Current State
Organizations are recognizing that business continuity planning extends beyond traditional disaster recovery to encompass succession management as a critical component of operational resilience. Brandon Hall Group’s research reveals that sophisticated succession-management practices identify talent segments mission-critical to achieve business goals, including both leader and non-leader roles at all levels.
However, the data shows a significant gap in execution — while most organizations create succession plans for high-potentials, more than half review and update them only annually or on an ad-hoc basis. Additionally, about two-thirds of organizations lack a scalable approach to building consistent leadership and succession programs, and 56% report that high-potential development plans are not aligned with business objectives, creating substantial vulnerabilities in organizational continuity.
Complexities
Organizations face multiple challenges in implementing effective business continuity planning through succession management:
Resource intensity: Succession management done well is complex and time- consuming, requiring formal processes focused on the most important roles across both management and non-management positions.
Measurement limitations: Most organizations only measure for capacity and ability, failing to assess critical dimensions including dreams and goals, engagement levels, and true potential beyond past performance.
Alignment gaps: Development plans frequently fall out of sync with business objectives, with 56% of organizations reporting misalignment between high-potential development and organizational goals.
Process fragmentation: Organizations often treat succession as a collection of talent activities rather than a continuous process, resulting in weaker business outcomes on key metrics.
Assessment criteria: Research shows organizations over-rely on work experience and performance as indicators, missing the true definition of potential as “expressing possibility” rather than past achievements.
Implications
The fragmented approach to succession management creates significant risks for business continuity across organizations. When succession planning operates as an isolated, periodic activity rather than an ongoing process, organizations face potential leadership gaps that can disrupt operations, compromise strategic initiatives, and impact revenue generation.
The misalignment between development plans and business objectives means that even when successors are identified, they may not be prepared for the specific challenges their roles will demand. This disconnect becomes particularly problematic during unexpected transitions or crisis situations where immediate, capable leadership is essential. Organizations that fail to measure all dimensions of potential — focusing solely on past performance rather than future capability — risk promoting individuals who may excel in their current roles but lack the attributes necessary for success at higher levels or in different contexts.
Critical Questions
Organizations must address fundamental questions to strengthen their business continuity through succession management:
- How can the organization identify and prioritize business-critical positions beyond traditional leadership roles to ensure operational continuity?
- What measurement approaches will capture all dimensions of potential, including engagement, ambition, and capacity for growth?
- How frequently should the organization review and update succession plans to maintain alignment with evolving business objectives?
- What processes will transform succession management from a periodic activity into a continuous, integrated business practice?
- How can the organization ensure development plans for successors directly support current and future business requirements?
Brandon Hall Group™ Point of View
Expand succession planning beyond senior leadership to encompass all business-critical roles
Organizations must recognize that operational continuity depends on talent at multiple levels, not just executive positions. This means conducting thorough assessments to identify roles that, if left vacant, would significantly impact business operations, customer relationships, or strategic initiatives. By mapping these critical positions across the organization and developing targeted succession plans for each, companies create multiple layers of resilience that protect against disruption regardless of where turnover occurs.
Implement multi-dimensional assessment approaches that evaluate potential holistically
Moving beyond traditional performance metrics requires organizations to measure intelligence quotient (both raw and acquired), emotional intelligence (including self- awareness, self-regulation, social awareness, and empathy), and motivation factors (ambition, determination, and commitment). This comprehensive evaluation identifies individuals who not only perform well currently but possess the underlying attributes necessary for future success. Regular interviews, assessments, and performance check- ins provide ongoing data to refine understanding of each candidate’s true potential.
Establish succession management as a continuous process with regular updates and reviews
Rather than treating succession planning as an annual exercise, organizations should integrate it into ongoing talent management activities. This includes updating development plans as business needs evolve, conducting frequent performance check- ins with coaching and mentoring components, and linking learning initiatives directly to performance outcomes. Organizations that adopt this continuous approach report better results on key metrics including turnover, retention, engagement, and revenue.
Align successor development plans directly with business objectives and future organizational needs
Each development plan must connect explicitly to current business goals while anticipating future requirements. This alignment ensures that succession candidates build capabilities the organization will actually need, rather than following generic leadership development paths. Regular review cycles should assess both individual progress and continued relevance to business strategy, adjusting development activities as organizational priorities shift.
