Succession planning is seen as a crucial process by most major employing organizations, but how well is it standing up to the uncertainty of business life today and the assumption that talented individuals will manage their own careers? Some of the confusion surrounding succession planning is due to people using the term in many different ways. Here we define succession planning to be a process by which one or more successors are identified for key posts (or groups of similar key posts), and career moves and/or development activities are planned for these successors. Successors may be ready to do the job (short-term successors) or seen as having longer-term potential (long-term successors).

Succession planning, therefore, sits inside a very much wider set of resourcing and development processes, which we might call succession management. This encompasses the management resourcing strategy, aggregate analysis of demand/supply (human resource planning and auditing), skills analysis, the job filling process and management development (including graduate and high-flyer programs.

Organizations use succession planning to achieve objectives, including:

• Improved job filling for key positions through broader candidate search and faster decisions
• Active development of longer-term successors through ensuring their careers progress, and engineering the range of work experiences they need for the future
• Auditing the talent pool of the organization and thereby influencing resourcing and development strategies
• Fostering a corporate culture through developing a group of people who are seen as a corporate resource and who share key skills, experiences and values seen as important to the future of the organization.

Of these, the active development of a strong talent pool for the future is now seen as the most important. Increasingly, this is also seen as vital to the attraction and retention of the best people.

The most common model for centralized, corporate succession planning is that it covers only the most senior jobs in the organization (the top two or three tiers) plus short-term and longer-term successors for these posts. The latter group is often manifesting as a corporate fast stream or high potential population who are being actively developed in mid-career through job moves across business streams, functions or geographical boundaries.

Many large organizations also adopt a devolved model where the same processes and philosophy are applied to a much larger population (usually managerial and professional), but this process is managed by devolved business divisions, functions, sites or countries. It has to be said that few organizations successfully sustain the devolved model, usually because it is not really seen as a high priority and not adequately facilitated by HR.

Succession plans normally cover both short- and long-term successors for key posts, and development plans for these successors. Where a number of jobs are of similar type and need similar skills, it is preferable to identify a pool of successors for this collection of posts.

Typical activities covered by succession planning include:

• Identifying possible successors
  
  
• Challenging and enriching succession plans through discussion of people and posts
  
  
• Agreeing job (or job group) successors and development plans for individuals
  
  
• Analyzing the gaps or surpluses revealed by the planning process
  
  
• Checking the actual pattern of job filling and whether planned individual development has taken place

The process is essentially one of multiple dialogues. Preliminary views are collected, usually from senior line managers, and then these views are tested and amended in a number of such dialogues including up the management line, with HR professionals and in a committee of peers. The use of succession or development committees to challenge and agree to plans is an important way of generating cross-boundary moves. They also help ensure that the view taken by the organization of an individual is based on objective evidence.

The level of secrecy in succession planning is gradually being reduced. All employees should understand that such a process exists and how it works. Those covered by the process should have an opportunity to provide input about their own career aspirations, preferences and constraints. They should also get feedback from the process regarding how they are viewed by the organization, their perceived development needs and the kinds of job moves for which they would be considered.

Succession planning cannot stand alone. It is only of value if it is in tune with the business strategy and if its outputs (succession and career plans, and associated information) actually influence job filling and development. It, therefore, needs to link with:

• The resourcing policy for senior posts and broad brush human resource planning, e.g. the mix of internal development and external recruitment; the mix between generalist and functional career paths and the rough demand for successors of varied types over various timeframes.
  
  
• Strategies for skill development of those skills that will be needed over the coming years.
  
  
• The job filling process, which needs to use succession planning information when a senior or key vacancy arises or when there is an opportunity to make a developmental move. Organizations make this link in different ways-succession plans can be used directly to make appointments (although this is less common today), or the plans and database searches feed into a shortlist that may also be augmented through open internal job advertising.
  
  
• Individual development plans for those identified as part of the talent pool. These are part of the succession process and should lead to both job experience (e.g., job moves, projects, secondments etc.) and skill training/coaching.
  
  
•  Assessment processes, which need to feed information into succession plans, for example from appraisal. This is part of the move to base judgments of potential on evidence against skill criteria needed for the job. It is important these cover job specific and functional skills as well as generic leadership competencies. Individuals need to be aware which sources of assessment information might be used in this way.

Modern succession planning is a learning process for all involved. Senior executives have to learn what kind of process will work best in their own business, given its unique structure and resourcing issues. They also need to learn how to hold these rather difficult discussions about the strengths and weaknesses of their people, and how to best support their career development. The succession planning process, therefore, usually evolves over time as structures and needs change, and as executives get better at doing it.

The CEO has a critical role in giving priority to succession and in insisting on high quality, objective debate and follow-through. The HR function has an equally critical role in supporting the line. This is done in a number of ways, including process design and facilitation; challenging judgments and plans; brokering crucial cross-boundary career moves; advice to those doing the planning; career counseling for individuals; and information support.

The information support role these days usually involves holding summary plans and supporting data on computerized databases. These databases should be kept as simple as possible, but the information they contain should be continuously updated. This data becomes a valuable resource in its own right, especially for verifying that developmental actions are followed up on, and in searching for internal candidates when vacancies arise.

Succession planning has come a long way from being process based by putting names in boxes on organization charts. Its main adaptations to changing needs are summarized below:

• Strong emphasis on using succession planning as a process for proactively developing talent, and, therefore, an emphasis on engineering developmental work experiences
  
  
• Plan for pools of jobs where possible, not just for individual posts
  
  
• A more devolved model, with only very senior roles and small, high-potential populations planned for at the corporate center
  
  
• Acceptance of the need for a more diverse senior management group, with functional strength and general management skills
  
  
• Consideration of future skill needs and current skills (linked, but not restricted to, competence frameworks)
  
  
• More objective information on the performance, skills and potential of individuals, i.e., a meritocratic philosophy
  
  
• A collective management process for identifying successors and taking responsibility for their development
  
  
• More involvement of the individual and a gradual shift towards a more open approach. This includes adapting succession to take account of increasingly open internal job advertising.
  
  
• Less emphasis on the plan, more on the dialogue and the valuable database, which is built through the process and which can be used in a variety of ways (e.g., candidate search, during reorganizations)
  
  
• Line ownership, often led by the CEO, with active facilitation and support from HR

Many writers have suggested that succession planning is too detailed a process to be appropriate in today's volatile environment. It is true that it still faces many tensions and challenges including the need to be flexible, to take on board that people make their own career decisions, the need to increase the diversity of the talent pool, and especially to ensure that the talents of women and ethnic minorities are properly developed.

Organizations have found that although management training goes some way to developing future leaders, it does not deliver the range of experience they require for future leadership roles. Succession planning is the only process we have that helps an organization deliver tailored, proactive career development for the most talented individuals-and aligns with business needs. Most large organizations have concluded that modern succession planning is a crucial part of their HR strategy.