Succession planning must be viewed as a key component of C-suite success and a focus for C-suite leaders, many of whom are being held accountable to ensure appropriate succession plans are in place. In addition, boards want to see robust succession plans. When done correctly, it underpins the organization’s strategy by developing and implementing capabilities that drive its long-term success.
Despite its importance, many organizations are not approaching succession planning with enough diligence. Organizations are 1.7x more likely to have an informal, reactionary approach to succession planning than a formal, proactive one. Via Russell Reynolds Associates’ Global Leadership Monitor, which surveyed 1,690 executives from around the world in Q4 2022, we identified three common failings in succession planning that create strategic risk for organizations:
Board directors and the rest of the leadership team have differing opinions regarding the sophistication of succession planning. Proactive succession planning is created well in advance of need and follows a formal process and criteria to identify and develop potential successors long before that need arises. These plans are also continually updated as business needs change. Nearly half of board directors (48%) describe their organization’s succession planning as proactive, which is notably higher than the number of CxOs who agree (28%). The rosier view among board directors is concerning, as board directors need a clear view into what’s truly happening within an organization to alleviate risk.
Meanwhile, next generation leaders (9%) are unsure of their organization’s succession planning practices, emphasizing the need for C-suite leaders to better communicate with them. While many of these leaders might not be involved in the specifics of succession planning, the lack of visibility into the process is consequential for managing the risk of next generation leaders seeking external opportunities.
Succession planning sophistication
Which statement best describes succession practices at your organization?
Source: Russell Reynolds Associates Q4 2022 Global Leadership Monitor, n = 1,690 global CEOs, C-suite leaders, next generation leaders, and non-executive board directors
Almost half of next generation leaders (49%) don’t believe their organization’s succession plans are future focused. Most board directors (84%), on the other hand, believe their organization’s succession plans are focused on the future. CEOs need to urgently address the lack of confidence from the next generation leaders, who may struggle to see a future path in their organization and seek opportunities elsewhere.
Less than a quarter of all leaders agree that their organization’s succession planning practices are transparent and clearly understood, underscoring the urgent need for greater transparency in the process across all levels. While over two-thirds of board directors (68%) believe succession plans are equitable and inclusive, C-suite (38%) and next generation leaders (33%) are less likely to agree. As a result, there is material retention risk for next generation leaders that, in turn, threatens eroding the succession pipeline. When combined with the uncertainty among next generation leaders around transparency and lack of communication, the lack of trust in succession planning equity and inclusion is worrisome and merits reevaluation.
Succession Practices
My organization's succession practices… (% agreeing or strongly agreeing)
Source: Russell Reynolds Associates Q4 2022 Global Leadership Monitor, n = 1,690 global CEOs, C-suite leaders, next generation leaders, and non-executive board directors
Only 53% of C-suite leaders report development plans for succession candidates, revealing a missed opportunity to focus on successors’ growth and development. Benchmarking internal talent against external talent is a helpful exercise for calibrating the relative strengths and development opportunities. Even so, just 41% of leaders report taking this action. It's especially important to create a more integrated succession plan, whereby the external market can be used to reduce internal succession risk, and/or renew focus on internal talent if the external market will not provide good alternatives. Without the objectivity of market benchmarking, many succession plans are based on existing relationships and performance today—not necessarily the potential of leaders in the future—which opens opportunities for inherent bias.
While 51% of all leaders say that diversity reporting is routinely included in succession practices, we know that simply hiring more diverse talent won’t solve the documented imbalance at the top. Instead, organizations need to build equitable internal talent pipelines that fuel successive leadership plans at every level.
Succession Planning Practices
To the best of your knowledge, does your organization routinely include the following in its succession practices... (% selecting yes)
Source: Russell Reynolds Associates Q4 2022 Global Leadership Monitor, n = 1,690 global CEOs, C-suite leaders, next generation leaders, and non-executive board directors
A key component of organizational success and stability is having a comprehensive C-suite succession plan. Yet too many organizations lack this critical component. Of those that have enacted succession plans, there’s still a meaningful divide within executive teams around process and goals.
To address these issues, organizations can:
The Global Leadership Monitor (first launched in 2021) is an online survey of executives and non-executives that gathers the perspective of leaders on the impact of external trends on organizational health and their leadership implications. Russell Reynolds Associates surveyed its global network of executives using an online/mobile survey in October of 2022.
The 1,690 business leaders we surveyed in October 2022 represent: 46 countries in Africa, Asia, Americas, Europe, Middle East and Oceania. All data has been weighted by GDP to create a more representative share of the business contribution from each market.
The authors would also like to thank their colleague, Aimee Williamson, whose perspective helped shape these findings: