Succession or Evolution? Why the "Soft Stuff" is Hardest to Solve.

Succession planning is often treated as a technical exercise: identify roles, assess readiness, manage risk, and ensure continuity. On paper, it appears orderly and rational. In practice, succession is rarely just about replacing people, it is about whether an organisation is willing and able to evolve.

What most succession plans underestimate is the “soft stuff”: identity, power, relationships, culture, and unspoken assumptions about leadership. These human dynamics are the hardest to address, yet they are precisely what determines whether succession becomes a smooth transition or a destabilising event.
 

Succession Is Not Just About Roles
 

Boards and executives frequently frame succession as filling vacancies in critical roles. This approach assumes continuity, that the organisation’s future will largely resemble its past.

However, succession decisions inevitably raise deeper questions:

• What kind of leadership does the organisation need next?
• Which behaviours will no longer serve us?
• What must change for the strategy to succeed?

When succession is treated as replication rather than evolution, organisations risk appointing leaders who are technically capable but strategically misaligned with future needs.
 

The Hidden Power of Organisational Identity
 

Long-serving leaders often embody the organisation’s identity. They carry its history, relationships, and informal authority. Succession, therefore, can feel like a threat, not just to individuals, but to how the organisation understands itself.

Unspoken dynamics commonly include:

• Loyalty to “how things have always been done”
• Fear of losing influence or relevance
• Resistance disguised as concern for stability
• Idealisation of past leadership success

These forces rarely appear in risk registers or succession frameworks, yet they exert enormous influence over outcomes.
 

Why the “Soft Stuff” Gets Avoided
 

Organisations tend to avoid the soft stuff because it is:

• Difficult to measure
• Emotionally uncomfortable
• Politically sensitive
• Time-consuming

It is far easier to discuss competencies, timelines, and organisational charts than to confront issues of trust, control, readiness to let go, or cultural misalignment. As a result, succession plans look robust on paper while remaining fragile in reality.

Leadership Behaviour as the Real Succession Risk

The greatest risk to successful succession is rarely lack of talent, it is leadership behaviour. This includes:

• Founders or long-term executives who cannot step back
• Boards that avoid challenging entrenched leaders
• Successors who are constrained by legacy expectations
• Senior teams that undermine change while endorsing continuity

Without addressing these behaviours, succession becomes symbolic rather than transformational.
 

Succession as a Catalyst for Evolution
 

Handled well, succession can be a powerful catalyst for organisational evolution. It creates a natural pause, a moment to reassess strategy, culture, and leadership assumptions.

Organisations that use succession as an evolutionary opportunity:

• Align future leadership with strategic direction
• Revisit values and cultural expectations
• Redefine what “good leadership” looks like
• Invest in developing adaptive leadership capability

This approach requires courage from boards and executives to look beyond continuity and towards relevance.
 

The Role of Executive Coaching in the “Soft Stuff”
 

Executive coaching plays a critical role in addressing the human dynamics of succession. Coaching provides a confidential, reflective space to explore:

• Identity and role transition for outgoing leaders
• Readiness and confidence of successors
• Power dynamics within executive teams
• Emotional and cultural barriers to change

By working with both incumbents and successors, coaching helps organisations surface and address the issues that formal succession processes cannot.
 

Board Responsibility and Governance Maturity

Succession planning is a core governance responsibility, not a future problem. Boards that treat succession as a living conversation—rather than a periodic exercise—are better equipped to manage the soft stuff.

Governance maturity is evident when boards:

• Challenge assumptions about leadership continuity
• Hold space for difficult conversations
• Balance respect for legacy with need for change
• Support leaders through transition, not just replacement
   

Conclusion

Succession is never just about who comes next. It is about whether an organisation is prepared to evolve.

The “soft stuff”, identity, culture, power, and behaviour, is the hardest to solve because it requires honesty, vulnerability, and courage from those in positions of authority. Yet it is precisely this work that determines whether succession strengthens or destabilises the organisation.

Ultimately, the choice is not succession or evolution. The most resilient organisations understand that succession is evolution—whether they plan for it or not.