Fractional General Counsel: Why Growing Businesses Are Making the Shift
Here’s the hard truth: hiring a full-time General Counsel will set you back $200k+ (and that’s before super, payroll, workers compensation and a desk). And let’s be honest—that figure doesn’t always buy “top shelf.”
Now… do the math.
For $30k –$50k, a Fractional GC can:
Draft contracts
Review legal risk management
Advise on a deal & key issues
Scale up when you need extra horsepower
No long-term headcount. No overhead. Just legal firepower on tap.
But here’s the real reason businesses are shifting
Speed that matches business reality Deals don’t wait. Sales don’t pause. Urgent matters aren’t “next week’s problem.” With a fractional GC model, you can get answers in hours, not weeks. Speed to response = winning the deal.
Breadth of expertise One in-house lawyer = one perspective. A fractional model = a bench of experienced specialists you can tap on short notice. The right expertise, at the right time.
Business enabler, not handbrake In-house teams often get a reputation for slowing things down. A fractional GC is wired differently—laser-focused on solving what matters, not creating roadblocks.
Legal risk truth no one talks about: in-house lawyers rarely have PI insurance. Fractional GCs do. That layer of protection matters more than people admit.
For startups and scaling companies, a fractional GC isn’t a “nice to have”—it’s often the smarter first step before building a full team.
I’m curious—lawyers, owners, execs: what’s your take? Would you hire a full-time GC first, or start fractional?
This article is a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
A building professional who can write a report and a building professional who can defend one under cross-examination at VCAT are rarely the same person, and the gap between them is costing property owners claims.
If water from a neighbouring property has damaged your home or investment property in Victoria, section 16 of the Water Act 1989 gives you a direct path to recovery, but only if you can prove exactly where the flow came from and why it was unreasonable.
When a property damage claim moves toward recovery, the tradesperson who fixed the problem and the expert who can prove liability in court are rarely the same person.