The Nonprofit CEO

Succession Playbook
2

Many nonprofit organizations are finding themselves caught flat-footed when it comes to the transition of their
CEO. The impact of this reality is becoming increasingly apparent amidst the wholesale generational shift in
senior leadership at the majority of nonprofits as CEOs who have led their organizations for 15 years or more
face retirement. Moreover, in a high percentage of cases we have observed, these leaders are either founders
or quasi-founders.
At the same time, the boards of these nonprofits—which have often relied heavily upon the outgoing CEO—
are also experiencing generational shift and are needing to plan for the future health of the board itself. This
confluence of events is playing out in the context of an increasingly complex political, social and economic
landscape, creating a critical need for more careful long-term succession planning than ever before.
Although planning for the chief executive’s succession is arguably the most important role of the board, fewer
than a third fulfill this responsibility by articulating a formal succession plan.1 Nonprofit boards that neglect
this responsibility until a departure is imminent (or worse, has already happened), expose their organization to
significant risks and challenges. Individual directors may also be subjected to reputational risk if the transition
is fumbled and the organization is set back as a result.
Conversely, organizations that engage in proactive and long-term succession planning enjoy multiple benefits.
For these organizations, succession planning is more than just an exercise in risk mitigation; instead, it
provides an opportunity for the organization in general, and the board in particular, to engage in strategic self-
reflection, establishing priorities for the future and setting up the new leader for success.

RISKS AND CHALLENGES FOR ORGANIZATIONS WITHOUT A SUCCESSION PLAN

Abrupt or imminent departures leave little time for a thoughtful or
Chaotic or hurried strategic search process, reducing transparency and increasing the
search risk that important perspectives are excluded or the wrong successor
is hired.

The ideal profile of the successor is defined in response to the

Reflexive successor
perceptions of the outgoing leader and current context rather than a
criteria future-focused assessment of organizational needs.

Delays in organizational Without adequate warning or preparation for the transition, significant
initiatives may be delayed as staff, board members and major donors
momentum or progress
are focused on the succession.

Heightened sense of Unplanned departures without a clearly identified successor leave

stakeholders unsure about the organization’s stability and future
uncertainty among donors,
direction, negatively impacting organizational culture and donor
board and/or staff confidence.

Without a formal transition or onboarding process for the new leader

Loss of institutional
to learn directly from the outgoing CEO, vital institutional knowledge
knowledge may be lost.

Retention risk is increased as internal successor candidates are not

informed about whether/where they fit into future plans. In the
Loss of high-potential
absence of explicit planning, leaders may assume they are not under
talent consideration or may make unrealistic assumptions about what is
possible for them to achieve.

1 : BoardSource “Leading with Intent: 2017 National Index of Nonprofit Board Practices,” https://leadingwithintent.org/
 3

SUCCESSION PLANNING VS. EXECUTIVE SEARCH

But how does a succession planning process differ from a traditional executive search? Organizations may think
of the terms as synonymous, but they actually refer to distinctly different processes, each with its own important
outcomes.
Most organizations will be familiar with the traditional executive search process: Typically, a search committee is
formed, a job specification and ideal candidate profile is articulated and the search is launched to identify and assess
potential candidates, often with the help of an executive search consultant. A search is an intermittent event, usually
launched in reaction to a departure or the creation of a new role. The process usually begins about six months before
an anticipated departure and is led almost exclusively by the board-appointed search committee.
Strategic succession planning is about creating new options for both the present and the future. It is a proactive,
continuous process that dovetails with other strategic planning processes through which the organization engages
a wide variety of stakeholders to understand its future strategy and the talent that will be needed to achieve it. As
a result of this inclusive and deliberative exercise, internal successor candidates are identified and provided with
the tools to develop the skills necessary for assuming the top position, and the board is provided with a sound
infrastructure from which to launch any eventual CEO searches, should an external successor be necessary.
Organizations will also find that their human capital and learning and development functions are strengthened as
a result of the process, yielding ripple effects that extend beyond the C-suite leadership that is directly involved,
resulting in a “pipeline” of talent that can ascend to the C-suite when needed. To be effective, the succession
planning process must be launched at least two years, and preferably longer, before an anticipated transition.

TRADITIONAL EXECUTIVE SEARCH STRATEGIC SUCCESSION PLANNING

OBJECTIVE

 Choosing the next CEO among  Creating new options for both the present and the
currently available options future

OUTCOME

 Inclusive process to understand future strategy and

talent needs
 Internal successor talent is identified and developed
 Next CEO is identified
 Board has a sound infrastructure from which to
launch future searches
 Human capital and L&D functions are strengthened

TIMESCALE

 Intermittent event
 Ongoing, continuous process
 Reactive, timeline-driven
 Proactive
 Six months before anticipated
 Minimum two years before anticipated transition
transition
 Search committee

MAJOR PARTICIPANTS

 Board, senior leadership (and other staff as needed),

 Search committee
major donors, key partners
4

THE SUCCESSION PLANNING PROCESS

While the precise process will differ by organization according to the specific timeline, stakeholders involved
and organizational priorities, most succession planning processes can be broken down into three core phases:
preparation, evaluation and resolution.
Once
departure is
anticipated... RESOLUTION

ION Benchmark
T internals and
Identify and Onboard and
appoint new transition new
UA

conduct CEO CEO and top

AL

market scan team

EV

Assess internal
candidates and
initiate
development
plans

Establish
board and
comittee roles
and engage
ON

stakeholders
TI
RA

Develop
PA

strategy-driven E
criteria and role
profile PR

While anyone who has previously been involved in an executive search will be familiar with the “resolution” phase
(namely identifying and appointing a new leader, then onboarding and transitioning them and their new team), it is
the “preparation” and “evaluation” phases which yield the real value of proactive succession planning. These phases
provide the board with forward-looking insight into the organization and its future leadership needs, as well as a
comprehensive assessment of their current “bench of talent,” ensuring that the organization is prepared for when a
transition is eventually necessary. The following pages provide more detail on the objectives and specific steps of this
process.
 5

1 ESTABLISH BOARD AND COMITTEE ROLES AND ENGAGE STAKEHOLDERS

Objective: Assemble a representative committee with clearly defined roles to manage the planning process
and engage stakeholders on the strategic direction and resultant leadership needs of the organization.

Ideally, the board will have made clear to the current CEO from the start its expectation that she or he will plan for
their own succession. Establishing this from the outset as an explicit responsibility of the chief executive enables
a more productive and less politically charged conversation around succession and promotes a healthy dynamic
between board and senior leadership. However, while the current CEO must view succession planning as an
organizational priority, the process and ultimate outcome must result from a collaboration between the current CEO
and the board.
Once the board is ready to launch the succession planning process, it must appoint a committee to lead it. The
committee should be comprised of board members and at least one senior staff member (most often the sitting CEO),
with special attention paid to ensure that the committee represents a diverse range of perspectives and personal
histories with the organization. Clearly defined roles for the committee, the larger board, the current chief executive
and the senior human capital leader should be articulated from the outset to ensure that all are clear on their
responsibilities in the process. In some cases, trusted external friends of the organization may play a useful role on
this committee.
One of the committee’s first tasks will be to gather input on the current strengths and challenges of the organization,
its future strategic direction, and the leadership that will be required to execute that strategy. The committee should
seek input from a diverse range of stakeholders, which, depending on the organization, may include the current CEO,
senior leadership, other staff, major donors, volunteers and beneficiaries. As part of its commitment to conducting
a transparent process, this step should employ a variety of channels to gather input (e.g., surveys, town halls, one-
to-one interviews) and involve the current CEO in the communications strategy to ensure that the exercise is
understood to be in support of the long-term health of the organization.

DOs DON’Ts
 Take time to build trust and communication:  Blur lines of responsibility between the current
Succession planning must not be seen to undermine CEO and the board: The role of the chief executive
the current CEO’s position or as a way of forcing her or is not to select their successor, but rather to enable
him out. Whether the need for succession planning is good governance by providing the committee with a
first raised by the board or the CEO, all parties must vital perspective into current organizational
see the exercise as benefiting the long-term health of strengths, challenges and opportunities. The
the organization. The board must also be fully apprised process must ultimately be driven by the board.
of the current CEO’s plans and expectations for their  Presume that committee members share preferred
time in the role so that the committee can factor these working styles: Reaching a consensus early in the
into the ultimate plan. process will save considerable time and headache
 View succession planning as an ongoing process: in the long run. This should include discussion on
When executed correctly, the succession planning substantive issues such as the methods for
process dovetails with broader strategic planning evaluating internal candidates and seemingly
efforts and can become a tool for effective governance mundane issues such as communication style
that interacts with multiple elements of the (email vs. phone vs. in person) and calendar
organization. It must be viewed as an integral part of alignment, especially when working with committee
the board’s work rather than an item to check off on an members across multiple time zones.
annual agenda.
6

2 DEVELOP STRATEGY-DRIVEN CRITERIA AND ROLE PROFILE

Objective: Based on stakeholder input as to the future strategic direction and resultant leadership needs,
develop the experiential and leadership criteria for the next CEO.

Once the committee has heard from a sufficient array of stakeholders as to the current strengths and challenges
of the organization and its future strategic direction, they must reconvene to synthesize this input and determine
its implications for future leadership needs. The centrality of the future strategy to succession is what enables the
process to dovetail so neatly with broader strategic planning efforts—in essence, succession planning is a natural
outgrowth of strategic planning. In this respect, it is important to ensure it is an “outside-in” process that starts with
an acute appreciation of the external environment and how the organization is positioned.
By weighing the internal and external trends that it foresees impacting the organization in the future, the committee
will begin to align around the experiential and leadership criteria that will be required of the next leader. This should
include a mix of both hard and soft skills and, for most nonprofits, will include competencies related to strategic
leadership, communications, fundraising and capacity development, collaboration and relationship building,
innovation, operational acumen and commitment to the mission. At the top of the list should be the competencies
needed to implement the changes called for in the strategic plan.
In building the leadership criteria and role profile based on the strategic direction of the organization rather than
a backward-looking assessment of previous leadership, the succession planning process will ensure that the next
leader is equipped to meet the challenges of the future rather than solve the problems of the past.

DOs DON’Ts

 Discuss how the strategy has evolved under the  Automatically assume you are looking for
current CEO and determine at a high level what is version 2.0 of the current CEO—Equally, if the
needed from the new leader—continuity or change? organization is in need of transformation, don’t
 Focus on the competencies required rather than on automatically look for the exact opposite of the
the specific job titles and experience candidates current leader. Seek evolution, not revolution.
must possess in order to ensure that the applicable  Assume that any candidate will “have it
candidate pool is as diverse as possible. all”—The final selection will involve making
tradeoffs, so it is important to align around the
prioritization of the most essential
competencies.
 7

3 ASSESS INTERNAL CANDIDATES AND INITIATE DEVELOPMENT PLANS

Objective: Develop an in-depth understanding of the current “bench strength” by assessing internal successor
candidates and initiating development plans to address competency gaps.

With the competencies of the future leader identified and prioritized, the committee is now equipped to assess the
strength of its internal bench of successor candidates relative to those competencies. To do so, the committee
should leverage a combination of assessment tools, including behavioral interviews, psychometric analysis (which
may require the help of an outside assessment firm), a review of prior performance evaluations and gathering
input from direct reports and other stakeholders who have worked closely with the candidate. If available, a recent
assessment of the current CEO is another useful input to help form a baseline perspective around what has or has
not worked to date.
The assessment process will enable the committee to identify each successor candidate’s development gaps,
evaluate retention risk and assess culture fit. With the help of the CHRO or human capital leader, the committee
should estimate each candidate’s future growth potential and likelihood to address gaps in time for any anticipated
succession. Successor candidates who are determined to have sufficient potential should be provided with an
actionable development plan to address any gaps and be scheduled for regular check-ins to review progress against
this plan with the CEO, human capital leader and any other stakeholder who will support the development process.
This is also the point in the process when the committee should take up another parallel goal of the succession
planning process: “replacement planning,” identifying who would become the interim CEO in the event of an
emergency succession such as an unexpected departure or major illness. The designated interim leader might be an
internal successor candidate who is determined to already have high potential for succession or another stakeholder
who has significant ties to the organization, such as the board chair. While the key competencies and role profile
defined in the previous stage will help inform the discussion around the interim leader, ultimately the skills and
expertise needed in an emergency successor will differ from those needed in a permanent chief executive.

DOs DON’Ts

 Allow enough time before the expected transition  Assume that the internal candidate cannot
for the internal candidate(s) to have sufficient behave differently in a different
opportunity to engage in meaningful development role—sometimes leaders are restrained by their
activities to address any gaps. current role and responsibilities and must
 Provide internal potential successors with “reintroduce” themselves to the board.
meaningful roles in task forces and other strategic  Assume the current CEO’s preferred candidate
initiatives to help them develop and create is necessarily right or wrong—the purpose of
opportunities to assess their growth. the succession planning process is to ensure
 Be direct with aspiring candidates who have no that all relevant stakeholders have input into
chance—involving them in succession planning as the decision.
a courtesy will only delay a difficult conversation
and usually leads to hurt feelings.
8

4 BENCHMARK INTERNALS AND CONDUCT MARKET SCAN

Objective: Compare the relative progress of internal candidates and benchmark against representative
external candidates to understand how “bench strength” compares to the market.

After an agreed-upon period of implementing the development plans created in the previous step (typically six to 12
months), the committee must reconvene to assess the progress against those plans and benchmark their internal
successor candidates against the external market. To do so, the committee should launch an external market scan to
identify representative candidates in the market against whom to compare the internal bench.
Using the strategy-driven criteria and ideal profile outlined in step two, the committee should identify leaders in
immediately relevant or adjacent sectors who meet the criteria to serve as a “control” against which to measure the
internal candidates. Based on publicly available information, advice and counsel from appropriate advisors and the
committee’s own knowledge, the committee should prepare profiles of these benchmark candidates, noting career
history and any relevant observations on track record, leadership style and “recruitability.” An outside consultant can
be helpful for this stage, particularly if the board or HR function has limited in-house capacity. It is important to note
that at this stage no outreach is made to external candidates to test their interest in the role; the purpose is solely to
serve as a point of comparison for assessing the internal bench strength against what is theoretically “available” in
the market.
The committee will now have two important inputs for their decision-making process: assessment of how internal
candidates are progressing against their development plans and a review of the caliber of talent that they would be
likely to pursue if a formal external search were launched. Based on these inputs, the committee should determine
which internal candidates are “ready now” in the sense that they could step into the CEO role today, which of them
could benefit from additional development support and which (if any) have proven unqualified for the CEO role.
The committee should align around one or two “heirs apparent” who will continue to be groomed for succession. The
current CEO should take steps to involve these potential successor(s) in relevant strategic planning discussions
and begin to facilitate relationship building with any board members with whom they are not yet familiar. Those not
determined to be immediate successor candidates should receive clear communication as to the reasons why and
also a commitment from HR leaders to continue to support their ongoing development.

DOs DON’Ts
 Overcommunicate with potential successor candidates about  Promise to follow outside experts’
this stage of the process—the assessment and benchmarking recommendations in all
step can either engage and motivate or alienate and frustrate circumstances—honesty and
internal candidates. Taking time to clearly communicate the transparency are critically important to
process and goals of each step will go a long way toward retain the trust and motivation of all
ensuring that this process is positive for all involved. leaders involved in the succession
 Be clear about the differences between this step and a formal process.
search—and that an external search may still occur, even if  Overpromise on the role—ensure that
there are strong internal candidates. internal candidates are clear about the
 Help internal candidates see the value of external likely timeline for succession, as well as
benchmarking—they are being assessed against the top talent the realities and limitations of the role
in their market and, if they succeed, they will be more credible they are seeking to assume.
as a result.
 9

At the end of this stage, the board will have completed the succession preparation process and should have
everything it needs to either appoint the next CEO or launch an external search when the time comes. For
more information on best practices for launching a search and onboarding a new leader, please see Russell
Reynolds Associates’ Nonprofit CEO Transition Playbook.

If a departure is not imminent, the board should ensure that the following documents remain up to date and
accessible so that they are ready when the board needs to act:

SUCCESSION PLANNING DOCUMENT CHECKLIST

ɳ Experience and competencies required of the next CEO
ɳ Up-to-date assessments and professional development plans of the various internal candidates
ɳ Parallel documents assessing external candidates
ɳ A succession timetable (if the current CEO has an anticipated departure date)
ɳ An emergency succession plan

Proactive succession planning can serve to strengthen multiple aspects of a nonprofit organization’s
leadership team, strategic planning efforts and operational dexterity. Employees gain a clearer sense of
potential development paths and can see possible ways to advance professionally. In particular, organizations
with long-tenured CEOs will find that succession planning can address the negative side of leadership stability,
namely high turnover at mid- or senior-team levels because of a perceived or actual lack of opportunities for
advancement. Similarly, some boards become too comfortable neglecting good governance and cede too
much authority to the CEO. This makes a change in leadership at the top even more disruptive, especially when
a transition has not been anticipated and pragmatically planned for. With increasing numbers of nonprofit
leaders set to retire within the next five years, it has never been more important for boards to engage in
meaningful, strategic succession planning to ensure the sustainability of their organization’s future impact.
10

Succession Planning in the Era of COVID-19:

Urgent for Some, Critical for All
One of the reasons that many boards aren’t very focused on succession planning right now is that they are so
consumed in the moment of crisis management, and a CEO succession or transition seems like a far off need
that can be addressed at some later time. In normal circumstances, we recommend to our clients that they
begin long-term CEO succession planning two to five years away from the potential transition. This provides
ample time for multiple internal candidates to be rotated through several senior assignments, in the process
developing a multitude of leadership attributes they could then bring to the CEO role. But the current situation
is different. The reality is that there are many scenarios that might require a CEO transition much sooner:

Near Term: Some boards may realize they are already facing challenges with regard to their
CEO’s performance or tenure. They may have just announced a CEO transition right before the
pandemic occurred and want to support the incoming executive, or were planning to do so soon
but now wonder if they should wait for better days. At the same time, many boards may be faced
with an unanticipated need to transition a senior executive. Their CEO may become ill or step
down to take care of family or other personal concerns, or a board may assess that a healthy
CEO is simply unable to lead effectively during this challenging period.

Medium Term: If an organization is getting along without a current challenge, boards still need
to worry that one might be right around the corner. They might have a CEO who doesn’t need to
be replaced immediately, but who clearly isn’t as strong as they seemed when times were better,
and may not be suited for future organizational needs. Alternatively, they might have a well-
performing leader who had planned to stay in the role for several more years, but is now
reevaluating that decision and wants to step down sooner.

Long Term: Regardless of how well your organization is doing right now, and how strong your
succession planning process seems, this period of turmoil will most likely have a lasting impact
on your operating model and theory of change, and this is the time to adjust planning to
accommodate new realities: What it takes to be a successful CEO will be different in the future
than it was in the recent past. The internal candidates you were relying on may no longer be up
to the task, and your external prospects may no longer be available. The jobs you thought were
on the critical path to the corner office may no longer be essential. Ultimately, your leadership
pipeline may not be as strong and resilient as it once was.
 11

About Russell Reynolds Associates

Russell Reynolds Associates is a global leadership advisory and search firm. Our 470+ consultants in 46 offices work
with public, private and nonprofit organizations across all industries and regions. We help our clients build teams
of transformational leaders who can meet today’s challenges and anticipate the digital, economic and political
trends that are reshaping the global business environment. From helping boards with their structure, culture and
effectiveness to identifying, assessing and defining the best leadership for organizations, our teams bring their
decades of expertise to help clients address their most complex leadership issues. We exist to improve the way the
world is led. www.russellreynolds.com

GLOBAL OFFICES

Americas EMEA Asia/Pacific

ɳ Atlanta ɳ Minneapolis/ ɳ Amsterdam ɳ Madrid ɳ Beijing
ɳ Boston St. Paul ɳ Barcelona ɳ Milan ɳ Hong Kong
ɳ Buenos Aires ɳ Montréal ɳ Brussels ɳ Munich ɳ Melbourne
ɳ Calgary ɳ New York ɳ Copenhagen ɳ Oslo ɳ Mumbai
ɳ Chicago ɳ Palo Alto ɳ Dubai ɳ Paris ɳ New Delhi
ɳ Dallas ɳ San Francisco ɳ Frankfurt ɳ Stockholm ɳ Shanghai
ɳ Houston ɳ São Paulo ɳ Hamburg ɳ Warsaw ɳ Singapore
ɳ Los Angeles ɳ Stamford ɳ Helsinki ɳ Zürich ɳ Sydney
ɳ Mexico City ɳ Toronto ɳ Istanbul ɳ Tokyo
ɳ Miami ɳ Washington, D.C. ɳ London

© Copyright 2020, Russell Reynolds Associates. All rights reserved. This material may not be copied, reproduced or
redistributed, in whole or in part, without the prior express written consent of Russell Reynolds Associates.
RussellReynolds.com