Beyond the Iron Law: How Interim Executives Break the Cycle of Project Failures

Beyond the Iron Law: How Interim Executives Break the Cycle of Project Failures

Why Big Projects Keep Failing — and What We Can Do About It

If you’ve ever led a major project, you know the feeling. At first, everything looks promising — timelines make sense, budgets seem reasonable, and the plan looks solid. Then, slowly, cracks start to appear. Deadlines slip — costs balloon. Meetings get longer, but decisions take forever. Eventually, no one even remembers what the original goals were supposed to be.

And yet, somehow, everyone insists it’s still on track.

Bent Flyvbjerg, a global expert on project failures, has spent years studying why big things go wrong. In How Big Things Get Done, he found that 99.5% of large-scale projects fail to meet their original goals. This isn’t just an issue in construction or government projects — it happens in corporate transformations, IT overhauls, and M&A integrations all the time.

So why do executives keep making the same mistakes?

The problem isn’t just lousy planning or overconfidence. Once an organisation commits to something, it becomes nearly impossible to change course — even when things aren’t working.

And that’s where interim executives come in, not as miracle workers or saviours — but as objective outsiders who don’t have to defend past decisions. Their job isn’t to make people comfortable — it’s to get results.

The Real Reason Companies Stick With Failing Projects

Back in 2011, General Electric bet big on digital transformation. Jeff Immelt, GE’s then-CEO, poured billions into GE Digital, envisioning it as the “Microsoft of industrial software.”

The problem? GE wasn’t a software company.

Internally, plenty of people saw the warning signs. The product wasn’t catching on, and the market wasn’t responding the way they hoped. But instead of adapting, GE doubled down, convinced that if they just pushed harder, they could force a transformation.

By the time new leadership finally reversed course, GE had lost $11 billion, and most of its digital business had collapsed.

And here’s the thing — this wasn’t a shock to anyone inside the company.

This is the Commitment Fallacy — leaders get so invested in a plan that even when the evidence says, “This isn’t working,” they convince themselves it’s just a temporary setback. It’s like watching someone put more money into a lousy stock, hoping they can “win it back.”

How an Interim Executive Would Have Handled It Differently

A substantial interim leader wouldn’t have had the luxury of waiting for things to “turn around.” They would have:

• Stopped the bleeding early — instead of chasing an unattainable goal, they would have reevaluated what was working.
• Listened to the sceptics — they would have leaned into them instead of pushing past internal concerns.
• Pivoted sooner — perhaps by scaling back investment or refocusing efforts on a smaller, winnable market.

Would this have saved GE Digital? Maybe. Maybe not. Maybe it was doomed from the start. But one thing is sure: waiting too long to admit failure made the crash even worse.

The Confidence Trap That Sinks Projects

There’s a common belief in business that confident leaders make the best decisions.

That’s not always true.

Flyvbjerg’s research shows that the more confident leaders are, the more likely they are to underestimate risks and overestimate benefits. That’s why projects launch with impossibly optimistic timelines — and why delays are blamed on external factors rather than flawed assumptions.

Take California’s High-Speed Rail Project. It was supposed to cost $33 billion and connect Los Angeles and San Francisco, with operations starting in 2020.

Fast-forward to today:

• The cost has ballooned past $100 billion.
• The project is nowhere near completion.
• Critics now call it the “bullet train to nowhere.”

And yet, California officials refuse to pull the plug.

Why? Once people stake their careers on a project, they will fight to keep it alive — no matter how much it costs.

Why Interim Leaders See What Others Miss

Unlike permanent executives — who are often personally and politically tied to a project — interim leaders don’t have to justify past decisions.

That’s not to say interim leaders always make the right calls. Some approach the job too aggressively, slashing costs without fully understanding the long-term impact. Others try to act too quickly in organisations that require careful change management.

But the one thing they always bring? A willingness to ask the hard questions.

• Are we measuring success the right way?
• Are we underestimating complexity?
• What’s the fastest way to get accurate results?

Permanent executives often chase significant, transformational changes. Interim executives, on the other hand, know that small, testable wins drive success.

Why Execution Is Where Companies Fail

Even when companies get the strategy right, execution is where things fall apart.

Why?

• Too many decision-makers slow things down.
• Fear of failure makes teams hesitant to pivot.
• No clear ownership leads to endless internal debates.

Interim executives don’t have time for corporate theater. Their role forces them to act fast, while permanent leaders often struggle to balance politics and relationships.

Take the case of Volkswagen’s failed ERP integration. The company spent years trying to unify its global IT systems, convinced a single ERP system would improve efficiency.

But here’s what they didn’t account for:

• Local markets had wildly different tax and compliance requirements.
• Some plants were still using decades-old legacy systems that couldn’t integrate.
• The transition was so disruptive that operations slowed to a crawl.

Had an interim leader stepped in, Volkswagen might have made a more practical call — like piloting the system in a few regions first rather than forcing a global rollout. Instead, Volkswagen spent over a billion dollars trying to force-fit a system never designed for such complexity.

The Future of Leadership Is Interim

I wish I could say every project gets saved. Some don’t. Some are too far gone.

But the sooner you admit what’s happening, the better your odds.

If your project is stuck, delayed, or spiralling out of control, ask yourself:

• Are we forcing a failing plan because we’ve already spent too much?
• Do we need fresh eyes — someone who will challenge the status quo?
• Would an interim leader be the missing piece to break this cycle?

Because the real question isn’t whether your project is doomed.

It’s whether you’re willing to be the person who says, “Enough.”