The best people sometimes outgrow the role you wanted them to stay in. Succession planning is a good idea that often becomes too narrow. It turns into a private list of names, a replacement chart or a hope that one person will be ready when another person leaves. That may feel orderly, but it doesn't reflect how careers work now.
They grow, move, change priorities and sometimes outgrow roles. A succession plan that assumes talent can be held in place indefinitely isn't a plan. It is wishful thinking.
Succession planning should build capability, not ownership.
The better approach is to focus on talent development, not talent ownership. Develop people even if they eventually leave. That may sound risky, but the alternative is worse: don't develop people and hope they stay.
Employees outgrow roles all the time. Sometimes that's a sign of success. A person who came in as a coordinator may become ready for management. A manager may become ready for executive responsibility. If the organisation has no pathway, they will look elsewhere. That shouldn't be treated as betrayal.
Traditional succession planning often asks who could replace a particular person. Modern succession planning should also ask what capabilities the organisation needs more of. Leadership judgement. Financial literacy. Operational depth. Stakeholder management. Digital capability. Coaching ability. These can be built across more than one person.
- Old: protect one replacement
- New: build capability
- Old: assume loyalty
- New: prepare people for growth
This matters in sport and recreation because many organisations are lean. One departure can expose how much knowledge sat with a single person. Succession planning should reduce that fragility by sharing knowledge, broadening experience and preparing people before a vacancy appears.
A good succession system is visible enough to be credible. People should understand how development decisions are made, what skills matter and what opportunities exist. Secrecy can create suspicion, especially if succession feels like favouritism.
There is still a place for identifying potential successors. But the list shouldn't be the plan. The plan is the development work: mentoring, exposure, project leadership, feedback, training and chances to operate at the next level.
Succession planning needs a rethink because careers are more mobile and organisations are more exposed. Build people well. Some will stay and strengthen the organisation. Some will leave and speak well of it. Both outcomes are better than pretending people can be owned.