Wednesday, December 24, 2008

Successful Succession Management


From the latest issue of DDI Directions:

In this excerpt from his article, “Your Next CEO: Why succession planning is more important than ever,” published in the November/December 2008 issue of The Conference Board Review, DDI’s Vice President of Executive Solutions Matthew Paese, Ph.D., offers the following tips for Succession Success:

Start soon and never stop. How soon? Now. Over and over, we see organizations caught unprepared by unexpected crises or opportunities and forced to suddenly look outside for the next CEO. This not only ensures a likely drop in stock value—it introduces significantly greater business risk, since externally sourced CEOs are more likely to fail.

Some have suggested that CEO succession should begin at least three years prior to the anticipated change. This recommendation, or any that prescribes a specified time frame in which to administer the succession process, misses the point. CEO succession must begin immediately and must be a constant, ongoing process that is managed as closely and regularly as the organization’s most pressing business affairs.

Look more closely at candidates. In the same way that emerging CEO demands are difficult to predict, so too are the human beings that occupy those roles. However, the prevailing method for assessing CEOs—to extensively interview candidates—dramatically oversimplifies both the job and the individuals who might fill it. To achieve a more accurate assessment of CEO capability, boards must better define requirements and more deeply assess the capabilities of the incoming CEO.

This means breaking the tradition of private interviews with board members, long many companies’ most important—or even the only—assessment method. Interviews are unquestionably a central component to this process, but the typical unstructured interview is riddled with inherent error and must be enhanced by additional assessment measures, particularly leadership simulations, to more closely examine central attributes that might not otherwise be detected.

Make the growth of top leaders a board imperative. If we are realistic, we must recognize that scenarios will sometimes arise in which no viable internal candidate is available. However, this should not deter organizations from constantly cultivating and growing top leaders’ capabilities. Hesitations rooted in the fear of a horse race, political dynamics, or the job security of the incumbent CEO must be dispatched in favor of more enterprise-conscious strategies. Boards must assume that the CEO role is always unstable, and that the organization’s top leaders must be developed to the very peak of their potential to sustain maximum agility.

This requires that the company identifies a pool of internal leaders as potential CEO candidates and develop them toward that standard. Top management should conduct early assessments and prepare individualized development strategies to be discussed with the board. Since development must support the organization, each development plan should be reviewed for its impact on business progress as well as on individual growth. Measures of success in both arenas should be tracked and reported to the board regularly.

Use CEO succession as a model for talent strategy. CEO succession is not a decision—it is an ongoing process to diligently foster and drive the growth of internal leadership capability. To adequately address the challenge, boards must begin by developing a strategy for CEO succession that encompasses the identification and recruitment of high-potential leaders from inside and outside the organization, the profiling of the CEO role and its core challenges, the assessment of candidates’ leadership capabilities, and the accelerated growth of a pool of leaders toward the CEO target.

While CEO succession is aimed at a single position, the principles apply to talent growth across the entire organization. If done poorly, the organization fights an uphill battle to build sanction, support, and involvement in processes that drive talent growth. If done well, CEO succession not only ensures stability at the top post—it can serve as a model of how talent should be cultivated and deployed for the long-term benefit of the enterprise.

I'd like to wish all of my readers a very Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays 2008!
....and don't forget to leave cookies for Santa tonight.

12 comments:

Rachel - I Hate HR said...

Great points. At my company the CEO just stepped down after 30 years. Even though everyone knew he was close to retiring there was no succession plan. Recruitment was done with through the Board and the CEO's direct reports. No one knew who the candidates even were except those involved in the process. I don't think hiring a new CEO and throwing it at the people is the right away to go - especially when you have an organization of 170 like I do.

Dan McCarthy said...

Rachel -
right, it's amazing how often CEO replacement is mishandled.

steveroesler said...

Dan,

Good article and good advice...been through four of these as the consultant and each one has led to "we're not going to let this happen again."

Merry Christmas to you and those close to you...

Welshcakes Limoncello said...

Hope you're having a good Xmas.

Dan McCarthy said...

Steve, Welshcakes,
Merry Christmas to you too!
Dan

Anonymous said...

Good advice - I've found that succession planning is particularly important with new organizations where the founder is the CEO. Any organization without clear succession plan is unstable.

tom@leadingtoserve.com

Dan McCarthy said...

Tom -
Good point, and more and more Boards are becoming involved, even beyond the CEO position.

Waugust said...

The best succession planning comes from those who are the most assured in their own ability and place in the organization. Unfortunately that leaves out a lot of CEO's who are not so.

The CEO Insights said...

Nice Article.
I believe CEO succession planing is always a healthy sign for the organization..but then there can be such unforeseeable circumstances that all planning may become irrelevant..

for Eg. when Jeff. Immelt joined GE in 2001, the worst attack of terror was seen by the US, all markets down, and GE's business Finance operations down drastically..but then Jeff. handled..is it by LUCK ?? or by the planning ??

In second situation, we ahve famili business, like TATA Group..

here the planning becomes irrelevant, as after all, the CEO has to come from the same family..

But again to conclude...Succession Planning is a must.

Dheeraj
Facilitator
The CEO Insights
www.theceoinsights.com
theceoinsights@gmail.com

xtasy said...

Hi Dan,

I was just wondering what your thoughts were on hiring a CEO from outside the organization as opposed to an internal hire.

I feel that a person from outside the organization would bring fresh ideas.

My apologies if you have already touched upon this in one of your posts.

Leadership Development

Dan McCarthy said...

Xtasy -
There are pros and cons to both. While sometimes it’s necessary to hire from outside, I think it’s often due to a poor leadership development pipeline. You’re right – external hires bring new ideas into an organization, but they can be hired at all levels. For a CEO, I’d rather have someone that has been developed and prepared, knows the business and culture, and is less of a gamble.

Pawel Brodzinski said...

I have a couple of comments on the subject.

First, it does work the way you described in bigger organizations. In small companies there's usually a big gap beetween C-level execs and the middle management. In that case promotion of one of middle managers to top management requires a lot of trust, which is rare. Most of the time in small companies top management is hired either from ouside or by accident (suprise, surprise - now you're a CEO).

Second, talking about promotions a place where organizations often suck is lower. If your company has, let say, 100 of managers (on different levels) and you can find none of candidates for C-level exec there has to be a problem with people you've promoted or hired to management roles. From my experience that's the area which is managed poorly by many organizations. Problems with CEO succession is a natural consequence of that.