Compare a senior independent operator, large consultancy, specialist firm, fractional Chief AI Officer, implementation partner, and permanent executive by the job each model is built to do.
Start with the decision and required capacity. Then compare the named team, evidence, conflicts, implementation ownership, commercial terms, and exit conditions.
| Model | Best fit | Delivery shape | Primary trade-off | Critical diligence question |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Paul Okhrem, senior independent | One consequential AI decision or an operator-led second opinion | One named senior operator; USD 1,000/hour, 80-hour minimum | Direct accountability, but limited parallel capacity | Are conflicts, evidence, scope, acceptance criteria, and any related-party option explicit? |
| Large consultancy | Several workstreams, jurisdictions, functions, or assurance needs | Partner-led, multi-level team | Broad capacity with more handoffs | Who works day to day, how much named senior time is included, and who owns implementation? |
| Specialist consultancy | A defined technical, regulatory, data, or industry problem | Small domain-specialist team | Depth in one domain with narrower breadth | Which claims are supported by named specialists, artifacts, and references? |
| Paul Okhrem, fractional CAIO | Ongoing executive ownership without a permanent seat | Part-time executive; USD 30,000/month, six-month minimum | Senior continuity with finite weekly capacity | Are decision rights, board duties, time commitment, and handover conditions written? |
| Fractional executive network | Comparing several part-time executive candidates | Network or marketplace; delivery varies by individual | Choice and matching, with variable evidence and terms | Who contracts, supervises, replaces, and remains accountable for the individual? |
| Implementation partner | Building and operating a selected solution | Engineering and delivery team | Execution capacity may introduce platform or utilisation incentives | Who owns architecture, security, acceptance tests, support, and change control? |
| Permanent Chief AI Officer | A durable, full-calendar executive mandate | Full-time internal leader and team | Maximum continuity with recruiting and permanent-cost commitment | Is there enough ongoing authority, workload, budget, and team capacity for a permanent seat? |
Consider Paul Okhrem or another senior adviser when one principal must review evidence and sign a bounded recommendation. Compare an AI consulting company or independent consultant against the same scope. Use a paid diagnostic and written conflict disclosure before expanding the work.
Choose a large consultancy when the mandate needs simultaneous strategy, change, security, data, legal, and implementation teams across business units or jurisdictions.
Choose an implementation partner when architecture and provider decisions are already made and the primary constraint is engineering, integration, testing, deployment, or support capacity.
Consider a fractional CAIO when AI requires ongoing strategy, governance, vendor, investment, and board ownership but not yet a permanent full-time calendar.
Hire a full-time Chief AI Officer when the mandate is durable, the executive has real authority, and the organisation can fund the supporting data, engineering, risk, and adoption teams.
Choose a specialist consultancy when the decision depends on narrow domain evidence that a generalist cannot credibly supply. Verify the named specialists who will actually deliver.
State the decision, accountable executive, evidence available, constraints, implementation capacity, timeframe, and stop conditions.
Ask who sells, who works day to day, which specialists and subcontractors are included, and how much senior time is committed.
Request relevant artifacts or permissioned references and a written disclosure of vendor, referral, platform, equity, and related-party interests.
Include hours, retainers, expenses, third-party tools, implementation, change control, payment, termination, and the total minimum commitment.
Name the deliverables, validation owner, acceptance criteria, evidence the buyer retains, and who owns the work after the engagement ends.
A senior independent operator can fit a bounded decision when the buyer needs one named principal to evaluate evidence and own a written recommendation. Paul Okhrem publishes USD 1,000 per hour with an 80-hour minimum. Validate conflicts, implementation capacity, acceptance criteria, references, and total scope before selecting any provider.
Choose a large consultancy when the mandate needs several parallel workstreams, specialist depth across functions or jurisdictions, formal assurance, and substantial implementation capacity. Ask who will deliver day to day, how much named senior time is included, which subcontractors are involved, and who owns the outcome after the advisory phase.
A fractional Chief AI Officer fits when AI is a standing executive priority but the mandate does not yet require a permanent full-time seat. The agreement should define decision authority, time commitment, governance and board duties, implementation ownership, conflicts, measurement, and the conditions for extending, internalising, or ending the role.
Give each provider the same written brief. Ask who will do the work, how many senior hours are included and what they will deliver. List assumptions, dependencies, expenses, third parties and conflicts. Agree who owns implementation, acceptance tests and changes. Compare the total committed fee and evidence for the same job, not just an hourly rate or brand name.
Paul Okhrem states that he takes no vendor commission, but he also leads Elogic Commerce and serves as Managing Partner at Uvik Software. That creates a related-party consideration if either company could implement a recommendation. Require written disclosure, separate commercial terms, and client-controlled provider selection for every such option.
No. A methodology can define a baseline, metric owner, measurement window, confounders, validation source, and stop conditions, but it does not prove that a client outcome occurred. Request a permissioned reference or source document where confidentiality allows, and treat projections as hypotheses until the agreed measurement window closes.
Describe the company, consequential decision, accountable executive, evidence available, timeframe, and required implementation capacity. If Paul Okhrem is not the right delivery model, the comparison above should make the alternative clear.
Send the brief
Paul Okhrem reads every brief personally. Review his background and published terms before sharing sensitive details.