optionality. I think the third thing, which you can't skip, is literally headcount management. So we do all see clients who are undertaking either pauses in hiring or reductions in force. This is a tool that allows you to not actually add permanent headcount.
Sunny Ackerman (08:36)
Absolutely. The variability of the workforce and being able to quickly assess, bring the workforce in—but also being able to ebb and flow with the environment and what's happening.
When you think about the ways in which on-demand are contributing to organizational resilience during these times, what are some things that you're seeing right now?
Sandra Pinnavaia (08:56)
Wow. On the agility front, I'll just give a couple of examples. The need for a consumer company right now to rethink everything from pricing to their sourcing capability means that the current leadership team just doesn't have enough arms and legs to tackle all of this simultaneously. We're seeing them reach out and borrow commercial leaders with expertise in these kinds of areas.
The other thing that I think is really interesting is that this is becoming a tool for the support and development of your current leadership team. If you talk to HR leaders today, you are starting to hear fatigue and overload around the senior executive team. There's normal business as usual, there's the stuff you had planned to do this year, and then there's the need to actually do all the new things that the unpredictability has brought along. Seeing interim executives not as just simply covering a gap, but as a true scaffold or extension of your leadership team to help get them through is also really true.
There's two examples that really come to mind where companies were already undertaking something that was quite difficult coming into 2025—and getting through that was already going to be challenging and demanding—and then having to respond to the unpredictability right now just took it over the top. It might be worth talking about those for a second.
Sunny Ackerman (10:46)
Yeah.
Sandra Pinnavaia (10:48)
One is with a manufacturing company, a global firm, that was in the middle of relocating its headquarters to begin with. When you relocate a headquarters, you lose some of your top talent because they aren't willing to go. You are also relocating for various strategic reasons. And this was underway already, so add to that… so you're losing some of your top talent in the process. You're encountering all the operational challenges of relocating your headquarters. Add to that the fact that the tariff situation just arrived, and suddenly you have executives who literally are working 24 hours a day.
They needed immediate help to do two things. One was on their technology integration side—they've actually added an interim chief information officer who is going to be there for only a limited period of time to help almost double the capacity around that leadership effort. The second thing that they're adding is a real commercial leader who is helping to look at pricing.
Sunny Ackerman (12:08)
Interesting. Did both of these roles happen simultaneously or did they bring in one and then they identified we have a need for the commercial leader?
Sandra Pinnavaia (12:17)
Yes. It happened in sequence. The first one felt to them more urgent, and the success of that executive as an augmentation to the leadership team led them to say, "Well, let's try this with the commercial side as well.
Sunny Ackerman (12:31)
We see that quite a bit in our business.
Sandra Pinnavaia (12:32)
We do. We do.
Sunny Ackerman (12:33)
We start with one talent and they say, "This is really interesting. We have a need over here." Or sometimes the executive that we bring in will identify other pockets of opportunity for us to bring in other types of talent.
Sandra Pinnavaia (12:45)
Exactly. The second story I would share is with a consumer company, where the company is in the middle or at the very tail end of a multi-year technology transformation. Again, this is here at the tail end, you have to finish it.
You're in it. Like many clients, it's also slightly behind schedule. The pressure is on. You're in the last six months. Again, if all things had been going well and normal, it would have been hard enough. But first quarter came along, it got much harder. In that case, again, they've brought in someone who really is there with the sole job of taking over and supporting the existing CIO to make sure that this project is driven through and completed this work.
Sunny Ackerman (13:34)
What a relief to the organization and to the leaders that-
Sandra Pinnavaia (13:37)
Absolutely. Absolutely.
Sunny Ackerman (13:37)
... around that in terms of bringing in that talent quickly. Thank you.
Sandra Pinnavaia (13:41)
It's funny to think about that as an interim role, but it really is. This person is not consulting. They are there sitting next to the CIO and literally doing it.
But you've been an executive, and you've been here during this time. You're running a business that's global. How are you using on-demand talent?
Sunny Ackerman (13:59)
It's fascinating. I've been in the executive position now for a year with Heidrick, so I joined Heidrick last year. Coming into the role immediately, there was one area that I noticed within our organization that we needed to have an integration. We acquired a business in Europe, and we were looking at how do we truly start to integrate more of our revenue ops and our financial planning and analysis teams and some of the work that we're doing. We brought in an interim global head of operations that came in within a very quick period of time. We wrote up a statement of work and brought him in. He was able to hit the ground running and work and be really the connective tissue between those two functions.
But he provided a lot of the data and insights that we needed around what we were seeing in that European business to really start to—from an integration perspective—start to accelerate some of the things we wanted to do around our technology implementation, around our back and middle office implementation, around our revenue ops, and our financial planning teams.
It's been a lifesaver, I think, for us in terms of some of the work that this individual has been able to do. Again, it was finding the talent at the right time within the organization at a speed in which we needed to bring somebody in within around three to five business days. And we were able to do that.
Sandra Pinnavaia (15:18)
And not add headcount in the process.
Sunny Ackerman (15:20)
Exactly. We continue to extend the project because we found there was more areas of opportunity to use the type of talent in different parts of the business. The teams have worked so seamlessly together. It was like this individual had been a part of the team for months. The integration of that executive talent coming in and working alongside other members of the team was as critically important as the hard skills that he or she would bring. It was how do they integrate?
Sandra Pinnavaia (15:48)
That's right. It's so interesting. The world is getting better at experimenting with this. We still see it as often a very overlooked tactic.
Sunny Ackerman (16:00)
Yeah. We're going to change that.
Let's talk about interim and fractional executives. In the old days, I would say, they would bring in the type of talent to fill a gap or if there was someone out for a period of time. I think what we're seeing more and more of these days is companies really leveraging this as a strategic solution within their workforce.
When you look at this, what are some things that you're seeing right now with clients? How do you think about that shift from that old way of leveraging interim execs to where organizations are working today?
Sandra Pinnavaia (16:43)
I think it's really exciting and really smart. I also think we're still at the very early stages of companies getting really good at doing this. But that transition from “interim world is only for covering gaps” to “interim world is how you support and make leadership most effective” is really profound. That's what's happening right now.
I think there's a few things about why this is happening now. We started our conversation today talking about the insane level of change and pressure on leaders. At some basic level, the old binary world of do you make a hire or not make a hire is no longer fit for purpose for today's world.
It's too rigid in a way. Not to say that it's not important. Obviously building the right long-term leadership team is critical, but that very, “Are we making permanent hires? Does it have to be a permanent headcount?” At the leadership level, we're starting to see cracks in that, so I think the fundamental need is changing.
The second thing that is absolutely true is that the supply side, the existence of experienced executives who want to work this way has just never been stronger. I personally believe that's a genie that's never going back in the bottle.
Sunny Ackerman (18:17)
Agree.
Sandra Pinnavaia (18:19)
Whether it is people who've been independent for a long time, and they made their career that way—or increasingly we're seeing folks go independent as the last quarter of their career. Executives who are like, "No, thank you. I don't want to be a full-time CFO again, but I'm happy to do a three-to-six-month CFO engagement." The supply is better than ever.
We see that in at least two ways here at Heidrick. We see that in the registration of our on-demand talent group. We also see it in terms of literally the raw outreach of executives to Heidrick who are looking for new ways to work. There's the old models breaking. There's the existence of supply, which I think is really important.
Then last but not least, I think there's just this growing confidence in the hundreds of major companies that have been experimenting with this. I took a quick look, Sunny, and in the last year and a half we have served over 300 companies with interim executives. These are real executives—not consultants, not as advisors—but they're playing interim and temporary roles and providing a leadership liquidity that is helping companies perform better.
Sunny Ackerman (19:43)
That's incredible. Yeah, I think when we look at the overall momentum, even looking at—even with the volatility that we're seeing right now in the current environment—there's still the demand that we're seeing for this type of fluidity and agility in organizations. Again, leveraging it as a strategic solution and not as the filling a gap type of thing is what organizations are really starting to embrace and adopt.
Sandra Pinnavaia (20:06)
Right, and I think we need to help them. I think companies need to also find ways to get their feet wet and experiment. I think that probably accounts for the fact that we've had such an uptick in demand in the last two months.
Sunny Ackerman (20:24)
I would agree. I would agree. When you think about the use of interim evolving beyond just gap filling, what are some other ways in which organizations are leveraging this type of incredible talent that is out there?
Sandra Pinnavaia (20:39)
Well, I think there's a growing general realization that it's very hard to do two things simultaneously. It's very hard. It's very hard to optimize for today and for the future. Especially when today is so changeable and challenging. But just in general, the pace of change that...
Let's talk about how the AI theme is coming into—everybody is convinced, I'm sure rightly so, that AI is going to change the way many of us work, many of our business units work, many of the ways our functions work. How quickly is that going to happen? Are we waiting and seeing? Are we going to pilot things? There's just so much going on. The distinction between—or let me say it this way—the clarity that a lot of leaders have that what is needed now, today, this year is going to be very different from what's going to be needed two to three years from now.
That's across all functions. We hear it. Oh my gosh. We hear it over and over in the finance function, in the IT or business intelligence function, but we also hear it in commercial functions. We hear it everywhere. The HR function, another big one.
This idea that the leadership philosophy needs to start to recognize that you can't optimize for both today and tomorrow simultaneously, and therefore, incrementalizing or modularizing some aspects of leadership becomes just really smart about embracing it for the future.
Sunny Ackerman (22:26)
Yeah. And being able to, again, access that interim executive talent to be able to fill in those areas right now when you're thinking about current state, but you also have future state, which is a bit unknown, really helps organizations be able to tackle both of those areas.
Sandra Pinnavaia (22:42)
Exactly. I'll give you two really quick examples. One is from a London-based company that is being carved out of a more traditional player, and they're at the last six months of the transition services agreement. That's kind of standard, okay. Turns out that the CFO left suddenly, and the company is 100% clear—this is a very clear example—that the CFO that they need today to complete the last six months of the separation from the parent company and to complete the transition services agreement is 100% different from the CFO that they'll need next year after that process is over. Don't start—don't conflate those two. Treat them as two distinct eras of CFO leadership.
Sandra Pinnavaia (23:33)
Right? That's a very clear extreme example.
Sunny Ackerman (23:38)
A great example. And a lot of organizations, I'm sure, as they're going through times of transition are experiencing leadership of the organization today and what the future organization needs to look like is different.
Sandra Pinnavaia (23:49)
Exactly, here's another example. We have a client who is in the process of migrating their very business from being a crypto mining company to a data center and data power company. And the CHRO that's needed for the next year is really different from the CHRO they envisioned needing a year from now. Currently that CHRO has to do a lot of assessment of the talent, a lot of migration. Who's going to be able to make that transition? Who's not going to be able to make that transition?
Sunny Ackerman (24:30)
Incredibly hard work, yeah.
Sandra Pinnavaia (24:31)
Yeah, it's probably be a pretty expensive CHRO. In the go-forward state, you might need a little bit more of a traditional CHRO.
So this idea that there's a now and a future becomes a really good forcing mechanism for companies to emphasize what is the most important skillset right now, not get locked in.
Sunny Ackerman (24:51)
Yeah, exactly. Excellent. So Sandra, what are some common reasons that organizations are bringing in interim executive talent, especially in this climate?
Sandra Pinnavaia (25:08)
Well, let's start with a couple of obvious ones. The first is when there's just uncertainty in the situation generally. You need time to figure out long term, but there's stuff that needs to be done right now. Classic reason.
A second is when you know that what you need today and for the next six, 12, or 18 months is going to be really different from the leadership you need in the future. We talked about a couple of those examples. You're completing a transaction. You're building a capability, and that's going to be different from running the capability. Now is different from later.
I think a third one that's pretty obvious is when you have an unforeseen issue that just requires immediate attention. Those are the more obvious ones—and of course when you have an executive who's out for unexpected reasons. But I think it gets more interesting when we think about a couple of other situations.
One is when your leadership team is simply stressed. When you, as the CEO or as the CHRO, you become aware of a key leader in the business who is struggling, who is very important to the company, but just suddenly has too much on their plate. That's a time to think about how can we scaffold that executive with some temporary support in the form of another executive?
The solutions that we see there are super creative—but I think it's actually a leadership development and support tool. We see that especially around things that are unusual like a transaction is difficult or it's a transformation that this type of executive has not been through before. In today's environment that might start to look like periods when you're undergoing layoffs or downsizing.
Then the last one is, in fact, during a riff or during downsizing. This is counterintuitive to a lot of executives when the goal is reducing the number of heads even at the leadership level. What we see over and over again, and frankly we saw this in 2008, we saw this in 2020, and we're seeing it again now, no matter how you approach downsizing, you end up with unanticipated holes and gaps that are suddenly a problem.
We have one client right now where literally their planned headcount reductions in Q4, those were planned. They went very well and they were perfectly happy with them until the tariff situation came around, and they realized that two or three of their procurement categories were uncovered by leaders who knew how to run sourcing for that category. That's a big problem! When all of a sudden you don't have heads in incredibly important positions, that's a time to think about on demand.
Sunny Ackerman (28:18)
Great. What are some particular industries or sectors that are utilizing on-demand talent, and not only right now during some of the economic pressures that we have?
Sandra Pinnavaia (28:31)
It's a question that we get asked often, but I almost think it's the wrong question. The industry and sector mix right now is very broad. I would say there's no single industry or sector that is outperforming the others with regard to adoption of on-demand talent, and there are no areas that are not trying it either.
That said, there are segments of clients where this is much more important and much more relevant than others. I think a few of those things we can talk about and you could probably observe from the outside.
First of all, mid-market companies—companies that have fabulous talent at the very, very top that are light in their overall leadership bench inside. Think companies between 500 million in revenue and 5 billion for sure, this is a very stressful time for those companies, whether they're public or they're privately held. Secondly, companies that have particularly strong businesses related to APAC imports or related to manufacturing, these are businesses that are needing more support than others. For example, in professional services right now, they don't have those kinds of pressures, neither of those things is—they have other pressures, but it's a little bit less acute in some of those.
Then the last thing I would say is whoever is undergoing a major transformation or transaction, this current environment is just an added complexity. If you, like our client in the manufacturing sector who started a multi-year transformation, a digital transformation a couple of years ago, trying to bring it home and now have all of 2025 pressures on top of it, that's really tough.
Sunny Ackerman (30:29)
That major transformation started two years ago has to be finished, has to go through. And so the volatility of the current environment can throw everything up in the air.
We've got to get this over the line. How do we do it? We potentially can bring in different types of talent or access different types of interim execs to help us accelerate this and see it through.
Sandra Pinnavaia (30:49)
Exactly. I think we're on the verge—when you talk to investors today—we're on the verge of seeing opportunity as well as problems. I think that's going to be very interesting. The classic first movers' advantage I think is going to start to play out if and how interest rates settle.
But the investors are getting really ready, and the idea that there's going to be a need to accelerate from zero to 100 very, very quickly in some situations. Whether you're an investor making acquisitions or you're a strategic company looking at acquisitions, I think this is also an important segment that will find on demand talent very useful.
Sunny Ackerman (31:34)
Agree, thank you.
Sandra Pinnavaia (31:39)
What advice do you have for executives who are curious about using on-demand talent?
Sunny Ackerman (31:44)
I would say first of all, just start by asking people within your organization, so the people that you're working around, where is their additional support? Where is their expertise needed? Where is additional lift needed? As an executive in an organization, assessing where you have potential areas of gap right now, and but talking to the talent within your own organization. Talking to your executive team, your leadership team, your functional teams, and just understanding where there's things that we need to accelerate, we need to provide additional support on.
Then going back and scoping a bit about what that might look like. You don't have to scope it completely—because we know this, Sandra, we work in a lot of organizations that have two or three things, and we can help them really scope that with the leadership talent. But start by asking within your own organization, and you'll quickly find, especially in today's environment, there's a lot of need I think businesses have in different areas.
That could be strategy, it could be financial expertise, it could be in the human resources function, it could be in the operations function—as we brought somebody in to work with me across our global business. But really assessing where those pockets are and then being able to work with partners like on-demand talent and accessing that type of talent quickly.
It's great because I think organizations can quickly assess, scope. We know we can typically within three to five business days provide talent profiles to companies really around what they're looking for and then be able to get that talent in place very fast.
Sandra Pinnavaia (33:12)
I couldn't agree more with you. I find sometimes a very simple and a little bit silly question, but if you had a magic wand, what would you do tomorrow that would make your team stronger? What expertise or extra experience would help your team get through the next quarter?
Sunny Ackerman (33:28)
That is a great question. I love that because I think every organization or leader would think about that question and know immediately something. A task, or a project, or a function or even maybe…
Sandra Pinnavaia (33:39)
Someone who's done this thing before.
Sunny Ackerman (33:42)
Exactly, yeah.
Sandra Pinnavaia (33:45)
A lot of our errors that we see clients making at this stage are waiting a little bit for too much clarity, and we're not afraid of digging in and helping a client go from that fuzzy, conceptual idea that extra expertise could be helpful to showing them some real humans who are truly available right now to jump in and help. Then we work together to structure their engagement.
Sunny Ackerman (34:10)
That's great, thank you. Sandra, what do you think is the future of interim execs in the next few years?
Sandra Pinnavaia (34:17)
Wow. Do you want to go first? What are your predictions?
Sunny Ackerman (34:20)
I absolutely would say it's here to stay. I think in the current environment and what we're seeing, it's only going to accelerate. I think more and more organizations are looking to embrace this type of talent. I think talent's wanting to work in very different types of ways. The environment in which we're in is only going to accelerate this, but it is here to stay.
Sandra Pinnavaia (34:38)
Well, listen, it's your and my job to make that prediction come true. But I actually really do believe it because of all the reasons that we've spent talking about today where the pace of business is just unrelenting, and we're going to need more liquidity in leadership, but I do have three other specific—and maybe a little bit controversial—predictions.
The first is that the use of interim executives will become a key piece of leadership infrastructure—and actually of leadership assurance in a company—as we go forward. That instead of it being an ancillary only in emergency situations, it will become one of the leadership development and leadership success tools that are used by the executive team and especially by the HR team.
A second one is that the role of the chief people officer or the chief human resources officer is going to change a lot for many reasons in the next five years. I think if I were to go forward, my prediction is that they and their teams are the ones who will champion the use of interim executives as a strategic tool. That they will take this on as perhaps a new part of the HR leadership agenda and bring it as a tool to their business partners across the organization in a way that's profoundly different from traditional staffing because it's at such a higher level.
I think that goes hand in hand with the fact that the chief people officers will also be driving change related to AI adoption across the organization and the very nature of how work is changing and how it's changing leadership roles. When we think about leadership assurance for the long term, this becomes one leg of the stool that will be very important.
The final prediction that I would make at this point is that the use of interim executives will stop being just for individuals, and it will become for entire teams. That there will be moments in time in almost every company where you need actually a squad, a task force, a SWAT team that's working on things like major transactions, the integration of—perhaps replacing consulting firms in some cases—but transactions and transformations where you need two, three, four, six leaders who are coming in for a period of six to 12 months to do something very important with the leadership team. I think it will get bigger than individuals.
Sunny Ackerman (37:25)
That's interesting. I have not thought about that with the team. We've been seeing that quite a bit in terms of clients not only engaging individuals, they might start with an individual but then they bring teams in around that individual, specifically on if it's transformation or some transaction type of task.
Sandra Pinnavaia (37:40)
Exactly. It's not quite going whole hog from the first moment and saying, "Let's just bring in the entire leadership team for this integration." But you see it start with, well, we need this person who is going to drive the change management office. Then we need this person who's going to actually supplement our financial leadership around this and be able to focus full-time on it.
We have seen situations that indicate that this is successful when it happens. We have one client who was preparing for standing up and divesting a whole information-based business coming out of a healthcare company, and they used a team in their IT—from the interim IT leadership to the three or four direct reports under the IT head—to do that and later replace them with permanent hires. I think this becomes a strategic tool beyond talent for actual business innovation and change.
About the Author
Follow on Twitter Follow on Linkedin Visit Website More Content by Business Talent Group
