Every board knows that succession planning is important. Governance experts emphasize it. Proxy advisors evaluate it. Investors ask about it. Yet meaningful succession planning remains elusive for most organizations.
The gap between intention and execution reflects deeper organizational dynamics—dynamics that make succession planning one of the most avoided conversations in corporate governance.
Why Succession Planning Gets Avoided
It's Uncomfortable: Succession planning requires acknowledging that current leaders will eventually leave. For CEOs, discussing their own succession can feel like planning their obsolescence. For boards, it can feel like expressing dissatisfaction with current leadership. Neither party is eager to have that conversation.
It Seems Premature: When things are going well, succession planning feels unnecessary. When things are going poorly, it feels too urgent for thoughtful planning. There's rarely a "right time" that feels natural to the organization.
It's Complex: Thoughtful succession planning requires honest assessment of current leadership, objective evaluation of internal candidates, and disciplined cultivation of talent pipelines. It's much easier to assume things will work out.
It Creates Politics: Identifying potential successors creates internal competition. Executives not named as successors may become flight risks. Internal dynamics shift in ways that can be destabilizing.
The Cost of Avoidance
But avoiding succession planning extracts its own costs.
Emergency Transitions: CEOs leave unexpectedly—for health reasons, personal circumstances, or sudden performance issues. Without succession planning, organizations face rushed searches, interim solutions, and extended periods of uncertainty.
Missed Internal Development: The best succession outcomes often come from developing internal candidates over years. Organizations that don't plan forfeit this option, limiting themselves to external searches when transitions occur.
Talent Loss: High-potential executives who don't see a path to advancement leave. The organization loses future leaders to competitors who offer clearer trajectories.
Governance Gaps: Boards have a fiduciary responsibility to ensure continuity of leadership. Boards that neglect succession planning aren't fulfilling this fundamental duty.
What Good Succession Planning Looks Like
Effective succession planning doesn't require elaborate processes or extensive documentation. It does require honest conversation and disciplined attention.
Regular Discussion: The board should discuss succession at least annually—not as a crisis response, but as a standing governance topic. This normalizes the conversation and removes some of the discomfort.
Emergency Preparedness: At minimum, the board should have a clear emergency succession plan. If the CEO were unable to serve tomorrow, who would step in? This doesn't require identifying a permanent successor, just ensuring continuity.
Internal Talent Assessment: The board should have visibility into internal leadership talent—not just the CEO's direct reports, but the next layer as well. This requires deliberate exposure to high-potential executives through presentations, dinners, and other interactions.
Development Investment: Identifying potential successors is only the beginning. Those individuals need development opportunities—stretch assignments, board exposure, executive coaching—that prepare them for eventual advancement.
External Awareness: Even organizations committed to internal succession should maintain awareness of external candidates. This provides benchmarks for evaluating internal talent and options if internal development doesn't progress as hoped.
The CEO's Role
Succession planning can't happen without the CEO's engagement—but it can't be the CEO's sole responsibility either.
Effective CEOs: - Embrace succession planning as part of their role, not a threat to it - Develop internal talent deliberately, providing stretch opportunities and honest feedback - Give the board genuine access to high-potential executives - Provide candid assessments of internal candidates' readiness and development needs - Recognize that planning their succession is part of leaving a positive legacy
Boards should expect this engagement, and should be concerned when CEOs resist succession conversations or restrict board access to internal talent.
The Board's Role
Ultimately, succession planning is a board responsibility. Boards must: - Insist on regular succession discussion, even when it's uncomfortable - Develop independent perspectives on internal talent, not relying solely on CEO assessments - Ensure development plans exist for high-potential executives - Maintain awareness of external market conditions and candidates - Engage search firms or consultants when independent perspective is needed
Starting the Conversation
If your organization hasn't had meaningful succession conversations, starting can feel daunting. A few approaches that work:
Frame it as Risk Management: Succession planning isn't about replacing current leaders—it's about managing the risk of unexpected transitions. This framing can reduce defensiveness.
Start with Emergency Planning: Begin with the narrower question of who would step in during an emergency. This is easier than discussing permanent succession and establishes the topic as legitimate.
Use External Facilitation: A trusted advisor or executive search firm can facilitate succession discussions, providing objectivity and making conversations feel less personal.
Make it Routine: Add succession to the board calendar as a standing annual topic. Regularity normalizes the conversation.
The Bottom Line
Succession planning isn't about doubting current leadership or rushing to make changes. It's about governance discipline and organizational resilience. The organizations that do it well are better prepared for inevitable transitions—and often develop stronger leadership benches in the process.
The conversation nobody wants to have is precisely the conversation every board should be having. The time to start is now.