The Succession Illusion: Why Most Leadership Transitions Fail Before They Begin

Let’s get honest about succession planning. For decades, organizations have poured time, money, and hope into formal plans, mentoring programs, high-potential pipelines, and heir-apparent grooming. And yet, when a leader exits - especially unexpectedly - most companies still scramble. Why? Because the entire system is built on a comforting illusion: that leadership can be neatly handed off like a baton in a relay race. It can’t.

The truth is, most succession plans are static, shallow, and self-congratulatory. They look good in binders and board meetings but collapse under pressure. And the reason they fail isn’t just poor execution - it’s that the entire philosophy behind them is outdated, misaligned with reality, and often driven by ego more than strategy.

The Binder Plan Trap

Let’s start with the classic “binder plan” - a list of names under key roles, updated annually in HR meetings. These plans are supposed to signal readiness. In reality, they signal nothing. Listing a successor doesn’t mean they’re prepared. It means someone checked a box.

In one survey, 64% of CHROs said their company uses the nine-box grid to categorize talent. Only 9% believed it was effective. That’s not a system - that’s theater. And when the moment comes, these plans often “no longer work for today’s business realities,” because the business has evolved while the plan sat untouched.

Mentoring: The Myth of the Savior

Mentorship is another sacred cow in succession planning. Pair a rising star with a seasoned exec, and voilà - future leader. Except, not really.

Most mentors have no skin in the game. They’re retiring, moving on, or simply uninterested. They offer occasional lunches, not real development. Worse, some actively avoid empowering their mentees out of fear or insecurity. I’ve seen it firsthand - leaders who resist sending their team to innovative workshops because they fear being outshined. That’s not leadership. That’s ego preservation.

And let’s not forget the secrecy. Companies often avoid telling potential successors they’re being considered, fearing “false expectations.” The result? Those very people leave - unaware they were ever in line.

High-Potential Programs: Exclusive and Exhausting

HiPo programs are the corporate version of elite clubs. Select a few, shower them with training, and hope they stick around. But the selection process is riddled with bias. Women and minorities are underrepresented. Quiet talent is overlooked. And the chosen few often burn out or leave when the promised promotion doesn’t materialize.

Meanwhile, the rest of the workforce disengages. If you’re not on the list, you’re not in the future. That’s a morale killer. Succession planning should build a bench, not a pedestal.

The Crown Prince Problem

Grooming a single heir apparent might feel strategic. It’s actually reckless. Betting on one person creates tunnel vision. If they leave, falter, or don’t fit the future needs, the organization is back at square one.

It also breeds internal politics. Those passed over often exit, taking institutional knowledge with them. And the chosen one? They may become complacent, protected from failure, and untested in real challenges. That’s how you end up with a leader who looks good on paper but flounders in practice.

The Ego Equation

Here’s the uncomfortable truth: many succession plans fail because the current leaders don’t want them to succeed. Succession planning forces leaders to confront their own exit, their own mortality. Some resist. Some sabotage. Some choose successors who mirror them, not challenge them.

If your succession plan is driven by fear, tradition, or ego, it’s not a plan - it’s a liability.

What Actually Works

We need to stop treating succession as a checklist and start treating it as a living, breathing process. That means:

• Continuous development, not annual reviews.

• Real experience, not just mentorship.

• Inclusive growth, not elite clubs.

• Multiple contenders, not crown princes.

• Transparent conversations, not secrecy.

• Alignment with future strategy, not past performance.

  
  

And above all, we need leaders who are secure enough to develop successors who might surpass them. True leaders don’t fear being outshined - they take pride in it.

Final Thought

Leadership succession isn’t about naming names. It’s about building capacity. It’s about preparing people - not positions - for the future. And it’s about recognizing that the best successor might not be on your list today. They might be the quiet contributor, the overlooked innovator, or the one who challenges the status quo.

If your succession plan doesn’t account for that, it’s not a plan - it’s a placeholder.