Assuming that we are committed to the interim or consulting routes there are a few other nuances to consider; alignment to client need and knowledge transfer.
The world of interim is relatively small, and everyone thrives or fails based on their reputation. Their only goal in every assignment is to deliver maximum value for their client, as failing to do so can limit or end their interim career.
This is not necessarily the case with many consulting firms, where partners and senior individuals are under pressure (and rewarded) to sell more work/services to clients which makes it tempting for consulting firms to place client needs secondary to generating revenue.
Secondly, whereas an interim professional’s reputation is based not purely on delivering a solution, but on how much value that solution delivers after the interim has left, they have a significant interest in ensuring that the client is fully capable of operating without them once they have finished their assignment – fully completing their knowledge transfer.
This is not necessarily so for consulting firms, and the commercial rewards of repeat business can make it tempting not to complete knowledge transfer, creating dependencies that allow the firm to continue to charge to support the client.
It would be unfair of me not to point out that there are areas where, for reasons of size, complexity and risk profile of the solution required that the interim path is simply not capable of delivering, making consulting the only option.