Fractional Leadership in SaaS: Why It Often Fails — and When It Actually Works

Fractional leadership has become increasingly popular in SaaS. Fractional VP Sales, fractional CRO, fractional CCO — for many founders it feels like the ideal middle ground. Senior experience, flexibility, and lower cost than a full-time executive.

On paper, it makes perfect sense.

In practice, however, fractional commercial leadership often fails to deliver what companies expect. And few people have been as explicit about that as Jason Lemkin, founder of SaaStr.

In multiple articles, he takes a clear stance: fractional commercial leaders rarely work — not because the people lack talent, but because the model itself conflicts with what commercial growth actually requires.

SaaStr’s Core Critique of Fractional Sales Leadership

In the article “A Fractional VP of Sales Almost Never Works” Lemkin doesn’t mince words.

His core message is simple and uncomfortable: you cannot fragment commercial leadership.

According to SaaStr, fractional VPs of Sales are rarely present enough to build real context, are often too far removed from day-to-day execution, and almost never carry full responsibility for outcomes. Commercial growth demands continuous leadership — in deals, in team dynamics, and in decision-making. That doesn’t fit neatly into “a few days a month.”

What Lemkin calls out most clearly is that many fractional roles drift toward consultancy. Plans are created, analyses are shared, frameworks are introduced — but execution remains with the organization.

And strategy without execution changes nothing.

When Fractional CROs and CCOs Can Work

In a second article, “Fractional CROs and CMOs: The One Time I’ve Ever Seen Them Work”

SaaStr adds an important nuance. Fractional CROs or CCOs can work — but only under very specific conditions.

In the rare cases where Lemkin sees success, these leaders effectively act as interim executives.

That means real time commitment, real operational responsibility, and a clear mandate to build the commercial team and work toward a permanent successor. As soon as a fractional role becomes primarily advisory, impact disappears.

The conclusion is clear: half leadership produces half results.

Why “Fractional” Is Often Misunderstood

Part of the confusion around fractional leadership is that the term is used to describe very different roles. Fractional is often lumped together with interim management, consulting, or advisory — while in reality, these models serve fundamentally different purposes.

The key differences are not contractual, but behavioral. They come down to three questions:

• Who is accountable for results?

• How present is this leader in the organization?

• Do they actually lead and build the team?

When you look at fractional leadership through that lens, the distinction becomes much clearer. Below our point of view:

What this table makes clear is that fractional leadership is not “lighter” leadership. The difference with interim is not responsibility, but focus and intent. Interim leaders primarily run what already exists. Fractional leaders combine strategy and execution to change what exists — while being flexible in time commitment.

This distinction is critical, and it’s exactly where many fractional engagements go wrong.

Where Fractional Leadership Typically Breaks Down

Across all SaaStr criticism, the issue isn’t fractional leadership itself — it’s lack of ownership. Most commercial initiatives don’t fail due to poor strategy, but because no one truly owns execution.

There’s a plan, but no rhythm.

There are targets, but no predictability.

There’s ambition, but no system.

In that context, fractional leadership feels like a reasonable bridge. In reality, it often just postpones the underlying problem.

The LeapLogic Approach: Strategy and Execution as One

LeapLogic was founded on these same observations. We repeatedly saw commercial transformations stall — even with capable people and strong intent. Not because of missing insight, but because strategy and execution were separated.

That’s why we work differently.

At LeapLogic, strategy does not exist without execution. No reports that end up in drawers. No advice without implementation. We define the commercial direction and execute alongside the team — inside the operation, not above it.

That includes:

• actively participating in deals and pipeline reviews

• introducing structure and rhythm in forecasting

• sharpening positioning and ICPs through real conversations

• making commercial decisions and actually implementing them

  
  

Not as consultants, but as temporarily accountable commercial leaders.

Coaching, Team Development, and Transferability

A commercial system is only as strong as the people running it. That’s why coaching is not an add-on at LeapLogic — it’s core to every engagement. We work closely with founders on their commercial leadership while developing teams so ownership becomes internal and sustainable.

The goal is never dependency.

The goal is autonomy.

In many engagements, we explicitly work toward:

• a mature commercial structure

• a team that operates independently

• and a permanent commercial leader stepping into a well-prepared organization

At that point, we step out.

Not a Band-Aid, but Transitional Leadership

Where SaaStr rightly warns against fractional leadership as a band-aid for structural issues, LeapLogic positions itself deliberately as transitional leadership.

Temporary. Intensive. Outcome-driven.

With a clear beginning — and a clear end.

Not to add capacity, but to build a commercial foundation that lasts.

Conclusion

SaaStr’s criticism of fractional leadership is justified. Too often it’s sold as an easy fix, while the real problem remains untouched. Commercial growth requires leadership that is present, accountable, and committed to building people and systems.

The LeapLogic approach is not a counter-argument to that critique, but a direct response to it. By uniting strategy and execution, delivering hands-on leadership, and always working toward a permanent solution.

That’s why we don’t believe in fractional as a format — but in temporary commercial leadership with lasting impact.