1. Succession planning by position - management driven

• Incumbent identifies the individual(s) who are in their view best qualified to move into the position in the short term (say within 1 year); the medium term (within 2 years) or the longer term (3-5 years);
• The incumbent may also identify their perception of the development needs of the candidates they have named;
• Sometimes the organisation decides that the succession plan is a strictly confidential document; consequently the only people who are aware of the succession plan are those who develop it. Even when there is some awareness that a succession plan exists, frequently the people on the succession list are not told that they are, unless the company decides to create "fast track" programs for these individuals. Sometimes the information is leaked informally, however employees are rarely consulted or asked to participate in the process; and
• Following the development of the succession plan, there may or may not be specific development for the individuals who made the list. Sometimes the incumbent will take a special interest in one individual who has been identified as a potential successor, and will develop a mentor/protegee relationship, in which the incumbent coaches and guides the person who has been identified for their role.

Advantages of this approach:

• This is the simplest model; based on the assumption that the best person to identify who would be able to do the job is the person who is currently doing it;
• The most common reason why organisations use this model is that it is often the approach the CEO is most comfortable with. He/she is able to scan the list and see if there are any positions which have no identified successors (thus identifying succession gaps in the organisation); and is able to look at which names tend to arise most frequently; providing a snapshot of those who are generally perceived to be the "stars"; and
• This approach is the least costly and the quickest; and does not require a high level of organisational commitment. It serves the purpose of ensuring at a minimum that managers are thinking about succession issues; and are aware that succession planning is partly their responsibility.

Disadvantages/risks:

• High risk of encouraging corporate "cloning". This can have serious business and EEO implications. The incumbent (who may have a fairly narrow perspective of the world) tends to identify individuals who are most like him/her in terms of educational background, experience, and personality style. Unconsciously, they may be also looking for someone of the same gender, socio-economic status, and family situation (indeed some will even acknowledge that they believe these to be relevant to the ability to do the job; although such biases often "go underground" and the managers know better than to openly acknowledge that these are their belief systems!);
• Problematic in large organisations in which the incumbent in the position does not know employees across the organisation. The identified successors tend to be people the incumbent works with, and candidates from other areas are not considered; and
• Risk that the person identified does not aspire to the promotional positions they have been identified for.

2. Creating succession planning "pools"

• In this model, high potential candidates are identified within the organisation as the senior managers of the future;
• They are usually selected by a task force of senior managers (often with the assistance of Human Resources) who set aside a day or more to go through a list of all employees above a certain level and assess which individuals should be identified as high potential. To facilitate decision making, they will often agree on some criteria by which to select the individuals, and may have the person's most recent performance appraisal as an additional resource;
• In some cases, candidates may be further narrowed down through an assessment centre process or through an interview/evaluation process; and
• Once the pool has been identified, those who make the list will generally receive some special attention. How much attention will depend on the organisation's willingness to make a financial commitment to the program. Often the Human Resource Department puts together a "fast track" program in which they assist the person to develop an individual development plan. They may provide some group training, they may institute a mentoring program, and identify certain training programs these people should attend.

Advantages of this approach:

• This type of approach tends to be somewhat fairer because more managers are involved in the selection of the people who are identified for the High Potential program; thus providing some checks to offset bias. However for this to be effective it is essential that the committee undertaking the selection is itself both diverse and open to organisational diversity. It also tends to be fairer because some criteria for selection of high potentials are usually applied; and
• This approach is also more likely to recognise the value of providing broad background for the high potential employees rather than a single functional stream of experience.

Disadvantages/risks:

• In large organisations the majority of employees may not be well known to the task force members, and their view of the person may be influenced by the level of visibility the person has in the organisation (which of course can be limited by the type of work they do and even their relationship with their manager). As a result, talented employees who do not have a high profile may be overlooked all together; and
• An even more insidious problem is the effect on employee morale of having such a program for those who are sometimes called "the anointed ones". In many organisations, it is widely known which employees have been identified as high-potentials, the other non-identified employees can be severely discouraged and demoralised. Some organisations have discovered that the backlash from a high-potential program offsets any benefits it may have. Some organisations discontinue their high potential/fast track programs for this reason.

3. Top-down/bottom-up succession planning

This model is based on the current and expected future needs of the organisation, as well as on ongoing two-way communication with employees. It has the greatest potential to be able to deliver improved outcomes for women. This process involves:

• Senior management as a group determines what competencies are required to enable a person to take on the key roles, for example, at a middle or senior management level, considering organisational requirements for "the manager/employee of the future". Certain criteria for progression are determined as across-the-board requirements for development, for example, education levels, organisational cross training, participation in management training;
• All employees at a pre-determined level are provided with the information developed by Senior Management via a session about succession planning and career development. This session outlines clearly the requirements for progression in the organisation. This enables staff to determine whether or not they are interested in progression; and to self-identify if they wish to be involved in a program which will help them to meet the criteria for development and progression;
• Employees who signal their interest in progression then participate in a workshop in which they are given guidance and led through such processes as: a) using 360 degree feedback to determine their strengths and weaknesses particularly relating to management skills, b) developing their own individual development plan and reviewing it with other appropriate people, c) learning how to take responsibility for their own career growth, and d) considering what would be good "next moves" for them to make in their careers. Assessment centres could also be used as part of the workshops;
• The results of the 360 degree feedback, as well as the individual development plans, and possible "next moves" would be maintained by a manager on a human resource information system. Each person's file would be updated annually or more frequently;
• A report on each of the people participating in the development program would be generated annually. This report would provide input for any senior level succession planning taking place. Thus senior management would be able to get a snapshot of how many people aspire to progression, and what progress they are making in working through organisational requirements; and
• Employees who initially opted not to participate in the development program are able to change their mind at any time and join the development program.

See Succession Planning Pilot Process for a suggested strategy to implement this succession planning model.

Advantages of this approach:

• Because the program leans so much on employee self-selection, there is less likely to be conflict with EO principles and thus ensure that a broader group of people participate;
• The program serves to empower employees; to help them feel that they have some control over their careers and are not at the mercy of others;
• The across-the-board criteria for progression ensure that there is less chance to "work the system" (e.g. to wire jobs for favoured applicants); and
• The process is transparent. There need be no secrets or hidden agendas. This engenders a higher level of trust.

Disadvantages/risks:

Three things are pre-requisite for the success of this program: Strong across-the-board support at the most senior levels of the organisation, consistency in application, and follow-through. A program like this should not be introduced if there is not a strong commitment to its continuation. At a minimum, two years would be required in order to see significant results and a changing culture.

To ensure that gender equity outcomes are enhanced, it is also important in this process to:

• Have consistency and uniformity in the process of job analysis, definition of competencies and in performance evaluation processes;
• Ensure that high-potential women are identified and that managers are proactive in this process (see the description of the Motorola plan below); and
• Have diversity or equal employment outcomes included in the performance indicators of management, for example, retention of women or number of women included on the succession plan.

What is the business case for succession planning?

Rothwell (2001) has reviewed the major reasons for having a succession plan:

• To accelerate the development and improve the retention of talented people. This argument is particularly relevant to the development and retention of talented women, a group often neglected in organisations;
• To identify ongoing needs for replacement and design appropriate training and employee development programs;
• To increase the pool of talented employees to fill key positions;
• To add value to the organisation's strategic plan and contribute to ongoing business strategies;
• To ensure individuals receive appropriate developmental opportunities and are successful in their career goals;
• To ensure that the organisation has full access to the intellectual capital of their employees;
• To improve employee morale and commitment to the organisation; and
• To encourage the development and advancement of the diverse group of employees.

One of the best case studies of how succession planning has been used effectively to improve outcomes in relation to diversity is that of Motorola. A description of their approach can be found at Case Study on Succession Planning.

Measurement and Evaluation

Rothwell (2001) has adapted the well-known four-level Kirkpatrick training evaluation hierarchy and suggests the following:

1. Participant satisfaction
   This includes evaluating overall satisfaction, satisfaction with each component of the program, including job descriptions, competency models, performance appraisal processes and satisfaction with individual career plans etc;
2. Program progress.
   This includes an assessment of how well the program has worked when compared with the stated objectives and how well an individual is progressing through their developmental experiences;
3. Effective placements.
   This includes what percentages of vacancies in key positions are filled internally, how quickly are vacancies in key positions filled, how quickly are internal replacements for key positions able to perform to the level required in the position; and
4. Organisational results.
   What successes or failures in the organisational plan are attributable to the succession plan, have there been changes in the gender and diversity profile of employees filling key organisational positions?

Back to Succession Planning Index

Resources

Carter, N. (1986). Guaranteeing management's future through succession planning. Journal of Information Systems Management, 13-14.

Rothwell, W. J. (2001). Effective Succession Planning. New York: AMACOM.

Back to Succession Planning Index