Creating a Succession Plan

When it comes to creating a succession plan, Miles and Bennett (2007), Cook (2014), and Gale (2013) all offer different approaches on how that planning process should be conducted.  By comparing and contrasting their respective approaches and identifying which aligns most accurately with the course text, a better understanding of how to plan for succession can be achieved.

Miles and Bennett (2007) identify four steps that must be taken in order to produce an effective succession plan.  The four steps include:  1) analysis, 2) development, 3) selection and 4) transition.  The first step in the process of planning succession, according to Miles and Bennett (2007), is to analyze the “most significant challenges the company and its industry are likely to face over the next four to six years” and use this information to determine what skills and experiences are needed by the company’s next leaders to guide the firm in the face of these challenges.  As an industry is always changing, it is not necessary therefore that the next CEO for example have the same skills and experience as the previous CEO, since new obstacles are likely to emerge that will require a different type of skill set.  The next step is development, and that means identifying a handful of internal candidates who may be ready to work the job in the within a specific time frame.  The third step—selection—should be conducted by having internal candidates pitch their vision for the company to the board of directors.  If none of the internal candidates satisfies, an external candidate may be required.  The final step is transition.  After the next leader has been selected, an on-boarding process must be conducting:  this is a process by which the new CEO develops relationships with the board members and generally is brought up to speed.

Cook (2014)’s process for planning succession focuses on four golden rules instead of steps.  The rules are:  1) Have replacements ready for 9 out of every 10 critical positions—i.e., know which positions are most essential to the well-being of the company and have at least 3 potential candidates who would be ready to step in to fill that slot should it become vacant.  2) Find the needle in the haystack—i.e., locate individuals within the company who have not yet been identified as possible candidates and gauge them on education and experience to see whether they should be marked as potential successors.  3) Monitor risks—i.e., use predictive analytics to assess whether a role player is likely to leave in the foreseeable future.  4) Integrate the succession plan into the workplace—i.e., use the collected data on workers to have a ready-made planning solution when the time comes.  Cook’s assessment of how to conduct the succession plan is not as thorough as that of Miles and Bennett (2007) and basically rehashes the same basic information—so none of it will seem new to one who has already read the recommendations of Miles and Bennett (2007)—and since their process plan is somewhat more detailed, it is a better source than Cook’s (2014).  Still, Cook does offer some good fundamental tips that are not discussed by the Miles and Bennett, who focus mainly on how to replace an outgoing CEO.  Cook’s focus is on ensuring succession for all critical role players—not just the chief executive.  So both are good resources for their own unique approaches; however, both pale in comparison to Gale’s (2013) planning succession recommendations.

Gale (2013) provides the most in-depth analysis of how a succession plan should proceed by offering tips, steps and tools to help the process along.  She starts by giving four basic tips to keep in mind when developing a plan:  the first is to strike the right balance between identifying high potential employees and keeping an open eye out among the whole pool of internal workers so as to be sure not to miss anyone.  This tip is actually in line with what Cook (2014) says about being sure to find the needle in the haystack—i.e., always be searching for as of yet unidentified potential candidates.  The second tip Gale (2013) recommends is:  balance the need to hire from within vs.

the need to hire from without—which is in line with the recommendation of Miles and Bennett (2007) that a company recognize when it is opportune to promote from within and when it simply is not.  The third tip of Gale (2013) is to recognize when diversity can be a boon to decision-making.  This is a tip that neither Cook nor Miles and Bennett make, and Gale makes it because it is important to always have multiple perspectives when making an important decision so that there are no gaps in the decision making process.  The fourth tip provided by Gale is to get support from the top.  If it’s the CEO being replaced, get the board’s input.  If it is a lower level leader, get the upper level’s feeback.

Gale (2013) then goes on to list the steps that should be conducted to facilitate the process:  1) create a specific model for the job with a definition of skills, experience, attitude and so on needed to do the job; 2) have a vision of where the company is heading (Miles and Bennett also recommend that incoming leaders have this and that it be approved of by the board); 3) know where potential candidates want to be/go with their careers; 4) identify potential obstacles to succession—such as other executives block the path of a successor for whatever reason; 5) map out the next few years for the company including how succession will take place and make sure all stakeholders are on board with the plan; 6) review the plan and update if necessary once a year.

Gale (2013) concludes by discussing the need to monitor the succession plan and tools that can be used to do this.  The tools she describes include:  SAP SuccessFactors’ succession and development module; Oracle Taleo’s succession planning module; Halogen Software’s eSuccession; Peoplefluent succession planning software; and Silkroad Wingspan.  Following this, Gale (2013) also covers a number of mistakes that succession planners make that companies should look out for—such as using the past to plan for the future (a point also made by Miles and Bennett (2007).  So while there is some overlap among the three sources, Gale’s is the most comprehensive, Miles and Bennett’s is the most CEO-focused, and Cook’s offers a general overview of a few fundamentals to keep in mind.

In terms of which aligns best with the course text, that would be Gale’s (2013) plan.  The course text essentially states that succession planning should follow 8 basic steps:  1) identify the positions to be included in the plan (something all three sources discuss); 2) identify which employees are to be included in the plan (again all three sources discuss this—but Gale gives the.