Developing a Succession Plan

Career Escape Velocity: Why Some Careers Soar While Others Stall Why do some careers plateau while others skyrocket into decades of influence and success? The answer lies in career escape velocity—a concept that separates lifelong impact from early obsolescence. Having observed thousands of careers over 20+ years as a consultant, I’ve noticed a clear pattern: most careers follow an arc—growth, peak, and decline. But a select few break free and keep soaring. The Career Trajectory Breakdown 1. CEOs & CXOs: Hit escape velocity, continuing as board members, advisors, or mentors long after retirement. Their expertise is always in demand. 2. Business GMs & Operators: Their career arc peaks unless they transition into C-level roles. Many still achieve financial stability before decline. 3. Middle Managers: Their trajectory initially mimics CXOs, but many plateau due to lack of capability, drive, or ambition. 4. Individual Contributors: Their careers span longer but with slower progress. The Career Arc & Resistance to Change When enterprises undergo transformation, those whose careers are on the decline resist change the most—because they have the most to lose. Successful transformation requires identifying and transitioning these "zones of resistance" before they derail progress. The 4 Traits of Leaders Who Achieve Career Escape Velocity 1. Relentless work ethic – They are always “on.” 2. Strong mentors/advisors – They have people who advocate for them when they’re not in the room 3. Comfort with discomfort – They constantly push beyond their comfort zone 4. Ambition-driven decisions – Their personal choices align with career acceleration. Now a bit more controversial observation: Even though we read about how people skills are very critical for leaders, my observation is there is no direct correlation between people skills and once ability to reach career escape velocity. Which of these traits do you think is the hardest to develop? Drop your thoughts in the comments! #Zinnov #Leadership

Looking at this data from the World Economic Forum, my own take is that the skills defining leadership in 2030 fall into three macro domains: 🔹 Human-Centric Capabilities: Empathy, creativity, human talent management—skills machines can’t replicate, yet. 🔹 Cognitive & Strategic Intelligence: Analytical thinking, systems mindset, lifelong learning—the foundation for navigating uncertainty. 🔹 Digital & Technical Fluency: AI, cybersecurity, tech literacy—no longer optional for executives in a tech-driven world. As someone deeply embedded in executive search, I see this shift daily: what separates top candidates isn’t just what they know—it’s how they think, adapt, and connect. #Leadership #FutureOfWork #ExecutiveSearch #AI #Skills2030 #TechLeadership #TalentStrategy

𝐒𝐢𝐱 𝐠𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬. 𝐎𝐧𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐜𝐞. 𝐔𝐧𝐢𝐟𝐢𝐞𝐝 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐛𝐲 𝐚𝐠𝐞—𝐛𝐮𝐭 𝐛𝐲 𝐩𝐮𝐫𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐞. I believed leadership meant setting direction and ensuring alignment. But over time—I’ve come to see that real leadership isn’t just about strategy. It’s about 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘯𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯. That truth has never been more relevant than it is today. For the first time in modern history, 𝐬𝐢𝐱 𝐠𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐜𝐨𝐞𝐱𝐢𝐬𝐭 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐜𝐞. It’s a leadership challenge few of us were trained for. 🔹 𝐒𝐢𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐆𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 (pre-1946): Still serving on boards; shaped by duty and discipline. 🔹 𝐁𝐚𝐛𝐲 𝐁𝐨𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐬 (1946–1964): ~12% of today’s workforce; value stability, loyalty, and legacy. 🔹 𝐆𝐞𝐧 𝐗 (1965–1980): ~27%; independent, pragmatic, delivery-focused. 🔹 𝐌𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐧𝐢𝐚𝐥𝐬 (1981–1996): ~34%; purpose-driven, collaborative, growth-oriented. 🔹 𝐆𝐞𝐧 𝐙 (1997–2012): ~27%; inclusive, tech-native, values transparency. 🔹 𝐆𝐞𝐧 𝐀𝐥𝐩𝐡𝐚 (post-2012): The emerging workforce—digital-first, fast-learning, entrepreneurial. These differences show up in how we work: → Senior leaders value hierarchy; Gen Z favors flat structures. → Boomers seek recognition; Gen X wants autonomy; Millennials want meaning; Gen Z asks, “𝘞𝘩𝘺?” → Gen Alpha? They're learning, building, and questioning earlier than ever. What feels like friction is often just generational dissonance. In a recent HBR piece, put it well: “𝘠𝘰𝘶 𝘤𝘢𝘯’𝘵 𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘱𝘪𝘳𝘦 𝘢 𝘮𝘶𝘭𝘵𝘪𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘬𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘤𝘦 𝘶𝘯𝘭𝘦𝘴𝘴 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳��𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘱𝘪𝘳𝘦𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘮.” That’s the shift we need as leaders: From uniformity → to personalization From authority → to empathy From legacy leadership → to 𝘭𝘪𝘷𝘪𝘯𝘨 leadership I now ask myself not just, “Am I leading well?” but “Am I leading 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘷𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘭𝘺?” Because when we adapt our style—not our standards—we help every generation contribute at their best. Great leadership today means adapting with intention and embracing what makes each generation thrive. 𝐏𝐮𝐫𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐞 𝐀𝐥𝐢𝐠𝐧𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭: Connecting individual roles to a broader organizational mission fosters engagement across all generations. 𝐂𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐦𝐢𝐳𝐞𝐝 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐮𝐧𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧: Recognize and adapt to the preferred communication styles of each generation to enhance collaboration. 𝐅𝐥𝐞𝐱𝐢𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐖𝐨𝐫𝐤 𝐀𝐫𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬: Offering flexibility can address the diverse needs and expectations of a multigenerational team. 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐮𝐨𝐮𝐬 𝐋𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐎𝐩𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐮𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐞𝐬: Promote a culture of lifelong learning to support professional development for all age groups. What shift have you made to better lead across generations? #HarveysLeadershipRhythms #ThoughtsWithHarvey #ExecutiveLeadership #TheLeadershipSignal #GenerationalLeadership #LeadershipReflections #LeadWithIntention #MultigenerationalWorkforce #LeadershipCue #Mentorship

They call it a "stretch assignment" or "development opportunity" - but watch closely because it's frequently just unpaid additional work disguised as career advancement. You're effectively doing two complete jobs for one salary while they observe whether you'll burn out before they decide if you've actually "earned" the promotion. How to protect yourself from getting systematically exploited: Get everything documented in writing. Send your manager an email explicitly confirming the project scope, expected timeline, and specific success metrics. If they refuse to put it in writing or keep it vague, that's your first significant red flag. Document your existing job responsibilities thoroughly before accepting the stretch assignment. When they later claim you're "not performing in your core role," you'll have clear evidence that your actual job got deprioritized specifically for their additional project. Establish a clear timeline with scheduled checkpoints upfront. Frame it as "I'll take this on for 90 days with a formal review at the 60-day mark." Open-ended stretch assignments quietly become permanent unpaid promotions with no endpoint. Track every additional hour invested and deliverable produced meticulously. When promotion discussions arrive and they claim "you haven't sufficiently proven yourself yet," you'll have a detailed record of exactly what you delivered beyond your job description. Ask directly and explicitly: "If I successfully complete this assignment, what specifically happens next in terms of title, compensation, or role change?" Vague corporate promises about "increased visibility" or "growth opportunities" mean absolutely nothing without concrete committed next steps. Stretch assignments aren't inherently problematic - but companies deliberately banking on your ambition and work ethic to extract free labor absolutely are. Sign up to my newsletter for more corporate insights: https://vist.ly/4fwrf #stretchassignment #careeradvice #workplaceexploitation #careerstrategy #corporatelife #professionaldevelopment #workplacetips #careerprotection #workboundaries #careergrowth

The first thing that hit me when I joined this mid-sized engineering company as a CHRO was the lack of structured #SuccessionPlanning. At an organizational growth rate as steep as it was, the importance of a robust #SuccessionStrategy to keep our growth momentum on track and ensure continuity in leadership was very clear. To this end, I initiated my work with a critical review of our current leadership structure, #TalentPools, and future organizational requirements. I met senior leaders and key #stakeholders to identify critical roles for which #SuccessionPlans should be developed. This review identified several gaps and potential risks. Some of the huge barriers were #ResistanceToChange. To many senior leaders, succession planning was an unnecessary complication rather than a strategic necessity. Secondly, our #TalentManagementSystem lacked the necessary analytics to effectively predict and plan for the #leadership needs of the future. The next challenge in the process was to make the process inclusive and unbiased. We did not only need a system that would identify the #FutureLeaders, but one that would also be fair and transparent in the development of their capacity. Knowing these challenges, we established a comprehensive #SuccessionPlanningFramework that includes both quantitative and qualitative tools. #TalentAssessmentTools: We used #PsychometricAssessments, performance reviews, and 360-degree feedback to assess the current leader in finding a successor. Tools like #HoganAssessments and #GallupStrengthsFinder helped us truly understand individual capabilities and suitability for future roles. #LeadershipDevelopmentPrograms: Based on assessment results, customized development programs for potential successors have been designed. This includes #mentorship, #coaching, and focused training sessions to get over the shortcomings in competencies and groom them for the leadership role. #SuccessionPlanningSoftware: We implemented succession planning software in the HR system— #SAPSuccessFactors and #CornerstoneOnDemand. These tools enabled us to track potential successors, review development progress, and evaluate succession readiness. It runs scenario planning and #SuccessionModeling to simulate organizational changes and what would be affected in such scenarios. Our succession planning strategy, therefore, bore its first benefit: a strong #LeadershipPipeline ready for the challenges ahead and improved employee engagement through clear career pathways. It also enhanced the organizational agility required for smoother transitions. Our organization is more resilient, with a strategic approach toward developing leaders that places us in good stead for the future. #CHRODiaries #SuccessionPlanning #LeadershipPipeline #HighPotentialEmployees #PerformanceAssessment #360DegreeFeedback #ChangeManagement #CareerProgression #EmployeeEngagement #StakeholderBuyIn #OrganizationalGrowth

Few boards have a well-defined process for Chair succession. Even in high-performing boards, 𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐡𝐢𝐩 𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐨𝐟𝐭𝐞𝐧 𝐡𝐚𝐩𝐩𝐞𝐧 𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐥𝐲, prompted by a resignation, retirement or term limit rather than as part of a deliberate governance process. 𝐘𝐞𝐭, 𝐣𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐥𝐢𝐤𝐞 𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐠𝐲 𝐨𝐫 𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐤 𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭, 𝐬𝐮𝐜𝐜𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐢𝐬 𝐚 𝐟𝐢𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐫𝐲 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐩𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲. It’s what ensures continuity and confidence in leadership when change inevitably comes. Having recently gone through a Chair transition myself, I was reminded of how important it is to plan the passing of the baton. 𝐌𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐧 𝐬𝐢𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐲 𝐟𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚𝐧 𝐞𝐦𝐩𝐭𝐲 𝐬𝐞𝐚𝐭, 𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐡𝐢𝐩 𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐰𝐚𝐥 𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐞𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐡𝐲𝐭𝐡𝐦 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐩𝐮𝐫𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐠𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐚 𝐛𝐨𝐚𝐫𝐝 𝐢𝐭𝐬 𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐠𝐭𝐡. Here’s a framework I’ve found helpful for thinking about board leadership transitions more deliberately: 1. 𝐃𝐞𝐟𝐢𝐧𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐨𝐥𝐞 𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐥𝐲. If the conversation starts when a vacancy appears, it’s already too late. Defining the role and ideal profile early helps the board align around expectations. What kind of leader does the organization need at this stage of its journey? What balance of independence, influence, and institutional memory will strengthen oversight? 2. 𝐅𝐨𝐫𝐦𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐳𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐜𝐞𝐬𝐬. Good governance requires clarity. Whose responsibility is it? The Nomination Committee, a dedicated Succession Committee or the Chair? How should potential candidates be exposed to the board’s dynamics? Formalizing these steps ensures consistency when the moment arrives. 3. 𝐈𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐟𝐲 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐩𝐮𝐫𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐞. Boards often default to seniority or rotation, but longevity doesn’t always mean fit. The decision should reflect the company’s current needs and direction, not tenure alone. Benchmarking candidates against the defined role brings objectivity and alignment. 4. 𝐄𝐧𝐠𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐄𝐎. The Chair–CEO relationship is among the most pivotal in governance. Involving the CEO early helps ensure alignment and chemistry, fostering a productive partnership from day one. 5. 𝐏𝐥𝐚𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧. Even the most seasoned director faces a learning curve when stepping into the Chair role. Structured onboarding, through shadowing, joint meetings and mentorship from the outgoing Chair, helps transfer both knowledge and culture. Ultimately, good governance is as much about oversight as it is about renewal. So it’s worth asking: Do the boards you are part of plan for leadership succession as deliberately as they plan for strategy and performance?

In most boardrooms, the agenda is dominated by financials, strategy, and market risks. Yet one of the most critical risks rarely gets equal airtime: talent risk. And here’s why it matters, because talent risk is strategy execution risk. It’s easy to assume people will perform, stay loyal, and execute the strategy. But reality is more complex: • Key leaders quietly burn out • High performers leave without warning • Critical roles go unfilled for too long • Capability gaps widen faster than succession pipelines can keep up Boards often miss these signals because they’re measured by headcount or retention numbers, not by what really matters: alignment, capability, and engagement. I’ve seen this play out first-hand. In an organization I was part of, a C-suite role in a critical department saw extremely high turnover. The role was deeply strategic, shaping the very direction the company took. Every transition in that seat disrupted momentum and yet, the board did not look at the deeper capability risk behind it. The truth I’ve seen across organizations is this: talent risk isn’t just about who might leave tomorrow. It’s about whether the people in place today have the alignment, capability, and resilience to deliver the future strategy. A disengaged executive team, a thin succession bench, or unaddressed skill gaps can quietly derail growth long before they show up in financials. For boards, that means elevating talent risk into the enterprise risk management (ERM) framework and treating it as a standing governance priority. This isn’t about micromanaging HR,  it’s about oversight, accountability, and fulfilling fiduciary duty. Boards can bring real value when they press on questions like: → Which roles are truly business-critical to executing next year’s strategy? → Where are the succession blind spots, especially at leadership level? → How resilient is our workforce to external disruption, demographic shifts, tightening talent pools, or regulatory changes? → Do we, as a board, have enough visibility into these issues to govern effectively and protect enterprise value? Unchecked talent risk doesn’t just slow execution,  it undermines resilience, erodes market confidence, and ultimately impacts shareholder value. Boards that surface talent risk early don’t just protect the business. They strengthen long-term competitiveness by ensuring strategy has the people strength to succeed. So here’s the challenge I’d leave with every board: 👉How are you keeping talent risk visible in the boardroom before it becomes a business crisis? #TalentRisk #BoardroomAgenda #LeadershipStrategy #WorkforceResilience #EnterpriseRisk

🚨 CEO Succession: The #1 Governance Blind Spot 🚨 Despite being one of the board’s most sensitive and high-stakes responsibilities, too many boards still stumble when it comes to CEO succession. This is one of the key findings of a recent joint study of the Center for Executive Succession and HR Policy Association (HRPA) A recent study highlights 10 of the biggest pitfalls — and the results are sobering: 1. 41% of CEOs hesitate to engage in succession planning — stalling momentum, morale, and candidate development 2. Most boards only begin planning 12–18 months before a transition — far too late to prepare a CEO-ready successor 3. Only 58% of boards align their CEO profile with future strategy — meaning the wrong leader is chosen for the company’s next chapter 4. Succession discussions are often too shallow — more ritual than rigorous debate 5. Executive transitions are poorly managed — risking reputation, investor confidence, and leadership stability 💡 The research makes one point crystal clear: 👉🏼  A trusted CHRO is often more critical to the process than the CEO. When empowered & trusted, CHROs: ✔️ Reframe succession as strategy, not an exit plan ✔️ Provide objective, future-focused talent insights ✔️ Ensure continuity and minimize disruption during leadership transitions The paradox? The CHRO is essential to CEO succession — but only if they are truly trusted by the board, the CEO, & the executive team ⚡ My humble take: CEO succession isn’t just about replacing a leader. It’s about safeguarding the company’s future, honoring legacies, and protecting stakeholder confidence. Boards that treat it as a compliance exercise rather than a strategic imperative risk being caught unprepared — with consequences that echo far beyond the C-suite But don't take my word for it. Take it from a previous client of mine. The Co-CEO of a beverage company stepped into a family CEO succession that was table stakes for the business. She described our working together as follows: “I stepped into my first Co-CEO role about a year ago and selected Navid as my executive transition coach. Whilst this was a big new role for me, we made a lot of progress. As a result of our year-long engagement, I can wholeheartedly say that I got many insights and value for the time that we spent together. Navid’s thoughtful approach meant that at times, we deviated from the Double Diamond Framework of Executive Transitions to spend time on a more urgent or emergent topic. Navid’s coaching was always helpful, and I appreciate the insight and sustainable behaviour shifts that were created during our time together.” #MasteringExecutiveTransitions #Leadership #CHRO #Governance #CEO #SuccessionPlanning #BoardEffectiveness

Getting leadership succession wrong can cost billions. Your shareholders know this. That's why Walmart's share price fell 3% when it was announced that Doug McMillon, their CEO of 10 years, was stepping down last November. Even though John Furner, CEO of Walmart U.S., took over in what looked like a smooth succession, the market still reacted. Because you don't really know what will happen until it happens. A Harvard Business Review analysis estimated that bad CEO successions wiped out $1 trillion in market value from the S&P 500 in a year. Meanwhile, investor returns could be 25% higher with good plans. After handing over HomeServe to my two top lieutenants, Ross Clemmow, running HomeServe EMEA, and Tom Rusin, leading HomeServe North America, I’ve learned quite a bit about what it takes to make a successful transition: 1. Start planning three years ahead. Don't wait until you're ready to leave. By then, it's too late. Give your chosen candidates challenging roles to test what they're made of. Not just their skills, but their character. Only by seeing how they behave in the field can you tell if they're an ego-free team player or a political power player. 2. Internal succession works best when companies really invest in their talent Research by Jim Collins showed that the best-performing companies had well-established systems for training, retaining and promoting insiders. It's the continuity of quality leadership that preserves core values whilst driving progress. 3. Never do succession planning behind closed doors. If it's open and promoted as business-critical, your teams will see the opportunities that come with it. It motivates staff to know their organisation encourages them to look for the next step up. 4. Be honest with yourself about timing. Don't just stay in the job because you can. Have the humility to know when you can't give it your all. The buzz you get from being founder and CEO is incredibly addictive. There were moments when I should have been looking to the long term, beginning the transition sooner than I did. Only 54% of FTSE 350 companies have a written succession plan for the board. That's shocking. The more we can prepare founders and CEOs in the UK for this eventuality, the better our markets will fare. Fortunately, we have openings in our upcoming Business Leader Growth Workshops to do just that. These are free, peer-to-peer learning experiences for founders or CEOs running businesses with £3 million or more in revenue. If you want guidance on planning your succession or any other challenges of building and scaling your business, these are for you. You'll learn from seasoned entrepreneurs who have been exactly where you are. Learn more and reserve your spot:  https://lnkd.in/e5wQ6JGS Share this to reach other founders and CEOs in your network.

"What has shaped your leadership journey?" and fast forward to those in leadership roles today, "How are we shaping the next generation of leaders?" For me, it continues to be shaped every single day. This is fueled by continuous learning and the courage to challenge my previously held beliefs as new information emerges. In today's fast moving world, I would expect this to be a shared perspective. Yet, reading reflections from a fellow GE alum, Dr. George Awad, he reminded me of something so important: we are profoundly shaped by our early career experiences. This is important to contemplate deeply amongst this GenAI inflection point that we are all living and leading through. I spent my first 17+ professional years being molded by GE through rigorous training, dedicated mentorship, the chance to practice what I learned, and fast feedback loops that enabled real-time course correction. It wasn't always easy but it was impactful and further sharpened at GE Crotonville Makers & Leadership Exchange. Lessons that I still carry today about integrity first, data-driven decision making, clear accountability, global perspective and walking in other people's shoes, speed with discipline and perhaps one of the most critical: talent is the competitive differentiator. All lessons shared by Dr. Awad in his post and most likely recognized by many Crotonville Alumni. For me, I'm thinking deeply about how we are training the next generation of leaders. Especially among the conversation that AI can do so many entry level jobs. And yes, some of the tasks in the entry level jobs are not formative. Yet, these are the spaces that offer the moments where future leaders are forged. They're the proving grounds where people learn to solve problems under pressure, navigate complexity, communicate across differences, and recover from failure with resilience. All so relevant and perhaps even more important in the next decade and beyond. ⁉️ The question is: What are we intentionally designing to develop leaders who can thrive alongside AI? I believe in the power of GenAI to unleash human potential, so I am considering how AI can be used as a learning tool, provide simulations and offer coaching etc. Is that enough? Where will future leaders look back at their formative years and reflect on their "Crotonville" moment where they were shaped by the fundamentals of leadership that enable them to lead the next wave of disruption and invention. 💡 In the spirit of continuous learning, I would love to hear what you're experimenting with or what keeps you up at night, as we navigate developing leaders in the age of AI.