Selecting a new chief executive is one of the most consequential decisions a board of directors will ever make. In the high-stakes world of sports, where multi-billion-dollar franchises and passionate fan bases hang in the balance, choosing the right leader is especially critical. In fact, many sports organizations today find that talent at the top is the key constraint on growth – the business of sports is booming, yet teams often struggle to capitalize on opportunities because they lack the right leadership. The mandate for modern sports CEOs has expanded beyond winning championships; they must also drive business success in an era of rapid change. What made a sports CEO successful in the past is no longer a guarantee of success going forward: Previously, sporting success led to business success. No longer. In the face of a digital technology and data revolution, evolving ownership structures, and changing consumer demands, clubs must now achieve greater business success to compete more effectively in the sporting arena. In this environment, boards of U.S. sports organizations and associations are redefining what they look for in a chief executive. Extensive research and leadership assessments show that the most effective leaders excel in three broad competency areas: Connect, Adapt, and Deliver. Below, we break down these three categories – and the key characteristics within each – that boards should prioritize when scouting the next CEO.
CONNECT: Influence People. Build Trust. Unite the Team.
In sports, the CEO isn’t just a strategist—they’re a symbol. The best leaders connect emotionally with players, employees, fans, sponsors, and civic leaders. They don’t dictate—they inspire.
Forget command-and-control. Today’s CEOs succeed by earning trust, modeling values, and rallying people around a shared vision. Emotional intelligence, integrity, and clear, transparent communication are non-negotiable. When things go sideways (and they always do), it’s the leader who can speak with clarity, take responsibility, and keep stakeholders aligned who wins the day.
Relationship-building is key. The sports CEO sits at the center of a complex stakeholder web. From locker rooms to city hall, media rooms to boardrooms, this job requires diplomacy, empathy, and presence. Boards should look for someone who actively listens, shows up for their people, and knows how to build bridges across divides.
Bottom line: Your next CEO must be more than a manager. They need to inspire belief—and unify the entire ecosystem behind the mission.
ADAPT: See Around Corners. Embrace Change. Lead the Pivot.
The business of sports is evolving faster than the game itself. Streaming, AI, NIL, esports, fan data, sports betting, league realignments—this is not the world of your last CEO. The next one must be wired for transformation.
Great CEOs aren’t necessarily tech experts, but they are tech-savvy. They ask the right questions, understand disruption, and move early. They’re agile thinkers who challenge the status quo, push boundaries, and bet on the future. They also know how to spot opportunities others miss—whether it’s rethinking revenue models or building deeper fan engagement in digital channels.
Crucially, today’s CEOs must lead through turbulence. Whether it’s navigating a pandemic, social justice demands, or college athletics upheaval, leaders must stay grounded while driving big, uncomfortable change. Case in point: the NCAA’s hiring of former Governor Charlie Baker, a leader known for cutting through chaos and building broad consensus. That’s adaptive leadership in action.
And sometimes, boards need to look beyond the sports world. Top leaders from tech, media, and entertainment bring bold new playbooks that traditional executives can’t match. Diversity of thought is no longer a bonus—it’s a strategic asset.
Bottom line: Boards should seek bold, forward-facing leaders who can evolve the organization before the market forces them to.
DELIVER: Execute Relentlessly. Build Elite Teams. Raise the Bar.
In the end, it all comes down to results. Today’s sports CEO must do more than set the vision—they have to make it real. That means delivering both competitive performance and commercial growth.
Execution matters. Boards should demand CEOs who can build operational discipline, drive accountability, and scale what works. Financial fluency is key. Your CEO doesn’t need to be a CFO, but they better understand budgets, margins, revenue levers, and risk.
But results aren’t achieved solo. Great CEOs attract, develop, and empower high-performing teams. Think head coach—but for the front office. They hire leaders who challenge them. They foster a culture of curiosity, collaboration, and continuous improvement. They know when to make the hard calls and when to back their people.
Top-performing cultures don’t happen by accident. Elite CEOs intentionally shape them. They set standards, recognize excellence, and remove mediocrity. Diversity and inclusion aren’t PR boxes to check—they’re how you get better ideas and stronger execution.
Bottom line: Boards must prioritize leaders who deliver—measurable growth, organizational excellence, and a culture built for sustained performance.
The Takeaway
What separates a good CEO from a great one in sports today? It’s not pedigree. It’s not just charisma. It’s a rare mix of influence, adaptability, and relentless execution.
The CEOs who excel are connectors, transformers, and finishers. They turn fractured organizations into unified movements. They don’t just ride change—they lead it. And they hold themselves and their teams to the highest standard of performance, every single day.
Boards of U.S. sports organizations—whether pro franchises, leagues, or governing bodies—need to get sharper, faster, and more strategic in how they assess leadership. The stakes are too high to rely on gut feel or the same old playbook.
# # #
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 and Chairman Emeritus, Russell S. Reynolds, Jr. Over the past 30 years, the firm has conducted thousands of projects for Boards and CEOs at public, private equity owned, and family-owned businesses across a range of industries including asset management, consumer markets and enterprises, financial services, healthcare, industrial, marketing and digital, and technology. To learn more about RSR Partners, click here.
‘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.
Peter Drucker was a wise sage. Many companies and even some industries have evolved to greatness thanks to his contributions to management thought. Despite his gifted prescience, Drucker could never have imagined the current environment, nor the unexpected journey through which Covid has taken each and every business. Still, a quote from Drucker rings true: “The greatest danger in times of turbulence is not the turbulence. It is to act with yesterday’s logic.”
Every business leader seeks to understand the current environmental factors and the future of the marketplace. To that point, operating plans consistently open with a view of the present market conditions and a prediction of those to come. It took a pandemic to teach us that our clairvoyant skills are lacking. Even now, we have no idea if our economy is heading into hyper-inflation, recession, or a soft landing. In a time that Drucker refers to as “yesterday,” the conventional wisdom among the wise CEOs would have been to move to a phase of business preparation, anticipating the challenges of the market situation to come. Let’s call this “managing according to maintenance objectives:” optimizing the chances for retention of current state with plenty of emphasis on contingent planning.
In essence, lifeboat management.
I offer here my thoughts on a different prescription. Keeping with the nautical metaphor, I appreciate the words of Union Naval Admiral Farragut when he said, “Damn the torpedoes!” Are there any lessons to be applied from the fog of war to the current fog of business? I speculate that today’s CEO Farragut would state unequivocally that success is not about survival or maintenance management. Rather, he’d call it seizing greater initiative while expecting inevitable risk.
Having the good fortune to know many great CEOs who would emulate Farragut, I perceive a common denominator among them. It is an insatiable, often unassailable drive to achieve breakout growth for their business, environmental factors notwithstanding. Their passion is palpable, sometimes in visible relief and sometimes not, but always motivating them to find seams and ingredients and synergies for sustainable surges of growth. To many casual witnesses, the business aspirations are almost unimaginable. However, it’s precisely the CEO’s imaginings that seem to prompt the urge to break through the fog, to lead with abandon.
When was the last time you witnessed someone whom you’d describe as an executive who leads with abandon?
In observing these CEOs and their teams, I have come to recognize some common elements that I’ll call the “formula.” These include some leader qualities and some new items of process thinking. These include: a spirit of adventure; a fresh way of expressing vision; a continuous attitude of nimbleness; an approach to embedding strategy as “water cooler” conversation; and a more flexible way to think about organization structure to meet market needs and opportunities.
The Courage to Pioneer
Serving as a business leader in today’s environment is tricky. The most effective CEOs seem to exhibit a pioneering spirit, like Paul Bunyan’s courage to wield a mighty axe for cutting new paths ahead. And it isn’t just a market share strategy in the minds of these few, but a desire to drive demand, to expand markets, to capture much more than their fair share of growth in categories, markets, and channels. Despite the reality of tightening/high-interest money, markets full of ambiguity, and the sequential pressure of business targets that keep approaching at high speed, conservatism does not rule among the best in breed, often called “pacesetters” in today’s lingo.
I see new shoots of growth among many companies, largely because their CEOs are continuously acting in a contrarian fashion compared to competitors. This behavior often includes rapid refinements in market and channel strategies to secure fresh growth in adjacencies, digital initiative to reach new customers and find new supply chain efficiencies, a redirecting of investments from over-mined markets into new product and new market innovation, rethinking the diversity of the business model to capture new opportunities through added services and e-commerce, and even nimbly and rapidly partnering with other companies to gain resources needed to tackle previously inaccessible customer needs, or to create new needs that haven’t yet been articulated. Budgets in some of these progressive businesses are also being shifted from process improvements to commercial innovation.
These pioneer CEOs are taking advantage of market pressures that slow some competitors. As such, their enterprises can leapfrog to future state.
Destiny and Destinational Planning
To many of these great executives, the most significant current question is not “how?” but “what?” That’s to say they often refine and sharpen their view of “what” the future looks like. They have full conviction in the capabilities of their teams and companies in determining their own destiny. Forget about incremental growth plans. Their thinking is not grounded in a cement mentality reflecting the business position of today. They formulate a vision of their business’s destination for tomorrow, more specifically, the overall objectives for two or four or even more years down the road. And they are not afraid to refine along the way or to think bigger if so inspired. Their process for planning and action is based on the “destinational” vision: a longer-term deliverable and a working backwards to define intermediate milestones as well as the related hurdles of consequence along the way.
Once that rock-strewn path is determined, then the focus of attention becomes about resourcing, i.e., what resources do we need to eliminate the obstacles? The tactics of execution spill out from there, and always with precision in mind.
Agility and Flexibility
I’ve alluded to the need for many businesses to undertake occasional refinement/continuous improvement. That’s probably a euphemism; most companies these days need much more than refinement, they need overhaul. Just ask a banker how their industry is prepared for challenges in 2023 and 2024. You may see some uneasy stares. Corporations and even small companies mired in entrenched systems, conventions, and processes rather than market foresight for the future, will likely begin to feel rapid decay over time.
Recently, I spoke at some length with two very senior operating partners at a successful and prominent middle market private equity shop in New York City. Their stature and growth suggest they are big thinkers and unusually thoughtful. That was quickly borne out in the conversation which was a by-exception dialogue, meaning we only discussed bold thinking for an hour. As we traded perspectives on the distinctions between today’s good CEOs and those who are truly great, we continued to circle back to their overriding hypothesis. The best CEOs at this moment in time are those who demonstrate “clear ability to pivot.” This needn’t be expanded upon at this juncture, as it is the fodder for another post, but ponder the point and consider how it applies to the strategy discussions around most of today’s boardroom tables which appear sleepy in contrast.
One last point on pivoting. I have a fervent view that companies today must have something called “organizational elasticity.” During the intensity of Covid, we all heard how business cultures need “resilience.” But I see resilience as an ingredient of foundation, namely, an ability to withstand unusual and extreme pressures.
“Elasticity,” on the other hand, is more about flexibility and the rubber-band stretch that a leadership contingent and their teams can withstand, bend with, and rebound as new space is explored and tested. The pioneering I have highlighted cannot be undertaken unless the organization has the mental preparedness and curiosity to peruse new forks in the road, to make some probes of reconnaissance, and to recover to a stable track if the diversions prove unproductive. Organizational elasticity requires all in a company to understand and agree to the attendant nimbleness of the journey. Change that finds a more open and faster-lane approach should be embraced. Rigidity should be institutionalized in mission-commitment, core values, and collaborative interest, not in growth initiatives, organizational dynamics, or processes.
The Compression of Strategy
The best CEOs are redefining strategy. In a classic sense, strategy has normally meant an articulation of direction for the long term, indicating dimensions of both azimuth and time. I’ve already addressed direction in the pioneering sense. But we now find highly successful CEOs and leadership teams who have compressed the strategic timeline into more tactical timelines. They ask questions like, why should this initiative take 3 years? Why can’t we achieve the same course correction in 3 months?
Incidentally, when was the last time the company reported upon the achievement of the long-term objectives that it set forth 5 years earlier? What’s the purpose of a long-range plan anyway, other than some vague hopes of where we seek to be in a few years? There’s nothing wrong with that, except it’s fictional when companies apply the metrics and objectives that they really don’t expect to discuss at the end of the journey. I’ve already addressed that topic in the explanation of destinational planning.
Organizational Implications
We all have seen a variety of corporate org charts that generally depict conventional details like seniority, pecking order, and lines of responsibility. Such mappings are not unimportant. “Org Charts” in my humble opinion are soon to be artifacts of past companies and cultures. Those leaders who are maneuvering through the fog these days are doing so with gusto, and most are thinking of their organizations as competitive teams, not silos and compartmentalized ownership and reporting lines. Great teams think about overall team objectives first, recognizing they have a variety of star players to carry the ball, and the teams make the distinction between who’s on the field (or the “floor”) and who’s on the bench, and sometimes the substituting happens at a moment’s notice depending upon the tenor and sway of the game’s score and the intuition and judgment of the coach.
Which makes you question: how do such companies keep straight their HR design and structure?
The future-leaning answer is they don’t, primarily because their teams are organized in a fluid fashion around the strategic growth issues of their company, not around units, functions, and roles. Think project and program management, for example, with constant asset deployment and redeployment. There’s a necessary fluidity required to stay ahead of market circumstances to achieve aspirational objectives. More to come on this very critical org piece in an upcoming post. Drucker was not only clairvoyant in realizing the danger of “yesterday’s logic,” but he was giving a clear warning to the hidebound CEOs who think that lifeboat or playbook management is the key to success. The very best of the pacesetters are making up some things as they go about the business of working to achieve the unimaginable. Managing a company in a dynamic foggy market is the “Wheaties” of today’s most athletic and most organizationally ambitious CEOs.
# # #
Alan Renne leads the firm’s Industrial practice and is a key member of the firm’s Board and CEO Services team. Alan specializes in helping companies build competence and effectiveness within their leadership teams and at the board level. He has advised numerous organizations and C-Suite executives on leadership development, succession planning, and organizational design and development.
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.
