Day to day Signals that your Succession Planning process is Not working ...any of these resonate for you?
Charles H. Bishop, Jr., Ph.D.
Introduction: ‘Succession Planning’ is a general term that has been around for a while. It makes sense when referring to the replacement of the CEO/COO or one of their direct reports. After that the term loses its effectiveness—generally a waste of time and effort to much beyond a few select positions. A bigger payoff is to have pools of talent at various levels.
Litmus test: As a C-Level or HR professional involved in the effort to assure that you have talent today and in the future you should look at the following questions to see if you are getting the results you need.
The questions* posed here are geared toward helping you get in touch with your feelings that you had in the following occurrences:
- Formal meetings where the issue of talent is discussed; and
- Ad-hoc situations…that raise a red flag for you
Formal talent discussion meetings:
Your annual talent review is held once a year…you see talent as one of the keys to the organization’s success…But
- By most involved it is viewed as a ‘once a year’ task that HR owns; there is little significant follow-through;
- There is a lack of candor and managers present and protect their reports…a ‘conspiracy of politenesses is the norm.
In discussions you hear of someone consistently described a ‘having potential’…But
- You have the haunting feeling that this really a euphemism for ‘we have just not seen them do much of anything of consequence’;
- The performance bar in that unit is low…and you feel that this is just another indication that this unit is in trouble.
Day to day situations that raise a ‘red flag’ for you:
Someone has been rated as a ‘high potential’…been in the job a couple of years…But
- You have never heard anything special about him/her…they seem to be ;OK”; They never get on a short list…no one has tried to recruit for their unit.
A certain individual was placed in a key job recently…But
- He/she has not been enthusiastically received, some skepticism, and when their name is brought up, there is a ‘rolling of the eyes’;
- Upon inquiry…the word in the ranks is…’why would management put someone like that in such a key position’?
An individual has been in a pivotal job for six (6) months…you inquire ‘how are they doing?… But
- Peers say…’the jury is still out’
- Immediate manager might say…” I think that they will be OK”
A senior officer you feel has a track record of ‘poor selections’, allegiance to certain people known to be poor performers…he/she protects them…But
- No one has ever held the executive responsible for this pattern of poor people handling…no one has ‘connected the dots’ and the impact;
- They consistently promote and reward their favorites…ignoring qualified candidates from other units (and this is tolerated).
Just too many talented individuals …leave the organization…But
- No one does an analysis as to cause; we have accepted turnover as ‘normal’…just happens…external factors are the culprit;
- When inquiring ‘who could we lose?’…there does not seem to be a plan or accountability fixed to stay on top of the issue;
The poorer performers…falling short in results and teamwork are well known…But
- They stay in position and no action is taken, even though your viewpoint is known;
- You discover where they are compensated/rewarded similar to your best.
Some units are just not producing any leaders for the organization—you are concerned…But
- Your inquiries are met with defensiveness…and, are told ‘people just like to work here’;
- Promotions out of those unit are delayed…you almost feel that talent is ‘overripe’ there.
Selection into key positions is extremely important, has been discussed at the executive level…But
- Compromise candidates and ‘one horse races’ seem to be all too common; You have a feeling that too many times we are settling for ‘good enough’.
If any of these inquiries are of concern for you, …. contact:
Charles H. Bishop, Jr. PhD
Office: 312-267-2924
Cell: 847-404-7015
* Questions extracted from an original paper was distributed by the Human Capital Institute; circa 2010.