Succession Planning: Why It Matters More Than Ever — and Why It’s Personal to Me

Succession planning isn’t just a governance exercise.
It’s one of the most strategic decisions any organisation will ever make — and one of the most emotional.

When I read the recent article in The Economist, “How do you replace a CEO like Tim Cook or Warren Buffett?”, it triggered memories from my own journey: the leadership assignments I handled at Egon Zehnder, the organisational transformation work at Sampoerna, and the advisory roles I now play at Wardhana & Co.

Across three decades of working with leaders at pivotal moments, one truth has remained unchanged:

A great CEO is never just a title.

A CEO carries culture.
A CEO sets direction.
A CEO inspires belief.
Replacing such a leader is never simple — and it should never be.

Succession planning sits at the intersection of strategy, psychology, culture, risk, and legacy.
And yet, many organisations underestimate its importance until it is too late.

I have seen companies that began thinking about succession at the right time — creating a smooth and energising transition.
I have also seen companies that waited until the moment was forced upon them. In those cases, the organisation was not ready, the talent pipeline was thin, and the transition was destabilising.

Below are some reflections inspired both by The Economist’s insights and by the practical realities I see every day in Indonesia’s business landscape.

1. Start Succession Planning Early — Long Before It Feels Urgent

One of the most common misconceptions is:
“We still have time.”

In reality, time is the one resource companies lose without noticing.
The Economist highlights how leaders who serve 10 years or more cast longer shadows — making transitions more complex and performance gaps wider.

When boards wait too long, they often face:

• Limited internal options

• Rushed decision-making

• Cultural anxiety

• Loss of investor confidence

• Increased business risk

Early succession planning is not a sign of disloyalty.
It is a sign of leadership maturity.

2. Balance Internal Loyalty with External Objectivity

Internal candidates offer continuity and cultural stability.
But relying exclusively on internal talent can unintentionally create tunnel vision.

The Economist points out a striking fact:
85% of CEO appointments are internal — yet two-thirds underperform their predecessors.

This does not mean external candidates are inherently better.
It simply means this:

👉 Boards need to benchmark.
👉 Boards need genuine comparison.
👉 Boards need courage to challenge assumptions.

The best companies evaluate internal and external talent side by side — with clear, future-oriented criteria.

3. Define the Future First, Then Define the Leader

Too often, leadership assessments look backward.
Boards ask:

• What has this person achieved?

• What roles have they held?

• What was their past performance?

These questions matter — but they are not enough.

The more important questions are forward-looking:

• What strategy will define the next decade?

• What new capabilities will be required?

• What cultural changes must be led?

• What emerging market forces must be navigated?

The next CEO must match the company’s future, not its past.

4. In Indonesia, the Succession Challenge Is Even More Nuanced

Having worked closely with Indonesian companies — family-owned, founder-led, listed, state-linked, and fast-growing — I see a unique complexity not always captured in global discussions.

Indonesian organisations often need leaders who can:

• professionalise the company,

• scale culture across generations,

• navigate fast-shifting regulatory landscapes,

• build digital capabilities quickly,

• drive regional competitiveness beyond Indonesia.

These transitions are rarely linear.
In fact, they are often exponential — requiring leaders who can grow at the pace of the organisation’s ambition.

Succession in Indonesia is not merely about “the next person.”
It is about shaping the next era.

5. Boards Need Both Courage and Process

Great succession planning requires a combination of discipline and conviction.

Boards must have:

• clear leadership criteria,

• structured evaluation,

• objective benchmarking,

• calibrated assessments,

• and open communication across the organisation.

These elements build trust and reduce uncertainty.
They enable the organisation to rally behind the new leader, not question the decision.

Ultimately, succession planning is a board’s opportunity to reinforce strategy, renew culture, and preserve continuity — all at the same time.

After decades of working with CEOs, founders, boards, and next-generation leaders, I have learned that the best-run organisations treat succession planning not as a moment, but as a mindset.

It is not about replacing a person.
It is about preparing an organisation for the future.

Where are you or your company in the succession planning journey — and are you preparing for the leader your future will require?