The Transformation Leadership Paradox: Why 79% of Digital Programs Fail—and the Case for Fractional Expertise

Tuesday October 14th 2025, | Author: Sarah Huang Executive Summary

Digital transformation has become a strategic imperative for enterprises across Southeast Asia, yet the failure rate remains stubbornly high. Recent research reveals that 79% of application modernization projects fail to achieve their objectives [1], while 60% of companies derive no value from their AI investments [2]. Even more concerning, IBM's comprehensive study of core banking transformations found that less than half of CIOs reported meaningful gains despite investments totaling billions of dollars [3].

This article examines the structural reasons behind these failures and presents a principle-based framework for transformation program leadership. Drawing on management consulting methodologies and the latest research from Deloitte, BCG, and McKinsey, we explore a critical question facing Southeast Asian enterprises: Should you hire a full-time transformation leader or engage fractional expertise?

The answer depends on understanding the fundamental principles of transformation execution, the specific challenges of the Southeast Asian context, and the economics of leadership talent in a rapidly evolving market.

I. The Transformation Leadership Challenge

The Rise of the Chief Transformation Officer

Deloitte's 2025 Chief Transformation Officer Study reveals a significant shift in how organizations approach transformation. Companies are making unprecedented commitments to transformation programs, with executives reporting up to 2.5x increases in transformation budgets over the past two years [4]. More tellingly, 90% of transformation leaders have led three or more transformation programs, indicating a professionalization of the role [4].

This trend reflects a growing recognition that transformation is not a one-time project but an ongoing organizational capability. However, it also raises a critical question: given the scarcity and cost of experienced transformation leaders, how should organizations structure this leadership function?

The Full-Time vs Fractional Decision Framework

The decision between full-time and fractional leadership is not binary but contextual. Organizations must assess several factors:

Full-Time CTO indicators:

Multi-year programs with budgets exceeding $50 million

Teams of 100+ people requiring constant coordination

Enterprise-wide scope spanning multiple business units

Complex stakeholder environments with significant political navigation

Fractional Consultant indicators:

Initiatives spanning 6-18 months with focused scope

Need for specialized expertise not available internally

Budget constraints that cannot support full-time executive compensation

Requirement for speed to impact without lengthy search processes

Multi-market transformations requiring diverse regional expertise

Understanding the principles that govern this choice is essential for transformation success.

II. Core Principle 1: Transformation is About Execution, Not Strategy

Why Smart Strategies Fail

McKinsey defines digital transformation as "the rewiring of an organization, with the goal of creating value by continuously deploying tech at scale" [5]. The key word here is rewiring—a fundamental restructuring of how work gets done, not merely the adoption of new technologies.

The Deloitte study confirms that companies experience the most significant challenges during execution, relative to design and planning phases [4]. Three of the top five challenges cited are about "getting things done" and closely related to managing people and change.

The Execution Gap

Research across transformation programs reveals a fundamental mismatch between where organizations allocate resources and where value is actually created. Organizations typically spend approximately 40% of their time and budget on strategy and planning, 30% on technology selection, and only 30% on execution and change management. Yet the value creation pattern is inverted: strategy contributes roughly 15% of realized value, technology selection 20%, and execution and change management a commanding 65%.

This execution gap—the systematic underinvestment in the activities that drive value—is a primary driver of the 79% failure rate. Organizations optimize for the comfortable, consultant-friendly phases of strategy and design, then struggle when confronted with the messy reality of implementation.

The Fractional Advantage in Execution

Experienced fractional consultants bring a critical advantage: pattern recognition from multiple transformations. A full-time hire, even with strong credentials, typically has deep experience in one or two organizational contexts. A fractional consultant with 15+ years of experience may have led 10-20 transformations across different industries, geographies, and scales.

This breadth of experience translates into:

Faster problem diagnosis. Fractional consultants recognize failure patterns before they compound. They have seen how similar challenges manifested in other contexts and can quickly identify root causes rather than symptoms.

Proven playbooks. Rather than developing approaches through trial and error, fractional consultants bring tested frameworks that reduce risk and accelerate time to value. They know which methodologies work in which contexts and can adapt them to specific organizational needs.

Cross-industry insights. Solutions from adjacent industries that internal teams would not consider become available. A fractional consultant who has led banking transformations, retail digitization, and manufacturing automation can bring insights from each domain to bear on new challenges.

Vendor neutrality. Without legacy relationships that bias technology choices, fractional consultants can make objective recommendations based solely on client needs and business outcomes.

III. Core Principle 2: Change Management is Continuous, Not Episodic

The Talent and Change Management Gap

Deloitte's research identifies talent and change management as the top budget allocation gap [4]. Organizations recognize its importance but systematically underfund and understaff these capabilities. While technical workstreams typically consume 60% of transformation budgets, change management receives only 15%, training and enablement 10%, communication 5%, and leadership alignment 10%.

This allocation pattern contradicts what we know about transformation success factors. Technical implementation typically accounts for only 30% of transformation impact, while people-related factors—change adoption, capability building, leadership alignment, and cultural shift—drive 70% of value realization.

The Human Capital Equation

The Deloitte study reveals that over half of transformation team resources are now dedicated full-time to transformation programs [4]. This represents a significant shift from the historical model of part-time involvement, but it creates a new challenge: where do these full-time resources come from?

For Southeast Asian enterprises, this presents a particular dilemma. The region's average monthly wages stand at just 7% of US levels [6], which affects both the availability of experienced transformation talent and the economics of building large internal teams. Organizations must compete for a limited pool of qualified professionals while managing cost structures that make large-scale hiring challenging.

The Fractional Solution

A fractional transformation leader can address these constraints through several mechanisms:

Immediate access to change management expertise. Rather than conducting a 6-12 month search for a full-time executive, organizations can engage fractional expertise within weeks. This speed matters because transformation momentum is fragile—delays in leadership create uncertainty that undermines stakeholder commitment.

Flexible scaling of support. Transformation programs have variable intensity across phases. Foundation and mobilization require heavy leadership involvement, while execution phases may need less frequent strategic guidance but more tactical problem-solving. Fractional models allow organizations to match leadership intensity to program needs, paying for expertise when it delivers maximum value.

Transfer of capabilities to internal teams. Effective fractional consultants operate as embedded coaches, building internal capability while driving results. They document processes, train team members, and create sustainable practices that outlast their engagement. This knowledge transfer is often contractually mandated, unlike full-time executives who may leave with critical institutional knowledge.

Cost efficiency. Organizations pay for expertise only when needed, not for administrative overhead, internal meetings, or activities that do not directly advance transformation objectives. This efficiency is particularly valuable in Southeast Asian markets where capital constraints require disciplined resource allocation.

IV. Core Principle 3: Measurement Drives Accountability

The Metrics That Matter

Contrary to the narrative that "transformation often fails," Deloitte's research shows that more than 80% of programs are on track to meet or exceed performance targets [4]. However, this statistic requires context: these are programs with dedicated CTOs, substantial budgets, and rigorous measurement frameworks.

Successful transformations distinguish between leading and lagging indicators. Leading indicators—team velocity, stakeholder engagement scores, risk mitigation rates, and change adoption percentages—predict future performance and enable proactive course correction. Lagging indicators—revenue impact, cost reduction, customer satisfaction, and time to market—confirm value realization but offer limited opportunity for intervention.

The most effective transformation scorecards balance both types of metrics, creating clear line of sight from daily activities to business outcomes. Team velocity predicts revenue impact. Stakeholder engagement predicts customer satisfaction. Risk mitigation rates predict cost performance. Change adoption percentages predict time-to-market improvements.

The Accountability Framework

Successful transformations establish clear accountability through four mechanisms:

Executive sponsorship. CXO-level ownership with personal stakes in outcomes creates the political capital necessary to drive difficult decisions. Sponsors must be willing to remove obstacles, resolve conflicts, and hold teams accountable for results.

Milestone-based governance. Go/no-go decisions at defined checkpoints prevent organizations from continuing to invest in failing initiatives. These decision points must be genuine—not rubber stamps—with clear criteria for advancement and consequences for underperformance.

Transparent reporting. Real-time dashboards accessible to all stakeholders create shared understanding of progress and challenges. Transparency reduces politics and focuses energy on problem-solving rather than blame assignment.

Consequence management. Rewards for success and course-correction for underperformance reinforce accountability. This does not mean punitive measures for every setback, but rather clear expectations that performance matters and will be addressed.

Fractional vs Full-Time Accountability

The accountability mechanisms differ significantly between full-time and fractional models:

Commitment duration. Full-time CTOs typically commit for multi-year periods tied to program completion, creating stability but also inertia if the fit proves poor. Fractional consultants work on milestone-based contracts that are renewable, allowing organizations to adjust or replace leadership at natural transition points.

Accountability mechanisms. Full-time executives operate under employment contracts with compensation tied to outcomes, but these ties are often indirect and long-term. Fractional consultants work under statements of work with payment explicitly tied to deliverables, creating tighter accountability loops.

Flexibility. Replacing an underperforming full-time CTO involves high switching costs—severance, search fees, onboarding time, and organizational disruption. Fractional consultants can be replaced at milestone boundaries with minimal disruption, as their work is documented and transferable.

Incentive alignment. Full-time executives are incentivized by long-term organizational success, but also by resume building, internal politics, and career advancement. Fractional consultants are incentivized by reputation and referrals, which depend entirely on delivering measurable results. A fractional consultant's next engagement depends on current client success, creating powerful alignment with outcomes.

Knowledge transfer. Full-time executives may leave with critical knowledge when they depart, creating organizational vulnerability. Fractional consultants are contractually obligated to document processes, train teams, and ensure knowledge transfer, as this is an explicit deliverable of their engagement.

V. Core Principle 4: Technology Choices Must Serve Business Outcomes

The Technology Trap

IBM's core banking study reveals a sobering reality: 73% of banks found it harder to manage costs for system updates after modernization, while 69% found it harder to maintain adequate risk management [3]. These findings suggest that technology choices were driven by vendor promises rather than business requirements.

The pattern is familiar across industries. Organizations select technologies based on analyst reports, vendor relationships, or resume-building considerations rather than rigorous assessment of business needs. They pursue "cloud-first" strategies without evaluating which workloads actually benefit from cloud deployment. They adopt AI platforms because competitors are doing so, not because they have identified high-value use cases.

The Correct Technology Selection Sequence

Successful transformations follow a disciplined sequence:

Business outcomes first. What specific business results must the transformation deliver? Revenue growth? Cost reduction? Customer experience improvement? Risk mitigation? These outcomes must be quantified and prioritized.

Process design second. How must business processes change to deliver these outcomes? What new capabilities are required? What existing processes must be eliminated or streamlined?

Capability requirements third. What technical and organizational capabilities are necessary to support the new processes? What data must be available? What integration points are required? What skills must teams possess?

Technology selection fourth. Given the capability requirements, which technologies best fit the organization's context, constraints, and objectives? This evaluation must consider total cost of ownership, vendor viability, integration complexity, and organizational readiness.

Vendor evaluation fifth. Among the technologies that meet requirements, which vendors offer the best combination of product maturity, service quality, pricing, and strategic alignment?

Implementation sixth. How will the selected technologies be deployed, integrated, and operationalized to deliver the intended business outcomes?

Organizations that reverse this sequence—starting with technology and force-fitting it to business needs—are the ones reporting increased costs and complexity post-modernization.

The Vendor Neutrality Advantage

Full-time executives often develop relationships with specific vendors over their careers, creating unconscious bias in technology selection. They may also be influenced by resume building (choosing trendy technologies to enhance marketability), risk aversion (selecting "safe" enterprise vendors even when better alternatives exist), or ecosystem lock-in (preferring vendors they have worked with before).

Fractional consultants, by contrast, are evaluated on outcomes delivered, not technologies deployed. Their reputation depends on making the right choice for each specific context, creating natural incentive alignment with client interests. They have no vendor relationships to protect, no resume to build, and no career advancement to consider. Their sole focus is selecting technologies that will deliver business value in the client's specific context.

VI. Core Principle 5: Context Matters—Especially in Southeast Asia

The Regional Complexity Challenge

Southeast Asia presents unique challenges that require specialized expertise. The region is not a monolith but a collection of distinct markets, each with its own regulatory environment, infrastructure maturity, cultural norms, and competitive dynamics.

Singapore operates as a regional hub with advanced infrastructure, strict data protection laws, and high talent costs. Organizations based in Singapore benefit from world-class connectivity and a sophisticated regulatory environment but face intense competition for digital skills.

Indonesia offers massive market scale—the world's fourth-largest population—but presents challenges in regulatory fragmentation, infrastructure gaps, and geographic dispersion across thousands of islands. Digital transformations must account for limited connectivity in secondary cities and diverse consumer behaviors across regions.

Thailand has a strong industrial base and conservative banking sector with moderate digital adoption. Transformations must navigate established business relationships and hierarchical decision-making structures while building digital capabilities.

The Philippines benefits from English proficiency and a service-oriented workforce, making it a hub for business process outsourcing. The convergence of telecommunications and banking creates unique opportunities for mobile-first financial services.

Vietnam has a young, digitally native population and rapid economic growth. However, organizations face challenges in regulatory clarity and the need to build foundational infrastructure while scaling operations.

The Regional Expertise Premium

A full-time transformation leader with deep Southeast Asian experience commands a significant premium—often 30-50% above comparable roles in single-country markets. For organizations operating across multiple SEA markets, the challenge compounds: do you hire for Singapore expertise, Indonesian scale, or regional breadth?

The talent market dynamics create additional complexity. Singapore-based executives may lack understanding of Indonesia's market realities. Jakarta-based leaders may not have experience with Singapore's regulatory sophistication. Regional leaders with multi-market experience are rare and expensive.

The Fractional Model Advantage

H&F Advisers' fractional consultants bring several advantages in this context:

Multi-market experience. Partners who have built and scaled platforms across 56 countries bring pattern recognition that single-market executives cannot match. They understand which approaches are universal and which require localization.

Regulatory knowledge. Deep expertise in open banking, digital payments, and fintech regulation across Southeast Asia enables organizations to navigate complex compliance requirements without costly missteps.

Network effects. Connections to regulators, technology partners, and talent pools in each market accelerate execution. Fractional consultants can facilitate introductions, provide market intelligence, and help organizations avoid common pitfalls.

Cost efficiency. Organizations access regional expertise without relocating a full-time executive or paying Singapore-level compensation for Indonesia-focused work. Fractional consultants can work across markets as needed, providing the right expertise in the right place at the right time.

VII. The Economic Case: Full-Time vs Fractional

Total Cost of Ownership Analysis

The economic comparison between full-time and fractional leadership extends beyond base salary to encompass total cost of ownership.

The Value Equation

The economic case for fractional expertise becomes compelling when we consider time to value and risk mitigation:

Time to value. A full-time hire requires 6-12 months from search initiation to full productivity, including search process, notice period, relocation, and organizational context building. A fractional consultant can begin delivering value within 1-2 weeks, immediately deploying proven frameworks and methodologies.

Risk mitigation. If a full-time hire proves to be a poor fit, the switching cost is substantial—typically 12-18 months to recognize the problem, make the decision to change, and replace the executive. With fractional consultants, organizations can evaluate performance at milestone boundaries (typically 30-90 days) and adjust or replace leadership with minimal disruption.

Capability transfer. Full-time executives may leave with critical knowledge when they depart, creating organizational vulnerability and knowledge loss. Fractional consultants are contractually obligated to document processes, train internal teams, and ensure knowledge transfer as an explicit deliverable of their engagement.

VIII. The H&F Advisers Framework: Principles in Practice

The Four-Phase Transformation Model

H&F Advisers structures transformation engagements across four distinct phases, each with specific objectives, activities, and deliverables. The fractional engagement model allows for variable intensity across phases, matching leadership investment to value creation opportunities.

Phase 1: Foundation (Weeks 1-4)

The foundation phase establishes the transformation's strategic direction, governance structure, and execution roadmap. Fractional consultants typically engage 4-5 days per week during this intensive period.

Objectives:

Assess current state capabilities and identify gaps relative to future state requirements

Define transformation vision and quantified business outcomes

Build detailed transformation roadmap with clear milestones and decision points

Establish governance structure, decision rights, and escalation protocols

Fractional consultant activities:

Conduct stakeholder interviews across business units and functions to understand perspectives, concerns, and aspirations

Review existing architecture, processes, and capabilities through documentation analysis and system walkthroughs

Benchmark performance against industry best practices and regional comparators to identify improvement opportunities

Develop comprehensive business case with ROI projections, risk assessment, and resource requirements

Deliverables:

Transformation charter articulating vision, objectives, scope, and success criteria

Governance framework defining decision rights, meeting cadence, and escalation paths

Detailed resource plan and budget allocation across workstreams

Risk register identifying potential obstacles and mitigation strategies

Phase 2: Mobilization (Weeks 5-12)

The mobilization phase builds the team, establishes infrastructure, and initiates quick wins to demonstrate value and build organizational momentum. Fractional consultant engagement typically reduces to 3-4 days per week as internal teams assume greater responsibility.

Objectives:

Build and onboard transformation team with required skills and experience

Establish program management infrastructure including tools, processes, and reporting mechanisms

Initiate quick win initiatives in 1-2 business domains to demonstrate value and build credibility

Align stakeholders on transformation vision, approach, and expectations

Fractional consultant activities:

Define team structure and recruit key roles, including both internal transfers and external hires

Implement program management tools and processes for tracking progress, managing risks, and facilitating collaboration

Launch pilot initiatives that can deliver measurable results within 90 days

Facilitate leadership alignment sessions to build commitment and address concerns

Deliverables:

Fully staffed transformation team with clear roles, responsibilities, and accountability

Operational program management office with established processes and tools

Quick win results demonstrating tangible value and validating transformation approach

Comprehensive change management and communication plan addressing stakeholder needs

Phase 3: Execution (Months 4-12)

The execution phase delivers core transformation initiatives, scales successful pilots, and builds sustainable internal capabilities. Fractional consultant engagement typically reduces to 2-3 days per week, focusing on strategic guidance, obstacle removal, and coaching.

Objectives:

Deliver core transformation initiatives that drive the majority of business value

Scale successful pilots across the organization, adapting to different contexts as needed

Build internal capabilities through coaching, knowledge transfer, and hands-on collaboration

Course-correct based on learnings, changing market conditions, and emerging opportunities

Fractional consultant activities:

Provide strategic guidance on complex decisions and remove organizational obstacles

Coach internal leaders on transformation management, change leadership, and stakeholder engagement

Facilitate cross-functional collaboration to address integration challenges and dependencies

Monitor metrics rigorously and drive accountability for results

Deliverables:

Completed transformation initiatives delivering measurable business value

Internal team capable of managing ongoing transformation without external support

Documented lessons learned and best practices for future transformation waves

Sustained performance improvement validated through business metrics

Phase 4: Sustainment (Months 13+)

The sustainment phase transitions from transformation mode to continuous improvement, embedding new capabilities and optimizing value realization. Fractional consultant engagement typically reduces to 1-2 days per week for advisory support and periodic health checks.

Objectives:

Transition from transformation mode to continuous improvement as business-as-usual

Embed new capabilities and ways of working into organizational culture and processes

Measure and optimize value realization, ensuring transformation benefits are sustained

Build organizational muscle for future transformation waves

Fractional consultant activities:

Conduct periodic health checks and optimization reviews to identify improvement opportunities

Provide advisory support for complex decisions and emerging challenges

Facilitate knowledge sharing and capability building across the organization

Support planning for next transformation wave based on lessons learned

Deliverables:

Self-sustaining transformation capability embedded in the organization

Continuous improvement processes that drive ongoing optimization

Full value realization from transformation investments validated through business results

Organizational readiness for next transformation cycle

IX. When to Choose Full-Time vs Fractional: A Decision Matrix

The Full-Time CTO is Right When:

Organizations should consider hiring a full-time Chief Transformation Officer when several conditions align:

Scale and duration. Multi-year, enterprise-wide transformations with budgets exceeding $50 million require sustained leadership presence. The complexity and political navigation demands of these programs justify full-time executive attention.

Organizational complexity. Highly matrixed organizations with 10+ business units requiring constant coordination benefit from full-time leadership. The stakeholder management and alignment requirements exceed what fractional engagement can reasonably provide.

Political navigation. Significant internal resistance requiring full-time stakeholder management and coalition building may necessitate full-time presence. Some organizational cultures require constant executive visibility to maintain momentum.

Regulatory intensity. Heavily regulated industries such as banking and healthcare with ongoing compliance transformations may require full-time leadership to manage regulatory relationships and ensure continuous compliance.

Talent development. Organizations with a strategic priority to build internal transformation capability through an apprenticeship model may benefit from full-time leadership that can mentor and develop future transformation leaders.

The Fractional Consultant is Right When:

Fractional consulting models offer advantages in several common scenarios:

Speed. Organizations that need to start immediately without a 6-12 month search process benefit from fractional consultants who can begin delivering value within weeks.

Focused scope. Specific transformation initiatives such as core banking modernization or AI implementation, rather than enterprise-wide programs, are well-suited to fractional expertise with deep domain knowledge.

Expertise gap. Organizations needing specialized skills—such as open banking implementation, stablecoin infrastructure, or regulatory compliance—that are not available internally can access this expertise through fractional engagement.

Budget constraints. Limited budgets that cannot support full-time senior executive compensation can access world-class expertise through fractional models at 40-60% of full-time costs.

Flexibility. Uncertain duration or scope requiring ability to scale leadership up or down matches the fractional model's inherent flexibility.

Regional coverage. Multi-market transformations across Southeast Asia requiring diverse market expertise benefit from fractional consultants with regional experience rather than single-market executives.

Risk mitigation. Organizations that want to test transformation approaches with experienced practitioners before committing to full-time hires can use fractional engagements as extended evaluations.

The Hybrid Model: Best of Both Worlds

Many successful transformations employ a hybrid approach that combines the strengths of both models:

Fractional consultant provides strategic leadership, proven frameworks, and specialized expertise at the top of the organization. This individual sets direction, makes key decisions, and coaches the team.

Full-time program manager handles day-to-day execution, team coordination, and stakeholder communication. This individual ensures continuity, maintains organizational knowledge, and manages operational details.

Internal team delivers workstreams with coaching from the fractional consultant. Team members build capabilities while executing transformation initiatives.

This hybrid model offers several advantages:

Cost efficiency. Organizations pay for fractional expertise only for strategic leadership while leveraging lower-cost internal resources for execution.

Continuity. The full-time program manager provides organizational continuity and institutional knowledge while the fractional consultant brings external perspective and specialized expertise.

Capability building. Embedded coaching from the fractional consultant builds internal capabilities that outlast the engagement.

Flexibility. Organizations can adjust the fractional consultant's involvement as the transformation evolves, scaling up during critical phases and down during steady-state execution.

X. Conclusion: Choosing Execution Excellence Over Credentials

The data is unambiguous: transformation success is determined by execution excellence, not strategic brilliance. The 79% failure rate persists not because organizations lack vision or resources, but because they struggle to translate strategy into sustained organizational change.

For Southeast Asian enterprises navigating the complexities of digital transformation in fragmented, rapidly evolving markets, the leadership model matters profoundly. The choice between full-time and fractional expertise should be guided by principles, not convention:

Principle 1: Execution trumps strategy. Choose leaders with proven delivery track records across multiple transformations, not just strategic planning credentials.

Principle 2: Change management is continuous. Invest in people and organizational capabilities, not just technology platforms.

Principle 3: Measurement drives accountability. Establish clear metrics, transparent reporting, and consequences for performance.

Principle 4: Technology serves business. Maintain vendor neutrality and relentless focus on business outcomes rather than technology for its own sake.

Principle 5: Context matters. Prioritize regional expertise and deep market knowledge over generic transformation experience.

The fractional consulting model, exemplified by H&F Advisers' approach, offers a compelling alternative to traditional full-time hires for many transformation scenarios. By providing immediate access to battle-tested expertise, flexible engagement models, and cost-efficient delivery, fractional consultants enable organizations to beat the 79% failure rate and achieve sustainable transformation success.

The question is not whether your organization needs transformation leadership—it does. The question is whether you will choose the model that maximizes your probability of success given your specific context, constraints, and objectives. In Southeast Asia's dynamic, competitive, and complex markets, that choice increasingly favors fractional expertise that delivers execution excellence over full-time credentials that promise strategic vision.

Sarah Huang is Managing Partner and Fractional Chief Product & Commercial Officer at H&F Advisers, where she specializes in helping businesses unlock revenue, secure funding, and achieve product-market fit across the Asia-Pacific region. With 18 years of experience spanning software development, strategic consultancy, and monetization.

Sarah's expertise lies in pitching and winning paying customers—driving commercial momentum where it matters most. She partners with visionary founders, scaling teams, and global brands to architect go-to-market strategies that integrate product readiness, value proposition design, channel alignment, and commercial execution. Her approach combines deep market insight with practical execution, enabling businesses to move with clarity and confidence in fast-changing markets.

At H&F Advisers, our firm champions the fractional consulting model—providing clients with immediate access to world-class expertise without the cost and complexity of full-time executive hires. H&F work focuses on translating strategic vision into measurable business outcomes through short, high-intensity engagements that build internal capabilities and deliver results that last beyond the project.

Contact: For transformation leadership inquiries, please send your inquiry to team@hfadvisers.com

---

References

[1] SynergyLabs. (2025, October 3). Best Practices for Legacy System Modernization in 2025. Retrieved from https://www.synergylabs.co/blog/best-practices-for-legacy-system-modernization-in-2025

[2] Boston Consulting Group. (2025, September 30). Are You Generating Value from AI? The Widening Gap. Retrieved from https://www.bcg.com/publications/2025/are-you-generating-value-from-ai-the-widening-gap

[3] IBM Institute for Business Value. (2025, September 22). The 94% core banking problem. Retrieved from https://www.ibm.com/thought-leadership/institute-business-value/en-us/report/core-banking-modernization

[4] Deloitte. (2025, April 22). 2025 Chief Transformation Officer Study: Six Things to Know About Transformations Today. Retrieved from https://www.deloitte.com/us/en/about/press-room/2025-chief-transformation-officer-study.html

[5] McKinsey & Company. (2024, August 7). What is digital transformation? Retrieved from https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/mckinsey-explainers/what-is-digital-transformation

[6] Bain & Company. (2025, October). The Southeast Asia CEO's Guide to AI Transformation. Retrieved from https://www.bain.com/insights/the-southeast-asia-ceos-guide-to-ai-transformation/

[7] H&F Advisers. (2025). About Our Team. Retrieved from https://www.hfadvisers.com/about