Who Needs Succession Planning?

Several years ago, the then Chief Executive Officer of Progress Energy unexpectedly passed away. Within days, the regional energy powerhouse introduced a new chief. How could that have happened so fast? The answer--someone had been groomed to take his place.

Presumably, the successor was also shadowed by a leader-in-waiting. In the view of many, the old line, "uneasy is the head that wears the crown," might be better replaced by "uneasy is the organization that lacks successors."

Succession planning has long been valued and practiced in the business world. In public education, not so much. I should know. Triangle Leadership Academy Director of Learning, Fran Riddick, wrote her doctoral dissertation on the subject.

Riddick's methodology compelled her to interview me and senior leaders in Charlotte-Mecklenburg, Guilford, and Wake County school districts, inquiring of us whether, how, and for whom the three largest districts in North Carolina planned programs of leadership development and succession planning. 

Riddick concluded that, "While all three districts have a variety of strategies in place, none of the districts have a comprehensive, written succession plan and corresponding evaluation." "None," she said. And that was when TLA was going full tilt. Whatever attention was paid to building school leader bench strength before the recession has definitely been attenuated since recent budget cuts.  

But explaining inattention to leadership development and succession planing because of dwindling public dollars is really a red herring. Even three years ago when money was not as much an issue as it is now, Riddick's research suggests that there was a lack of systemic seriousness about who's next and what they need to get them to next. Why is that, one wonders. 

Let us pose to the proverbial Man from Mars, beamed down to Anytown, USA, observing the apparent seriousness to districts growing their own leaders, the following multiple-choice test item:

School and district leaders are (a) expendable, (b) interchangeable, (c) ineffectual, (d) readily poached, (e) all of the above, or (f) none of the above. No, this is not one of those dreams where you are taking a final exam without having attended class all semester.

If you have spent a single day as a public school educator, you know the answer is (f).  But if leadership matters, and if principals and other school leaders are becoming increasingly difficult to recruit at a time when we need more and more of them, how do we get the practitioners we need? In about the same amount of time it takes to quaff a hot venti mocha latte, we can get in our cars and visit some nearby models.  

Progress Energy is but one local example of a company that plans for its successors. Principals participating in the NC Principals and Assistant Principals Association, Distinguished Leadership in Practice, recently learned in field trips to GlaxoSmithKline, Lenovo, Red Hat, and others that those companies also sustain programs of leadership development, enabling employees at every level to fill a pipeline to a pool of future-ready leaders.

Senior leaders at software giant, SAS, were most articulate. They said leadership development and succession planning was part of their organizational culture, embedded in their DNA. One is tempted to conclude that SAS, who in the last 36 years has increased profits and productivity every year, been named twice in the last five years as Fortune magazine's "Best Places to Work" and in the top ten for the last eight years, might teach public school educators a thing or two.

To paraphrase the Good Book, where schools lack visionary leaders the learners perish. You can buy a few but most you'll have to develop. And when you do, the leaders need to know that there is a pathway to their future in your district. Who needs succession planning? We do. Honk if you agree. Then ask me what research and craft knowledge suggest we do next.