|
The Catholic Church has the kind of well-defined process for succession and continuation that you expect from an organization that expects to be around for millennia. A new Pope requires a 2/3 vote by eligible electors in a sequestered conclave. The electors are the members of the College of Cardinals who are under the age of 80. There is no time limit on these deliberations. Once a decision is made, there is no question of a Pope’s legitimacy.
When it comes to corporate succession, a Board of Directors comprises the electors for a CEO. It sets its own rules on what is required for election. Compromise choices that are not straightforward (e.g., co-presidents or interim titles) are possible but often end badly. For other, more junior positions, the decision-making is more informal, and selections are often less definitive. The choice of a new Pope is not the incumbent’s decision. When Pope Benedict chose to retire, he couldn’t put his finger on the scale in selecting who replaced him. Being over 80 at the time of his resignation, Benedict wasn’t even eligible to vote in the conclave. Too often, a leader tells their identified succession candidate that they are in line for the leader’s job. Unfortunately, the candidate interprets the message as their boss’s decision instead of their recommendation. When that candidate is just one of several under consideration, they feel that a commitment has been broken. Here's a recent blog I wrote on how we make promises that are not ours to keep. Take a look at last month's blog for more on the subject. While the Pope can be any man of the Catholic faith, the choice always comes down to somebody from the College of Cardinals. The pool is sufficiently broad, and there are many qualified candidates, based on the experience they've gained in different roles. Spencer Stuart noted that only 56% of new CEOs were hired from inside the organization. Modern organizations seldom have large pools of qualified succession candidates. Executives tend to stay in specialized functional paths, guided by their expertise and their assumption that rotations away from their strengths will slow their career progression. Succession decision makers often value the more circuitous path less taken. If they can't find that inside or if they want a break from the past, they look outside. Those not elected Pope continue in leadership positions. They have an unbroken, direct line of authority and teaching passed down from Jesus’s apostles (apostolic succession). This process applies to Church doctrine as well. This loyalty to the organization’s consistent mission is a bond not easily broken. Those who lose out in corporate succession often don’t stick around. They lack the level of devotion to an organization’s mission that a Cardinal feels. With their ambition for a more senior position stoked, with potential resentment that a "promised" role did not come to them, they are motivated to look for that opportunity elsewhere. A shared set of beliefs, robust leadership development and a legitimization process are keys to one organization's ability to select its leader and maintain the continuity of its executive team.
0 Comments
The most common issue our mentors report executives in new positions face are team members who thought they were in line for the job, face with the disappointment of not getting the role and must be won over by their new boss. These folks can be an asset from their tribal knowledge, including an understanding of corporate politics that surpasses their new boss. Often, they are the biggest challenges in a new leader gaining alignment from their team. I’ve written before about managing this dilemma if you’re the person assuming the position of authority. Here is a link: How can companies avoid this problem? They can simply have leaders stop overpromising. Let’s say you are a CXO. You have identified somebody in succession planning who could take your place someday. And in the process of developing them for a C-suite position, your message is, “This is to prepare you to take my place.” When you vacate your position through retirement, promotion or a job elsewhere, this individual assumes that your job becomes theirs. Instead, the position is posted, and an outsider gets the nod. What went wrong? The final decision on your replacement is seldom yours to make, but that part of your message didn’t get through. The tough part for the company is that, as the outgoing leader, you may not have to live with the consequences of your miscommunication. You built loyalty and retained an effective employee with the promise of the keys to the kingdom. If that doesn’t play out, either the employee blames the company (no consequences to you) or believes you misled them (not your problem anymore.) Succession-related individual development plans can be framed as having a goal of becoming ready to assume a senior role, in your company or elsewhere. There is no guarantee that readiness for a more senior role will match up with that position becoming available. Also, there may be more than one person on your team on a similar development path. This is desirable, if people understand the rules of the road. The ideal situation is to have at least one internal candidate ready to assume your senior position, if you got hit by a bus. Of course, there is a risk that this candidate will get frustrated that a position hasn’t opened, and that they find a job outside the organization. That is a better outcome than you leaving, the internal candidate failing to get the job and the new leader trying to retain a disillusioned and possibly disruptive team member for fear of the loss of tribal knowledge. In fact, having a reputation as a developer of leaders is an enormous calling card in recruitment. Let’s take this a step further. A leader’s responsibility is to make themselves replaceable. If your developing leader is ready to assume your role, an organizational design exercise might identify part of your responsibilities that can be transferred to them. This may allow you to take on higher-level responsibilities that have only been aspirational before. Further still, the company might decide that the time is right to plan a transition to a younger, less expensive leader. You take the risk of getting replaced, just like the company takes the risk that its investment in an employee's professional growth will be another company's gain. Taking this risk is the acid test of your personal brand or the company's employer brand. It's why people will want to work for you. When you consider your legacy, don't leave your successor with a mess of your creation; they'll face enough challenges without your "help." Develop those who work for you, so they can become leaders wherever their paths lead. .Be careful about overpromising those in your succession plans. They'll likely be disappointed if they don't get your job regardless; it is significantly more serious if they had reason to believe their ascension was a slam dunk. |
Archives
March 2025
Categories |
RSS Feed