Most organisations only start talking about succession once a seat is actually vacant. That’s understandable – with everything else on the agenda, the question of who comes next is easy to defer. The trouble is, by then it’s already too late.
Succession is also an uncomfortable subject. Raising the question of a current CEO’s eventual departure can read as a lack of confidence, or simply bad form, so it’s easier to put off. The result is that the conversation about future leadership only happens under pressure, rather than at a calm moment when it could actually be done well.
Why most organisations react too late
According to DDI, only 12% of organisations report having a strong bench of leaders ready to step into critical roles. Companies that systematically develop internal candidates, on the other hand, are ten times more likely to have their leadership quality rated highly by employees, and three times more likely to rank among the top financial performers in their industry.
The cost of reacting late is measurable. McKinsey analysis finds that between 27% and 46% of executive transitions are viewed as failures or disappointments two years on – most often because the decision was made under time pressure rather than through a properly run process.
That points to a deeper problem. Succession isn’t an HR project. It’s a strategic decision that belongs to the board.
Succession is a board decision, not a task to delegate
Harvard Business Review puts it plainly: choosing the next CEO is arguably the most consequential decision a board makes – it shapes the company’s strategy, culture, and credibility with investors for years afterward.
HR can, and should, run the competency assessments, development plans, and talent reviews. That doesn’t change who ultimately owns the outcome, though: the board decides who will lead the organisation, and the board carries the consequences of that decision with investors, employees, and the market.
In practice, succession doesn’t begin the day a CEO, CFO, or COO walks out the door. It begins five to ten years earlier, when an organisation deliberately invests in developing the people who will one day make its most important calls.
In well-run succession processes, individual board and supervisory board members get personally involved in developing high-potential candidates – getting to know them, watching them work, giving them exposure to harder decisions. That involvement is difficult to outsource, because it’s largely what builds the trust a critical role will later demand.
Let's talk about who's ready to take the helm when the time comes
We help boards and supervisory boards build a real leadership bench – before succession becomes an urgent need.
What happens when a company searches for a leader “right now”
In strategic leadership hiring processes, we see a familiar pattern play out. A company needs a leader immediately. The market is tight, the strongest candidates aren’t actively looking, and time pressure keeps building.
That’s the moment it becomes clear the company has neither a ready internal successor nor enough runway to run a proper search on the open market.
In practice, that means paying twice: a longer stretch with a critical seat empty, and a higher risk that the candidate who does get hired – however strong their CV – turns out to be a poor fit for the culture and the way the organisation actually operates. Time pressure rarely produces good people decisions.
The succession paradox
The paradox is that succession is easiest to build precisely when it isn’t needed yet.
Oversight of the process should sit with a standing board committee, not an ad hoc group assembled once things turn urgent. McKinsey recommends that this committee review the status of internal candidates regularly, ideally twice a year, and keep the full board briefed on progress – rather than waiting until succession becomes urgent.
Building the bench in practice means specific, deliberate moves: giving high-potential people projects that stretch beyond their current role, regular exposure to the board and supervisory board, cross-functional rotations, and clarity about exactly which experience gaps still need closing before someone is ready for a critical seat.
The questions well-prepared organisations ask instead
That’s why the best-prepared organisations don’t ask, “Who will replace our CEO?” They ask a different set of questions instead – the same ones that come up when thinking through C-suite transformation:
- Which roles are critical to executing our strategy?
- Who has the potential to step into them a few years from now?
- What experience and capabilities do they need to build starting today?
Succession isn’t about finding a replacement. It’s about deliberately building future leaders. It’s one of the most important investments an organisation can make in its own resilience.
Companies that take this seriously today won’t be forced, a few years from now, to choose between rushing the decision and leaving it to chance.
About the Author
Rafał Boczkowski has 20 years of professional experience as an Executive Search Consultant and HR Leader in Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia. His clients appreciate his extraordinary, full-range problem-solving approach, which allows him to tackle seemingly insurmountable challenges.We appreciate your interest in our executive search solutions. We are here to offer tailored solutions designed to elevate your organization’s potential. Connect with us to explore further.
