The environment in which organizations operate these days is complex, volatile and difficult to predict. As a result, some organizations may adopt a wait and watch policy and become redundant due to inaction. A smart organization, however, is one that keeps its strategic goals in mind while embracing uncertainty with the aim of finding patterns to ensure continuous action through disciplined decision making.
There has been a drastic change in the world we operate in, since the time when only age used to separate employees from their organizations. More so, the issue was confined to the HR function alone, at best concerning the senior-most executives of the function but limited to a few key positions only. It was only an unplanned activity performed to find a "replacement". There was a high cost involved in finding the right replacement. It used to be time consuming, having an adverse effect on the efficiency of the organization even as it involved the risk of loss of critical knowledge.
Succession planning as a concept has evolved into a strategic initiative, wherein organizations depend on this for enriching their talent pool of top performers at all levels, particularly at crucial positions. It has come a long way from merely being a process of addressing the issue of aging employees or dealing with an unforeseen situation arising out of someone suddenly deciding to change career.
The typical process of succession planning includes the following:
• Identification of key positions
• Identification of key talent
• Assessment of the talent and gap identification
• Creation of a development plan, and
• Monitoring and reviewing progress
Successful organizations that have championed this concept have made succession planning part of their DNA.
I see a great opportunity for CIOs in following the succession planning process in their respective organizations. This paves the way for them to climb up the ladder in their organizations to attain a more strategic position and focus more on strategic goals. A CIO emerges as a stronger contender for a boardroom seat. This also helps a CIO to nurture his team to get involved at a tactical level goal meeting than being involved majorly in operational issues.
Sounds so simple. Isn't it?
But this is easier said than done and the reasons are plenty.
But this is easier said than done and the reasons are plenty.
• Given the constraints of operating with minimal resources, is the CIO in a position to plan succession in his team?
• Given the fact that IT today is run in a true hybrid environment with multiple technology flavors, is it possible to create a skill pool in such diverse skill sets?
• Refresh cycle of technology being much faster compared to any other functional skill, does it give the CIO enough bandwidth to effectively plan succession?
• IT has to provide 24/7 operational coverage to business. In times where CIOs can barely manage support, is it possible to have succession planning?
• The training budget is not controlled solely by CIO.
Does it sound a little emotional or too practical? I hope not. I am also reminded of a CEO who once said that "There are millions of reasons why things could not be done but there is only one reason for something to happen." Let me also try to find that one reason by asking some simple questions:
• Have you done enough homework to identify key positions in your team?
• Have you identified the talent in your team?
• Has the talent assessment been done already?
• Have the gaps been identified and is a development plan ready?
• Have you identified what skills / certificates are relevant?
• Do you have sufficient budgetary allocations made for the same?
• Does the monitoring and progress review of the plan happen regularly?
One may say that a CIO alone cannot be held responsible for ineffective succession planning but may I ask who stops us from playing the role of an influencer? Ultimately, it is our responsibility to deal with succession planning at least in our teams, irrespective of the fact that the organization has or does not have a formal succession planning initiative.
Who do you think is the ultimate beneficiary, the organization or the CIO?
Sorry I could not open the page above. Nevertheless, I was part of the succession plan for the CEO of the company that I worked for and I put in place a succession plan to replace me as CIO, and would fill in when I stood in for the CEO.
I rotated all my direct reports on an yearly basis. The systems development manager to operations, operations to communications and so on, until over a six year period they all were capable of understanding every facet of the company. Equally, I rotated each of the Senior Business Analysts who were “embedded” in each of the lines of business so that they become aware and capable of understanding how the business was run, and were not seen just as “IT” people. Interposed with this, selected managers were made to attend external management courses. All of this was part of their development objective in there annual reviews. It worked successfully. The only downside was that they became extremely marketable and were often poached by headhunters. Fortunately, very few left.
Daya,
Most of us know but very few actually accept that they are at fault. I need guts to accept that I am am poor succession planner or I am least bothered about it or (may be) I feel unsecured by having a successor while I am there for the job. I know of CIOs who have moved on to take serious business roles but have no guts to leave their IT role. Though there is nothing bad in it yet the sheer insecurity makes them do what they “don’t do”.
The explanation of the succession planning process is very subtle and you have rubbed the CIOs on the wrong side. The even more pertinent question is “Whether the CIO is allowed to/has the liberty of planning succession (in isolation of either a policy or an authority). I suppose this is an “Ambitious” ask as of now. Barring a few examples that I know, there aren’t many structured Succession Planning cases available to refer. Even the companies that claim they have a policy, default big time.
Moreover, the biggest lacuna is in the thinking that IT is a sub-set of business automation and therefore need not be looked upon as a department that requires succession planning as opposed to others like Finance, Operations, Manufacturing etc, which are supposedly ‘super-critical’.
You have rightly mentioned that “irrespective of whether the company has it or not the CIO can/should” do succession planning. The point is valid and nobody should contest you on this one. But what will be the outcome of it is a point of great debate. Moreover, I find the lack of willingness too.
Will the CIO be the hero or a villain in the organization?
Overall it is a provocative piece which, as I said earlier, rub on the wrong side…Like the debate “Can CIO be the CEO and How?”
David, First of all thank you so much for sharing insight of the process followed by your organization and yourself. I would say this indeed is a very practical and effective approach, given the constraints. Could you please elaborate on what kind of management programs/trainings were conducted for your team and also if there exists any training programs which helps next in line or future CIO to prepare themselves as CIOs? If yes, what are those? Once again thanks for sharing your experience.
Organizations and CIOs should take up organized succession planning just as it has been done for other functions for long. It is a long-term strategic activity and needs to be planned well. However, it shouldn’t exceed 2-3 years for each candidate.
If the CIO initiates this, there will be greater acceptance. It will showcase the courage and maturity of the current CIO and indicate his willingness to move beyond the CIO role.
I believe both the organization as well as the CIO stand to benefit. Hence CIO succession plan needs to be driven like any other critical business initiative.
In my opinion succession plan can be created for only few (1-2) candidates and not with entire next line of IT. The motivation for the rest of the team is rotation of roles and enhancing their skills which can help them get selected in the next instance of succession planning or even in their next job. Ultimately, they will grow.
Therefore the organization needs to choose wisely and invest handsomely - this may cause some heart burns on the operational side - but it can be contained.
There seems to be a focus on developing the future CIOs of late, i am aware of two such programs/courses:
a) Gartner ALD for aspiring CIOs - 2-day program. It started in US (5 times), once in Australia and just last month it was held in India. I was one of the participants and quite liked it. I will surely recommend anyone interested in the same.
b) ISB Global CIO certification.
Thanks.
I commend Daya on articulating his views without holding back. Sure, there can be no debate on the fact that succession planning actually benefits the CIO and it makes him available and suitable for a larger role. It has also been well put that CIO should take a lead even if such a procedure is not prevalent in the organization. However I will add a note of caution, agreeing with what Rahul has said. Many organizations do not practice this approach and the HR functions in many organizations are just ornamental. They talk but never walk the talk. The trouble arises when the successor we develop is not recognized by the organization and realizing the situation, the identified successor leaves for greener pastures as described by David. The task faces challengs in the real world.
Yes Bala, that is the blatant truth. The successor that you are nurturing can at best be considered a stop gap arrangement or a “CIO in distress” if the idea is not bought by the organization/HR. More than that, the successor needs to know that he is being groomed and developed. The classic case is Cyrus Mistry, the guy who will succeed Ratan Tata. This is the formal way. I do agree with Manuhar that this can’t be done to everyone but at least to one person!
Good one Daya. A very controversial topic. Though, I will logon to the page and post my comments, can’t resist my immediate 2 cents on the table.
Succession planning starts with a commitment to make oneself “redundant” of what they currently do and at the same time “prepare” for the other roles. As most of the personnel don’t plan and prepare for the other roles, they quite often don’t want to make them redundant. No one will accept; but true, for the Primal Instinct is “What’s in it for me?”.
Even after willing to make oneself redundant to identify and nurture personnel to take the mantle, requires a lot of planning. And there are organizational constraints – for example the technical and business analyst standing at same level in hierarchy. With such positions it takes a longish route in terms of providing both an equal opportunity.
Dear Muthu, You are bang on. I intended to provoke a thought with respect to CIOs thinking beyond the role of CIO. Unfortunately there does not exist many examples where CIOs would have prepared themselves for the “Other Role”. CIOs want change but what? It is still an unknown animal thus they end up in taking another CIO profile with a fancier title or designation and enhanced pay package in another organization. I am yet to see some examples of paradigm shift.
Sucession planning in my view is not a stand alone exercise only for the CIO. It can be successful only if it is taken up at the organisational level. It has to be necessarily driven by the HR department.
Muthukumars view in this context is very relavent. The feeling of insecurity will abstain people from making themselves redundant. It is a human tendency to keep yourself secured. This has to be done tactfully else it cannot deliver the desired results. As articulated by Daya the key positions and talents for the organisation need to be objectively identified. Only then the gap analysis can be carried out and the development plan made accordingly.
Well written, Daya.Succession planning requires patience both from the planner and the person whose career is being planned. More often, a rotation process takes time and the skill sets are very specialized. Have been planning to put in role rotation as a step towards succession planning and have not managed it yet. Role rotation causes disruption, both to the business and to the IT environment, changes team dynamics and challenges learning skills. I think now is the right time to jump into it and handle the repercussions..
Looking at the overwhelming response, I propose to do an informal CIO discussion over a cup of coffee on a Saturday at a central location sometime during end of March. If CIOs agree, I can mobilize many others.
Daya we exchanged informal notes…How many of us here in Delhi have done a proper succession planning with measurables ? I am not sure if we are culturally ready to do succession planning. At least I have never had an IT boss who did it. I dont remember any of my CEOs who did it. Probably automatically it does happen, but not sure how many do practice this in real life and has a method to achieve this. All the gap identification etc ends up in learning and development strategy rather than grooming. I recently read Tata’s are grooming their CEO. So are the Goenka’s. But then not many such examples at least for CEOs. And if there are any such example woudl be good to explore if their CIOs underwent the same. If not then I would call the process farcical. I for one have not done this, I have always believed when the time comes, someone is elevated. If he is good he takes over and works through the ranks else steps down. But some of the people who worked for me have risen beyond my rank at least with no direct contribution from my side in developing them into a CIO at least.
Tamal, I agree there aren’t many examples of this sort available for reference. A few stray cases are coming into limelight in the CEO community. You said somebody is elevated to hold the position. That somebody, if not a CIO, can just be a mere “fulfillment” agent and not a strategist or visionary (even if it so-called). Do we realize this? It is about brining in a culture and following it to ensure there are not many mishaps.
I liked your thoughts and agree with them. Succession planning is not simple. Not just because of the complexities involved as rightly mentioned by you (in terms of many reasons as given by you and questions posed by you), in my view there are many other factors also. It goes back to classic question - Is CIO himself / herself ready to become CEO or take a Board or higher business position - In my view, most of the times answer is sadly NO. There are limitations in most CIOs in taking up business roles (while many CIOs in public may claim that they are equal if not superior to most of their business peers and are more than ready for CEO position - when they are in business meetings they realize that this is not the fact) and this the reason whey we have only very few examples of CIOs getting into that role. Now, when there is a scenario where CIO does not get the role beyond CIO - what is the motivation for him or her to do succession planning (and that too in environment where most other business functions also do not do it). Imagine a scenario where CIO has made somebody in his / her team ready and CIO is not getting any further position in organization - what will happen - either CIO will leave or the mentee will leave.
Having said that, it does not undermine succession planning. In my view, first CIO has to be convinced of his / her on abilities and not feel insecure and then take this seriously. Job rotation and specialized training programs apart from mentoring sessions are great ways of succession planning. Another thing one can do is to give some unrelated and difficult projects to the person being groomed and then coach / guide the person. Also, job rotation does put stress in system as the performance levels of team tend to drop in short term - people getting into unfamiliar territories, users saying earlier guy was better (familiarity factor) and this could lead to some delays. CIO here has to play a very constructive role in managing this transition and supporting the team.
Good article dear. look forward to your next one
I am building on what I had said earlier - plan where you will be as well as plan who will take your position.
I also want to add to this the theme around “What next, CIO?”.
I have been often hearing CIO to board and CIO to CEO. Sounds music to ears. But, how much of it is a reality and what makes us think that we are there. Sure, being in the middle of all that is happening in the business, gives us “some” understanding. But, does it give “all” that requires to step on to the others shoe? How many of us have this opportunity and how many of us are working towards converting these opportunities to reality. This probably supports the ambiguity & uncertainty around where will you be.
Ok. You have finally decided where you will be and your action plans are clear as to when and how you will reach there. Now the other part of who will pick the baton from you and who will pick the baton from that person who will pick the baton from you. What I am probably highlighting is a domino effect with respect to succession planning. It just doesn’t stop at you identifying your replacement, it goes lower and lower till you reach the absolutely tactical layer and decide to stop. This isnt easy and does take time.
To answer Tamal’s question on how many of us plan and practice succession planning. I can’t say I plan succession meticulously, but I have been practicing for sure. Needless to say that mostly the motive has been continuity rather than succession. This includes opportunistic successions as well, where opportunity knocks at the door and on the basis of assessment the baton is handed over to the next best. Many a times it works.
And at the end, succession planning should be the DNA of an organisation. Primary responsibility for succession planning should be the function with proper support coming from HR. The role of HR could actually get limited, if no (human resource) budget is needed to fulfill succession planning.
Appreciate that Rahul is planning to have a session on succession planning. I would love to attend. And I would love to hear where fellow CIO’s are planning to move into and what opportunities they are working on currently.
Thanks Daya for opening such a wonderful topic.