‘Tis the season for public companies to approach prospective director candidates about joining their boards at next year’s annual meetings. Over the past several years, companies have done a good job at identifying what board member capabilities they need to address the challenges they foresee ahead. The constructive tension and pressure from stakeholder capitalism has made sure boards prioritize diversifying their composition and expertise. But like sports teams that try to build a team around a collection of star talent, boards are only as strong as their culture.
From our 30 years of working with Fortune 10 to pre-IPO boards, their effectiveness is predicated on how—and how well—their board leaders lead. The best can harness the individual talents of their fellow directors to create the necessary decision-making aperture and constructive tension that allows for the best possible decisions. While admittedly there are individuals who have the unique and innate ability to lead other leaders, many of the most impactful board and committee chairs have developed their approach through hard work, agility, accessibility, courage, humility, and integrity.
As corporate boards continue to evaluate and add new directors, it is important for nominating committees to prioritize how candidates learn, adapt, and overcome as much as focusing on their past accomplishments. From our recent survey of public company directors, we highlight the best practices of great board leaders. We hope this will serve as a guidepost to build and enhance your own boardroom culture.
1. Establishing a Culture of Trust and Embracing Diversity of Viewpoints: The most impactful and revered board members can foster a board culture where trust and constructive discourse are paramount. This involves creating an environment where diverse opinions are valued and where challenging discussions can occur without fear of retribution. It’s about harnessing the collective wisdom of the board to make the best decisions possible. In today’s globalized business environment, embracing diversity of thought is not just a moral imperative but a strategic one.
2. Engaging Deeply in Strategy and Providing an ‘Outside View’: Successful boards are deeply engaged in various aspects such as strategy, digital integration, M&A, risk management, talent development, IT, and marketing. They contribute significantly by providing an ‘outside view’ to strategy and challenging the strategic alternatives presented by management. This requires directors to offer guidance and constructive feedback, ensuring that the company’s strategic direction benefits from diverse perspectives. This is only possible if board members are avid and continuous learners who can connect the lessons of the past with the current trends and issues facing companies today.
3. Objectivity and Big-Picture Mindset: A director must be objective and possess a big-picture mindset. It’s essential for board members to be future-ready and have the courage and decisiveness to make high-quality decisions on pressing strategic issues. A great director steers the board’s attention to these critical strategic issues and potential risks, balancing short-term and long-term perspectives.
The role of a director as a leader on the board is multi-dimensional and requires a blend of strategic insight, objective decision-making, courage, and the ability to foster a culture of trust and inclusivity. By embodying these qualities, directors can significantly contribute to the success and resilience of their organizations, steering them towards a sustainable and prosperous future. Boards looking to enhance their effectiveness would do well to cultivate these traits or prioritize them during the selection process, ensuring their directors are equipped to navigate the complex and ever-changing landscape of our business world.
# # #
Brett Stephens is the CEO of RSR Partners and helps lead the firm’s Board & CEO Services.
RSR Partners is a boutique professional services firm headquartered in Greenwich, CT, that specializes in helping Boards and CEOs with their most critical recruiting, selection, and succession needs. The firm was founded in 1993 by industry icon Russell S. Reynolds, Jr. The firm has conducted thousands of projects for Boards and CEOs at public, private equity-backed, and family-owned businesses across a range of industries including asset management, consumer goods and services, industrial, technology, and healthcare. To learn more about RSR Partners, click here.
A continual challenge we have helped our clients address over the years is how best to populate boards with diverse directors. In fact, 86% of all of our board placements over the past two years have either been gender or ethnically diverse. Data shows that diverse boards with the right combination of relevant skills and experience outperform more homogenous ones. As such, boards often overlay their diversity objectives on top of the more traditional objectives, such as requiring that the director possess the relevant skills, experiences, perspectives, and judgment needed to be successful. Achieving all these objectives simultaneously can often prove difficult and is a short-term solution that, if not managed correctly, can have a devasting impact on board performance in the long-term. Instead, identifying and cultivating relationships with potential candidates that may not be ready to join a board in the immediate term, but have the potential to serve in several years, can increase a board’s ability to achieve these objectives, ensure culture, and remain viable for many years to come. Yet, it requires discipline and a commitment to a strategic, long-term vision.
Varying Viewpoints on Diversity
As a starting place, it is helpful for directors to ascertain what they should take into account when considering how to add diversity to their ranks. A common request from boards is to find the “best candidate,” which often means the candidate that checks all the boxes at the same time – diversity and the specific skills and experiences needed – even if there is a paucity of that candidate type in their target companies and industries. Boards can broaden their definition of diversity by considering and understanding the culture and effectiveness of the current board. In addition, diversity should also reflect the board’s customers, employees, and communities. Best practice is for boards to consider what the “best candidate” is right now and also give significant thought to what the “best candidate” is in the future – for the board and the organization. Perhaps one of the criteria that seems critical right now can be postponed until another board seat becomes available. Lastly, some directors harbor concerns that they won’t have a place under a more DEI-focused paradigm, especially those with socially advantaged identities. This can create additional hurdles, however, exploring the data that demonstrates that diversity of identity leads to diversity of thought, and in turn leads to productive discussions and better outcomes, can help expand viewpoints on the importance of diversity in the boardroom.
Board Diversity and Results
According to ISS, there has been continued improvement in racial and ethnic board diversity. Approximately 86% of Russell 3000 Index companies, excluding the S&P 500, and 99% of S&P 500 companies have at least one racially/ethnically diverse board member. Additionally, nearly all industry sectors showed increased racial/ethnic board diversity year-over-year.
A new study from KPMG specifically referencing African Americans (AA) on boards states while they are still underrepresented in the boardrooms of public Fortune 1000 companies, there has been a significant increase in the proportion of these companies with at least one AA in the boardroom. Just over three-quarters (76%) of the companies studied had at least one AA director as of September 2022, compared to only 61% in 2020. However, it is still uncommon for public F1000 companies to have multiple AA directors; less than a quarter (22%) of these companies had more than one AA serving on their board. Larger companies are likely to have more AA directors than smaller companies. For the first time, all of the largest US public companies on the F100 list have at least one AA director. In fact, nearly one in ten (9%) of these companies have three or more AA on the board.
Age diversity is another factor to consider. In 2021, BoardReady released a report showing companies whose median director age was 55 or less had 10.1% YoY revenue growth compared to companies whose median director age was 65 or more which had -7.7% YoY revenue growth. That same report showed companies with over 30% of board seats held by women outperformed their less gender-diverse counterparts in 11 out of the top 15 S&P500 sectors. In addition, companies should look at geographic diversity as well as global experience.
2023 Diversity Voting Policies
ISS and Glass Lewis will generally recommend a vote against the nominating committee chair unless the following guidelines are met:
Universal Proxy Card
With the UPC, shareholders will have a greater say on the board’s composition as they can more readily compare the board’s nominees with the activist slate and focus on existing director performance, skills, experience, and diversity gaps. See this link to an RSR article on the UPC.
Succession Planning Process
There are multiple ways to address a lack of diversity in the boardroom, but all of them require continuous attention – a board should not stop seeking diversity once they have achieved their immediate “target.” Ideally, boards should seek to surpass the minimum requirement and help set the stage for the future, both within their own organization and to be a leader in the industry. Some possible approaches to improve boardroom diversity include:
How RSR Can Help with Director Searches
Our Board and CEO Services team partners with CEOs and boards to understand issues, assess opportunities, and strategically advise to ensure sustainable growth strategies are optimized. We continue to complete diversity assignments for a wide variety of companies, from small private family companies to Fortune 500s. Again, in 2021 and 2022, 86% of our board placements were either gender and/or ethnically diverse. We are proud to play a role in this important imperative, and excited for our clients who are making progress in diversity.
Our team leverages RSR Partners’ renowned experience in corporate governance with our industry and human capital consulting expertise to locate the best candidates. RSR Partners can assist your board with:
We would love to hear your perspective on the evolution of board diversity and assist you in achieving your board’s diversity goals.
# # #
Greg Lau leads RSR’s Board Advisory practice, Carter Burgess leads the Board Recruiting practice, and Eric Douglas Keene is a Managing Director in the firm’s Board & CEO Services practice at RSR Partners.
RSR Partners is a boutique professional services firm headquartered in Greenwich, CT, that specializes in helping Boards and CEOs with their most critical recruiting, selection, and succession needs. The firm was founded in 1994 by industry icon, Russell S. Reynolds, Jr. The firm has conducted thousands of projects for Boards and CEOs at public, private equity backed, and family-owned businesses across a range of industries including asset management, consumer goods and services, industrial, technology, and healthcare. To learn more about RSR Partners, click here.
Much has been written and debated about CEO succession. The pandemic has taught most companies that succession is a heavy-lifting exercise when it comes to business continuity. Boards are increasingly concluding that the full weight of succession planning rests squarely on their shoulders, which leads to the critical question that every board must answer: promote from within or search externally? Executive search and consulting firms, including ours, are often engaged to help boards resolve this complex situation, but the inclination to conduct a search may sometimes be premature. Having completed over 1000+ assignments for Boards and CEOs over the past two decades, we wanted to share a few observations when planning for the selection of your next CEO.
Internal or External?
There is no solution that applies to all situations. Given the extraordinary dynamics of today’s marketplace, one might argue that finding a CEO with the needed agility calls for assembling the broadest internal and external group of candidates possible. However, our conversations with many seasoned Nominating & Governance and board Chairs (“Chairs”), who are at the center of CEO succession, have shown that this is not necessarily the case.
The consensus seems to be that knowledge of the business, people, and its culture trump almost every other consideration, and thus an internal candidate is strongly preferred, especially when the business is on an upward trajectory. Many feel that deep knowledge and intimacy of the business can provide quicker impact with reduced risk of failure and that consideration of outside candidates for calibration should only be done as a very last resort, and when the CEO succession planning process has failed.
Many reasons exist to recruit or vet outsiders, such as the need for strategic or cultural changes, a requirement for specific expertise in dealing with unanticipated market challenges, activists, or a merger. These occurrences notwithstanding, most boards realize an outsider will take extensive time to assimilate and consolidate as needed. Even proven successful CEOs who have already demonstrated great learning skills still take time to settle in before they create an appreciably positive impact.
Therefore, while it may seem counterintuitive to our own business model, we encourage our clients to go through the process of deep self-reflection and succession planning regularly. This preparation may avoid the need to launch a rushed CEO search later. The process itself is very revealing for most organizations, and boards are recognizing that preparation is the key to optionality.
Engagement
CEO succession is a passionate and delicate topic. It involves changes and sometimes challenges that affect leaders who are considered to be the very best in commanding complex organizations. But for the boards who assume this monumental responsibility, it need not be a cause for angst. With a commitment to diligent planning, extensive engagement with candidates, a high level of candor in discussion, and an enlightened view of the opportunities and resources that present themselves to the company, succession planning can be a smooth journey, and even stimulating. When boards come to the point of treating succession as a non-episodic issue that deserves constant reflection and attention, the organization will find a more secure position for the exciting future ahead.
In the past, boards have overly relied on the perspective of management to develop, manage, and provide solutions for succession planning. With CEO tenure trending towards 5-year terms, boards need to own the responsibility and develop a perspective that is integrated but independent from management. One of the best ways to subdue unease around the topic is to make CEO succession planning a board priority and a regular topic of discussion. Most public company boards keep CEO succession as a standing agenda item but at private equity backed or family-owned companies, there is certainly room for improvement. By continual engagement on the topic on a formal level, and even under less formal conditions, boards can avoid being overwhelmed by the planning and enactment of succession plans. It is critical that Chairs start the conversation and be frank and open. Once they start the conversation, others on the board will engage.
It also helps to acknowledge and appreciate the sensitivities around CEO succession planning. Few changes in a company can affect such a breadth of internal and external constituents as a change in CEO. It is a critical event, shrouded often in unspeakable sensitivity. Framing the discussion as a neutral one can help directors open up. No CEO likes thinking about being replaced, but by setting expectations early that tenure is fixed, the topic is less likely to be taken personally.
A piece of the ongoing puzzle and dialog around CEO succession is building the competency agenda for the CEO, known as the “success profile.” For several years, we at RSR Partners have advanced the concept of “stretch versus fit.” For example, some boards aspire for greater growth trends and feel that goal can be achieved with some modest tweaking to strategy and culture which the incumbent CEO is unwilling or unable to embrace. Generally, while boards may have no regrets about the past, many have more expansive and aspirational visions for the future. As it relates to the “spec” capabilities required of the next CEO, they question whether to stay squarely on course or to drive change. Invariably, boards harbor some hopes and dreams that a CEO change will provide opportunity for added business propulsion, so they look for both steadiness and value-adding creativity in the next CEO.
My longtime friend and colleague, Alan Renne, who is a senior member of our Board & CEO Services practice and Head of our Industrial Technology team, has commented that “what the pandemic has taught most companies is that both culture and strategy are symbiotic in a sense, although neither can stand still under the pressure of unpredictability, which we’ve seen through the Covid period. Hence, we all hear the constant chatter about how companies require leaders with agility, nimbleness, resilience, etc. The point related to CEO succession is that the ‘stretch’ requirement can feel like a moving target since the marketplace is not static. So, boards must continually engage in the discussion about the CEO spec in the context of possible changes in strategy and culture, and therefore make in-flight course corrections on an ongoing basis.” Alan’s observations are spot on, and it is often during these continual discussions, that inspiring and innovative solutions to the CEO succession issue present themselves.
Bench Strength is Key
Finding an organization’s next CEO should be inextricably linked to understanding the capabilities and skills needed for success and filling those gaps at the C-Suite level. Succession planning goes hand in hand with talent reviews and leadership assessment, which help reveal opportunities to develop rising stars for succession consideration. The Nominating & Governance Chair’s mandate to ensure effective governance means that Chairs need to have a thorough understanding of the talent within the organization. They are expected to know when it makes sense to go to the market for the skills and experience that are needed, especially within the bench levels, so chairs are spending more and more time identifying and getting to know future leaders below the C-Suite.
Stars often rise from the “minor leagues” and good oversight on their development is key, especially as the CEO specification continues to evolve. Issues of executive development and retention go hand in hand, and boards should have their sleeves rolled up in these discussions.
“One of the most delicate topics today in leader development relates to promotion and rotation,” Alan states. “In many cases, companies are eager to keep great talent rising, challenged, and filling development gaps. Consequently, top players are often continuously pushed ahead to the next bigger job, but sometimes too quickly. High potential leaders need time to formulate strategies, build plans, execute, refine, and manage for a period that demonstrates sustainable success. Moving leaders too quickly can short-circuit that process and even disrupt business effectiveness. Boards should engage early in the leader development process because they have the seasoning of experience to spot these things and can offer valuable advice that will benefit their CEO succession plans.”
Retention and motivation of executives should also be high on the radar screen, especially considering the new phenomenon of “opting out,” discussed further below. Some Chairs have admitted that CEO succession can also be a challenge since it can be hard to retain A+ executives in the C-Suite if the company is unable to offer the compensation and flexibility of larger operating portfolios. If retaining and motivating talent within management is a priority, it should tie very closely into succession planning.
The “Siren Song” of Private Equity
Private equity firms are more actively and aggressively recruiting high potential talent from public companies. “There is a war for talent,” states Thames Fulton, a senior member of our Board & CEO services practice. “We often counsel boards so they understand and can deal with these incursions to their executive teams. We have been asked to educate the high-potential corporate executive who unknowingly thinks the grass is greener in private equity, thereby helping a board to buy some time in their succession planning.”
Conversely, there have been some great executives coming out of small and mid-cap companies because their leadership model is lean and therefore very hands-on and experienced. Large cap companies are starting to recruit those executives. “We spend significant time with our small and mid-cap clients, strategizing on how they can build their leadership bench in a way that earns loyalty and commitment from their teams,” adds Thames.
Competing for leadership talent in this environment can be especially challenging for organizations with limited bench spots. Boards must get creative about generating roles to provide opportunities for succession. There are ways to stimulate succession preparation with retention and development strategies. Dovetailing the creation of those roles with efforts to fill gaps in the competence between the bench and CEO can significantly impact an organization.
The Nexus of Board & Management and the “Opting Out” Phenomenon
The CEO role has always carried with it great cachet – authority, visibility, power, influence, prestige, impact, and wealth potential. In recent years, as terms like “servant leadership” and “shareholder capitalism” have occupied rightful places in the vernacular, the CEO role has become ever more complicated. More importantly, the pandemic circumstances over the past year have placed a glaring light on the CEO role. It is an extraordinarily intense and often grueling job, fraught with gut-wrenching decisions, overwhelming workload, tricky management and leadership challenges, and high pressure deadlines. Consequently, boards need to have intimate insight into the thinking of their future succession candidates. This can be incredibly important when gauging the bench’s proclivity to carry the CEO title.
In our discussions with the bench strength of today’s public companies, especially those seen as the best and brightest, we see an emerging phenomenon. Many are now seeing the CEO role as the great heavy-lifting job that it is, and they conclude that the associated sacrifices are too great for the potential rewards. In their minds, they are choosing to opt out in lieu of other career trajectories, including private equity backed opportunities. This is just one example of how boards need to know about personal decisions, especially as they consider high potential candidates for succession, which begs for deeper interactions between boards and the promising talent in the management ranks.
“When addressing clients’ CEO succession needs, we often overlay our board and executive search processes,” comments Gretchen Crist, Head of our firm’s Consumer Goods & Services practice. “This is an advantage during CEO succession projects because we can operate at the nexus of boards and management. We appreciate the board perspective and can integrate intelligence on proficiencies and personal motivations from the front lines of the business.”
Moreover, the succession planning process should be encountered as a moving target that never stands still – because markets, companies, and people are ever-changing. As such, the regularity of discussion between board directors and management should likewise increase. The Chair’s role is to help facilitate those conversations. Some Nom & Gov Chairs have occasional one-on-one conversations or visits with key members of management, while others have 8 – 10 executives attend each board meeting, and some attend dinners, on a rotation. Developing trusting relationships with members of management is good for both knowledge and retention.
Strike a Balance
“Succession planning has evolved into a rigorous process,” concludes Alan. “Our clients look down many levels into the management ranks to identify star talent. We are assessing their leadership abilities, putting their development plan in place, conducting a risk analysis around who might be poached, and benchmarking against external candidates and competitors. The goal is for the board to have transparency around who will be the next CEO if everything goes according to plan, and, as is often the case, if conditions change, to be sure to have a current CEO spec and a competency structure ready to go, should a search be unavoidable.”
“There also needs to be some flexibility and nimbleness,” adds Gretchen. “Clients do not need their succession plan to be perfectly buttoned up. It is fluid and dynamic. It’s important to get the dialog going and be open minded as the conversation evolves.”
There is so much to discuss during the CEO succession planning process, that it is natural and cyclical for the board to continually address the topic. Timing, the methods of evaluation of candidates, the development plans to help high potential executives build competencies, the regular review of the CEO spec, as well as a periodic revisiting of those stretch topics – like strategy and culture – are crucial to be sure that strong candidates of today have the skills to meet the expectations of tomorrow.
The clock is ticking… and boards need to be prepared when the time comes to make the best and most informed decision possible when selecting their next CEO. There is no more important responsibility for directors in this new world of stakeholder capitalism than CEO succession.
We are here to help you get it right.
About Our Board & CEO Services Practice
Our Board and CEO Services team partners with CEOs and boards to understand issues, assess opportunities, and strategically advise to ensure sustainable growth strategies are optimized. We are committed to executing an action plan that addresses sensitive and complex leadership needs and ensures clients are well positioned for the future. RSR offers trusted advisement rooted in years of experience and market knowledge. We excel at optimizing board and CEO effectiveness through transformative thinking about structure and operations. This helps us to engage closely with clients to drive greater accountability and enhanced performance. Our practice group leverages RSR Partners’ renowned experience in corporate governance with the firm’s industry and human capital consulting expertise to create an integrated and seamless approach. The range of services we provide to boards and CEOs include:
Board Services
CEO Services
RSR Partners is a boutique professional services firm headquartered in Greenwich, CT, that specializes in helping Boards and CEOs with their most critical recruiting, selection, and succession needs. The firm was founded in 1994 by industry icon, Russell S. Reynolds, Jr. The firm has conducted thousands of projects for Boards and CEOs at public, private equity backed, and family-owned businesses across a range of industries including asset management, consumer goods and services, industrial, technology, and healthcare. To learn more about RSR Partners, click here.
Over the past year there has been a notable increase in demand from RSR Partners’ clients for experienced professionals with established relationships in the venture community. Going forward, we anticipate that this demand will continue to grow, especially as venture funds’ dry powder is at historic levels.
Record Year for Venture Investing
Consider the landscape for all private investing over the last 10 years. According to Preqin, approximately $4.4 trillion was invested in both private equity and venture in 2020 compared to $1.7 trillion in 2010. In venture alone, emerging companies raised $130 billion in 2020, a 14% increase from 2019. Of note, the technology and health care sectors saw an increase in deal flow, driven in part by pandemic-related innovations. Instead of slowing down in 2020, venture capital funds set new records for deal activity and fundraising, and also turned in the second highest year for exit valuations with three of the top-10 tech IPOs of all-time (AirBnb, DoorDash, and Snowflake).
The Need for Stronger Teams
As institutions build up their exposure to venture, they must be mindful of shifting dynamics. Established venture managers account for over 70% of the fundraising, yet among that group the top decile managers remain difficult to access. Consequently, an organization building their venture portfolio today may need to tap new and developing managers where, according to Cambridge Associates, over 50% of the top performing funds can be found. The challenge is that venture has the widest dispersion of returns versus other asset classes. That discrepancy is expected to widen further, placing an even greater importance on recruiting investment teams capable of discovering and evaluating great emerging managers. While the challenge is not insurmountable, it requires the right team and a thoughtful approach. For example, we have learned of success from teams who have identified venture funds that are not household names but focus on technology investments that solve problems. Adding to the complexity of finding the best managers, the explosion in the number of SPACs (special purpose acquisition companies) being formed will challenge the best of the venture players. Sitting on billions of cash, SPACs will compete with funds to find the best deals and funds may have to pay up to participate, thus impacting their returns.
E&Fs and Family Offices Fuel the Growth
Endowments, foundations, outsourced CIOs, and family offices have been steadily increasing allocations to private investments and contributing to the explosive growth in venture capital. As noted in a Nonprofit News Special Report, the outperformance of private equity (+2%) and venture investments (+4%) versus the public markets in recent years is driving this trend, with that outperformance being far greater for the top quartile managers. Larger endowments have outperformed their smaller peers due to significant exposure to private markets. Those with more than $1 billion in assets under management averaged a 13.6% allocation to buyout and 9% to venture, compared to 6.2% and 2.2%, respectively, for all endowments. Brown University, which is overweight in venture, generated a strong fiscal 2020 return of 12%, making it the top performer in the Ivy league for the second year in a row.
More than 80% of family offices invest in venture and buyout funds, and 63% of family offices expect their venture allocation to remain the same or increase, according to a Campden Wealth survey. A survey of over 100 family offices showed an average venture allocation of 10%, split equally between direct investments and funds. When investing directly, family offices typically invest alongside other family offices or through co-investment vehicles. As our family office clients continue to increase their allocations and refine their approach, many are emphasizing the development of in-house venture investment talent.
Increasing Gender and Geographic Diversity
A notable trend is the increase in deal activity for female-founded companies. Reports show that 25% of venture investments in 2020 went to companies with at least one female founder. We have also seen this trend reflected in recent mandates as clients specifically seek gender diversity on their private investment teams. And while Silicon Valley remains the epicenter for venture investing, studies show its share of total deal value has consistently decreased over the last decade. New York and Boston continue to be leaders for FinTech and BioTech respectively, with emerging hotspots that include Austin, Atlanta, Chicago, Denver, Los Angeles, Minneapolis, and Seattle, locations where RSR has directly seen recruiting activity for venture talent.
Evaluate Talent with Wide Peripheral Vision
There is no doubt that the venture capital talent universe will become more competitive and the high demand for exceptional investment talent will continue to grow into 2021 and beyond. RSR approaches each search with wide peripheral vision in order to identify exceptional talent. One recent mandate for a prominent multi- billion-dollar foundation on the West Coast resulted in the hire of an experienced direct venture investor. Given the scarcity of venture talent, some institutions are pursuing less-seasoned candidates with high-growth potential. According to a Managing Director at a premier endowment, “Venture fund partners are younger and younger, and people allocating to these funds seem to be getting younger as well.” Our challenge, from a search and talent perspective, is to identify that next generation of “up-and-comers,” as well those who have “already arrived” and can lead an effort today. We are excited to have a front-row seat in the community and to be in a strong position to further assist our clients in the build-out of impactful investment teams.
# # #
About Our Asset Management Practice
The Quest for Venture Talent was authored by RSR Partners’ Asset Management practice and is based on recent experience performing searches for investment professionals on behalf of a variety of clients, including private foundations, family offices, and endowments. Please contact us for more information about our experience, capabilities, and for a consultation on how we can help with your talent needs.
RSR Partners is a boutique professional services firm headquartered in Greenwich, CT, that specializes in helping Boards and CEOs with their most critical recruiting, selection, and succession needs. The firm was founded in 1994 by industry icon, Russell S. Reynolds, Jr. The firm has conducted thousands of projects for Boards and CEOs at public, private equity backed, and family-owned businesses across a range of industries including asset management, consumer goods and services, industrial, technology, and healthcare. To learn more about RSR Partners, click here.
