Filling a VP of Engineering Seat at a Dev Shop
Filling a VP of Engineering seat at a custom software shop takes six steps, starting with whether the gap is permanent or transitional, and Hunt Club or Bolster fits depending on the answer. Usually the trigger is that the founder still does technical reviews on every project and nobody else can credibly tell a client a timeline slipped.
Hunt Club and Bolster offer two different paths to that hire. Here's a straightforward process for using either one well, in order.
Vendors Covered in this Article
Disclosure: We may earn a commission if you buy through some links on this page. It doesn't change what we recommend.
How do you decide if the gap is permanent or transitional?
Before opening a search on either platform, figure out whether you're hiring someone to run engineering forever, or to get you through a specific transition, like standing up a delivery process before a bigger client engagement or getting a shaky codebase back under control. A permanent VP of Engineering is a Hunt Club search: full-time, built to manage a growing team over years. A transitional need, where you want a senior operator for three to six months to fix something specific, is closer to what Bolster's fractional and interim listings are built for.
Most founders skip this step and regret it later, either paying full-time compensation for a problem that resolves in a quarter, or trying to stretch a fractional engagement to cover a role that really needed someone in the building every day.
How do you write a scorecard before reviewing any candidate?
Define what "good" looks like in the role's first six months in concrete terms: delivery predictability on client engagements, a specific process the new hire needs to stand up, or a team structure they need to build. Do this before you start reviewing candidates on either platform, because it's easy to fall for a strong resume that doesn't actually match what your business needs from this particular seat.
For a dev shop specifically, weigh client-facing communication skills as heavily as technical depth. A VP of Engineering here isn't just managing code; they're often the person a nervous client calls when a deadline is at risk, and that requires a different skill than pure technical leadership.
Step Three: Run the Process on the Platform That Matches the Gap
If you're running a Hunt Club search, expect a recruiter-managed process built around candidates surfaced through referrals inside their operator network, aimed squarely at a permanent hire. If you're using Bolster, you're doing more of the legwork yourself, browsing a marketplace of vetted fractional and interim engineering leaders and reaching out directly, which moves faster but puts more of the screening burden on you.
Whichever path you choose, SHRM's 2025 data put the median time-to-fill for a nonexecutive role at 44 days from requisition to offer accepted, with executive-level searches often stretching well past that once you add technical assessments1. A fractional or interim engagement sourced through a marketplace can typically start in a fraction of that time, which matters if a client deadline is the reason you're hiring.
Step Four: Budget for the Real Cost, Not Just the Rate
SHRM's 2025 benchmarking survey also found the average cost of an executive hire runs $35,879 once agency fees, job postings, and internal recruiting time are added up, against $5,475 for a nonexecutive role2. A retained search through Hunt Club will land in that range; a fractional or interim engagement through Bolster is typically billed as an hourly or monthly rate instead, without a placement fee attached, which changes how you should budget for it.
Factor in ramp time either way. A permanent VP of Engineering needs weeks to understand your codebase and client relationships before they're fully productive; a fractional or interim leader brought in for a narrower problem should be contributing almost immediately, since that's the whole premise of the engagement.
Step Five: Check References Against Delivery Outcomes, Not Just Team Size
Ask every reference the same question: did engineering delivery become more predictable under this person, and can they point to a specific example? Team size managed is a weak signal on its own; a VP of Engineering who ran a twenty-person team through constant deadline slippage isn't a better fit than one who ran a team of six with a clean delivery record.
For either a Hunt Club or Bolster hire, also ask specifically about how the candidate handled a client-facing crisis, since that scenario will happen again at your company and it's the clearest window into how they'll actually perform under pressure. For a broader comparison that includes traditional retained search firms, our Hunt Club vs Bolster vs Heidrick guide covers a third option worth knowing about.
Step Six: Plan the First Client Introduction Before Day One
Whoever fills the seat will need credibility with clients immediately, especially on any engagement that's currently at risk. Draft a short introduction plan before the hire even starts: which client relationships they'll take over first, and who on the existing team will shadow the handoff so nothing slips during the transition.
This matters more for a permanent Hunt Club hire, who will hold those relationships going forward, but it's still worth doing for an interim or fractional Bolster engagement, since the whole point of bringing them in is usually a client-facing problem that needs to be visibly fixed.
The six steps in order:
- Decide whether the VP of Engineering gap is permanent or transitional before opening a search on either platform.
- Write a scorecard defining what good looks like in the first six months, before looking at any candidate.
- Match the process to the gap: a recruiter-managed Hunt Club search for a permanent hire, or browsing Bolster's fractional and interim leaders yourself.
- Budget for the real cost of an executive hire, not just the rate.
- Check references against delivery outcomes rather than team size.
- Plan the first client introduction before the hire's first day.
What Good Looks Like
A software development company can name, in writing, what delivery predictability should look like six months after a new engineering leader starts, and it has matched the hiring vehicle, fractional, interim, or permanent, to that specific gap rather than to whichever platform was easiest to start with.
Building The Capability (5-Stage Skill Ladder)
How to Get Started
Disclosure: We may earn a commission if you buy through some links on this page. It doesn't change what we recommend.
If a new engineering leader means opening an office or hiring contractors in another state, get that state's filing requirements handled before it becomes a compliance problem.
A growing engineering team usually means more contractor and vendor payments each month, so automated payroll and clean banking save real time once headcount grows.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is a fractional VP of Engineering realistic for a dev shop with active client deadlines?
It can work well for a defined, time-boxed problem, like stabilizing delivery on one engagement or standing up a process, but it's a weaker fit if you need someone managing day-to-day client relationships across multiple projects indefinitely. Match the engagement length to the actual scope of the problem.
How technical does a VP of Engineering need to be at a custom software company?
Technical enough to make credible calls on architecture and scope tradeoffs, but the harder skill to find is someone who can translate technical risk into terms a nervous client understands. Weight both in your interview process rather than defaulting to whoever has the most impressive technical background.
Should we use both platforms for the same search?
Some companies run a Bolster engagement for interim coverage while a Hunt Club search runs in parallel for the permanent hire, which keeps delivery stable while you take the time to find the right long-term leader. Just be clear internally about which one is the actual end state.
Sources
Where we quote a benchmark, we show its source. Other figures in this guide are estimates or general guidance, so check them against your own numbers.
- Median time-to-fill, requisition open to offer accepted (SHRM 2025). SHRM 2025 Recruiting Executives Benchmarking data brief (PDF), 2025.
- Average cost-per-hire (SHRM 2025 Benchmarking). SHRM 2025 Benchmarking Reports press release, 2025.
Related Guides
Hunt Club vs Bolster vs Heidrick: Executive Search Compared
Compare Hunt Club, Bolster, and Heidrick & Struggles for executive recruiting and interim CXO placement. Evaluate fees, talent networks, and fill times.
Board Software for a Custom Software Shop's Advisory Board
Custom software and product engineering shops rarely answer to a venture board. How to choose between Diligent and BoardPro for an advisory or owner board.
Cap Table Software for Custom Software Shops: Pulley vs Carta
How a custom software and product engineering shop should weigh Pulley against Carta for equity grants, partner buy-ins, and dilution.
Optery or DeleteMe for a Custom Software Shop
How principals at custom software and product engineering firms should weigh Optery's automated removal against DeleteMe's human-run service.
Vouch vs Embroker for Custom Software and Product Engineering Shops
A step-by-step look at how a custom software or product engineering company should evaluate Vouch and Embroker for tech E&O and cyber coverage.
PEO Choices for a Custom Software Shop
Why a product engineering and custom software firm should evaluate Justworks and TriNet differently than a SaaS company, with IP and staffing tradeoffs.