News : In its French interim management barometer published on 4 May 2026, Morgan Philips describes a market that is active but more selective: 62 % of the interim managers surveyed consider it has become harder to find an assignment. The average length of an assignment stands at 10.8 months. And physical presence remains the norm: 47 % of assignments run fully on site, and 89 % include at most two days of remote work per week (Morgan Philips, 4 May 2026).
A fractional HR director is a human resources director who exercises that function for several companies, a fixed number of days a week in each and over the long run. They do not reinforce the administration: they carry the HR policy and sit on the leadership team.
Two lessons there for a company director considering an external HR directorship. An assignment of this kind is counted in months, not in days. And it plays out on site: an HR directorship that sees neither the managers nor the teams is directing nothing.
I am Christine Martin, an independent HR consultant. I work as a fractional HR director with mid-sized companies that have outgrown improvised HR without justifying a salaried HR director. The question I am asked is almost never “should this be outsourced”, it is “what level of HR do I need”.
Fractional HR director: what it is, and what it is not
The difference with HR support lies in the nature of the decisions. HR support executes what has been decided; an HR directorship decides, on the organisation, on pay, on the skills to be built, on the management structure, and carries trade-offs that commit the company for two or three years.
That is also what separates it from “outsourced HR direction” understood as an off-the-shelf service: either you buy deliverables, or you hand over a leadership function. I only take the second case, two days a week minimum, over the long term, because below that nobody is directing, they are patching.
Three levels of HR, three completely different questions
Many directors reason in volume: “I have too much HR to deal with”. The right question is about the level of decision. Here is the grid I use in a first meeting.
| Level | The question it answers | Sign that this is the level you need |
|---|---|---|
| HR administrative support | “Are the obligations met and the files up to date?” | The framework is in place, what is missing is time to execute |
| Generalist HR manager | “How do recruitment, training and day-to-day employee matters get run?” | The processes exist but nobody drives them |
| HR director (full-time or fractional) | “What organisation, what skills and what employment policy will carry the three-year plan?” | HR decisions commit the strategy and end up with the company director |
The most frequent mistake is recruiting one level below the real need. A question of structuring is then handed to someone who has neither the experience nor the standing to hold their own against a sales or operations director. That person burns out, the subjects still end up with the company director, and the company concludes that “HR is useless”. That is the situation I am most often called into.
This diagnosis of level matters more than the choice of format. The question of whether to outsource at all is dealt with in my article on outsourced HR for smaller companies; the question of which provider to pick, in the comparison of fractional HR, an HR consultancy and an in-house hire.
The signals that say you need an HR director, not reinforcement
There are fairly reliable symptoms. When I find three or four of them, the subject is a level of leadership, not a number of hours.
- Every people decision ends up with the company director. A pay rise, a dispute between departments, a contested promotion: if it all lands on your desk, there is no HR directorship.
- You have no overall view of pay. Gaps have settled in over successive hires, nobody can explain them, and every individual negotiation creates a precedent.
- The organisation chart no longer matches the real organisation. Managers with no clear scope, duplicated roles, employees who do not know who they report to.
- You are preparing a structuring operation. Strong growth, an acquisition, opening a site, handing over the business: the people side cannot be delegated to administrative support.
- Your managers have never been equipped: promoted for their technical expertise, without ever learning to run a difficult conversation or to set an objective.
- The leadership team has no HR voice. Decisions are taken on the numbers and on production, and their human consequences are discovered afterwards.
What a fractional HR director brings to the leadership team
The value of an HR directorship is not measured by the number of files handled, but by the decisions it shifts before they are taken. That is what company directors underestimate most.
Concretely, what I do in those meetings: cost out what opening a second site will require in skills to recruit and in management to install; say that a reorganisation announced in June with no preparation will produce resignations in September; turn a three-year plan into dated skills needs rather than intentions.
That reading is missing in many companies, and managers feel it. The third Apec-ANDRH barometer, published on 2 June 2026 among 2,000 private-sector managers in France, shows satisfaction with the HR function reaching 64 %, while 82 % of managers see it as an administrative department: they rate it effective on administrative tasks at 86 %, against 54 % on career management, and only half of them would turn to HR to discuss their professional development (Apec and ANDRH, in French).
In other words: administrative HR is recognised, strategic HR is still to be built. That is the gap a fractional HR director fills, without creating a full-time post the company would not fill.
The typical work of the first twelve months
A fractional HR directorship does not establish itself by producing documents. It establishes itself by settling, in order, what exposes the company and then what structures it. That is the backbone of my HR support.
- The employment stocktake. I always start with the collective agreement, because that is where I find the longest-standing discrepancies. In France it is not a matter of choice: under article L. 2261-2 of the French Labour Code (in French), the applicable collective agreement is the one covering the employer’s main activity. The business classification code is only an indication.
- Clarifying the organisation. Who decides what, which scopes, which delegations. This is often where tensions described as personal turn out to be structural.
- Pay policy. Making the existing situation objective, setting rules that can be explained, getting out of case-by-case negotiation.
- Equipping managers. Annual appraisals and career conversations that serve a purpose, objectives properly framed, support on difficult situations. On this point the French rule has changed, and many companies have stayed on the old rhythm: since law no. 2025-1403 of 30 December 2025, the professional appraisal has become the career pathway conversation, to be held every four years, with a summary review every eight years (service-public.fr factsheet, checked on 20 February 2026).
- The skills plan. Connecting the company plan to the skills to recruit, develop or shift, with deadlines.
On what can be delegated and in what order, see the article on which HR tasks to outsource first. And one clarification I set down in the very first conversation: I am an HR professional, not a lawyer. I make practices safer and I prepare files; as soon as it comes to legal characterisation, litigation or a risk before the labour tribunal, I point you to an employment lawyer.
When a fractional HR director is not the right answer
This arrangement does not suit everyone. Here are the cases where I say so plainly.
- Your need is a volume, not a level. If the decisions have been taken and what is missing is hands to execute them, HR administrative support will serve you better.
- You do not intend to open up the leadership team. An HR directorship with no access to the trade-offs is not a directorship. I have seen assignments fail for that reason alone.
- Your HR load lastingly fills a full week. Recruit a salaried HR director, and I can help you prepare the role so that it succeeds.
- You expect a fully remote directorship. Without presence on site, you sense neither the climate nor what managers never put in a written report.
- The subject is in fact an open conflict. A procedure already under way is first a matter for an employment lawyer; structuring comes afterwards.
This article does not cover the criteria for choosing the person either, sector experience, posture, confidentiality, availability. Those are set out in my article on the independent HR consultant.
FAQ
What is a fractional HR director?
It is a human resources director who exercises that function for several companies, on fixed days each week and over the long run. The difference with a consultant lies in the mandate: they do not recommend, they decide and implement the HR policy, like a salaried HR director.
What is the difference between a fractional and an outsourced HR director?
The two expressions often describe the same reality, but usage differs. “Outsourced HR director” sometimes covers an off-the-shelf service, deliverable by deliverable. Fractional implies a recurring presence, fixed days and a place on the leadership team. Check what the proposal in front of you actually covers.
How many days a week should be planned?
I do not work below two days a week: below that, the time goes on administrative emergencies and nothing gets structured. The rhythm then follows the size of the company and the work under way; it can rise during a reorganisation, then come back down.
Can a fractional HR director sit on the leadership team?
Yes, and it is the condition for the assignment to be worth anything. An HR directorship that is not present when trade-offs are made discovers decisions once taken and can only manage their consequences. I ask for that access before starting.
Does a company of a few dozen employees need an HR director or an HR manager?
It does not depend on headcount but on the decisions waiting. If the processes exist and need driving, an HR manager is enough. If the organisation, pay or skills have to be rethought to carry a growth plan, that is a leadership level, even part-time.
Let us take stock of what you need
If you are hesitating between HR reinforcement and an HR directorship, describe your situation to me: headcount, organisation, decisions that are dragging. I will tell you frankly what level you need, even if the answer is that it is not me. Write to me or call me here.
Sources
- Morgan Philips, Barometre du Management de Transition France, 4 May 2026. Read the barometer
- Apec and ANDRH, third Apec-ANDRH barometer, 2,000 private-sector managers, 2 June 2026. Read the barometer
- French Labour Code, article L. 2261-2, applicable collective agreement. French Ministry of Labour
- service-public.fr, factsheet F32040 on the career pathway conversation, Direction de l’information legale et administrative, checked on 20 February 2026. service-public.fr
