Is a Fractional Executive Worth It Compared to a Full-Time Hire?
We analyze the differences between a permanent executive’s salary and a fractional executive’s fee, explaining what companies are really paying for — and the true value behind each option.
Discussions around fractional work inevitably lead to one central question: how do the costs of a full-time executive compare to those of a fractional executive? For many entrepreneurs, the initial perception is that fractional seems expensive. Their day rate or hourly rate often appears higher than if you divided a full-time executive’s salary by the number of hours worked. However, the reality is more complex — and once you understand it, it radically changes how companies view this comparison.
A full-time C-level executive in Romania has a compensation package that includes not only their net salary but also benefits, bonuses, taxes, and social contributions. When you add all of that up, the total cost to the company can be 30–50% higher than the “on-paper” salary. For example, a CFO with a gross monthly salary of €10,000 might actually cost the company €13,000–€15,000 once contributions and negotiated benefits are included.
A fractional CFO or CEO, on the other hand, typically charges a monthly fee for a limited number of days. That fee might seem high — for example, €3,000–€5,000 per month for two to three days of work per week. But when you balance that against the fact that the organization is gaining access to the same level of experience and expertise — without the additional costs and obligations of a permanent employment contract — the equation begins to even out.
Moreover, the proper comparison isn’t about “how many hours you’re paying for.” A fractional executive isn’t just a service provider — they’re a leader delivering direct impact. Their efficiency is often much higher because they don’t waste time in unnecessary meetings or bureaucratic processes. Instead of sitting in the office eight hours a day just to be present, a fractional leader comes in with a sharp focus on objectives and results. In short, the company isn’t paying for time — it’s paying for value.
The hidden risks and costs also differ. Hiring a full-time executive involves expensive recruitment processes, long onboarding periods, and the risk of cultural or professional mismatch. If the relationship doesn’t work out, the company can lose months and significant amounts of money. With a fractional executive, contracts are shorter and more flexible. If there’s no fit, the collaboration can end quickly and without high exit costs.
Another important factor is resource availability. Many SMEs and startups simply cannot afford a full-time CFO or CMO — but they can afford a fractional one. Instead of going without strategic leadership due to budget constraints, these companies can access the expertise they need in a more sustainable way. In reality, fractional work opens the door to a level of talent that might otherwise be out of reach.
The model is equally attractive for professionals. A senior executive who might earn €10,000 per month at a single company can, as a fractional, work with three different companies for €5,000 each. The result? Higher income, professional diversity, and a better work-life balance. From this perspective, fractional doesn’t mean “cheaper” or “more expensive” — it means “more efficient.”
In Romania, where cost discussions are often dominated by the concept of a “monthly salary,” the idea of a fractional fee requires a mindset shift. Entrepreneurs must understand that they are not paying for billed hours — they are paying for correct decisions, strategic direction, and risk reduction. A single well-made financial decision by a fractional CFO could save the company hundreds of thousands of euros, even if they are only present a few days a month.
It’s important, however, to remain realistic. A fractional executive is not a magic solution to get top-tier leadership at a discount. It’s a more flexible and context-adapted alternative, but the cost still reflects the depth of experience involved. If a company is simply looking for a “cheap option,” the fractional model might not be the right fit.
In conclusion, comparing a full-time salary to a fractional fee isn’t just about raw numbers. It’s a comparison between rigidity and flexibility, between hidden costs and transparency, between time and value. For many companies, fractional isn’t necessarily cheaper — but it’s infinitely more efficient. And in a market where speed and adaptability are decisive, that’s the difference that truly matters.
Photo: Canva
