William J. Rothwell - Effective Succession Planning (2005)(3-e)(en)

Exhibit 11-1. (continued)

Use team building.

Are members of

the same part of the organization capable of absorbing the extra duties without sacrificing productivity in their present job duties?

No

Yes

Review work priorities.

Form team(s) and do not replace the key position.

6.Find ‘‘disconnects,’’ which are missing, redundant, or illogical factors that could affect the critical business issue or the process.

7.Analyze the disconnects.

8.Develop a ‘‘should’’ map to present a more efficient or effective method of handling the work.

9.Establish measures or standards for what is desired.

10.Recommend changes.

11.Implement the changes.

In essence, the same steps described above can be used to determine whether there are ways to ‘‘engineer a key position out of existence.’’ If there is, then no successor will be needed. (However, the work process may be broken up and reallocated, necessitating new competencies for those who absorb the new duties.)

Question 3: Can a Key Position Be Rendered Unnecessary by Redistributing the Duties to a Team?

If the answer is yes, then it should be possible to achieve the same work results by placing responsibility in a team of workers from the same function or work unit. However, two caveats should be considered. First, if the workers have never functioned as a team, then they will probably require team-building and training on team skills to work as a cohesive group. Second, if prospective team members are already working at—or beyond—their individual capacities, then loading additional duties on a team will not be successful.

Question 4: Can a Key Position Be Rendered Unnecessary by Reallocating the Duties to Other Parts of the Organization?

In short, is it possible to avoid filling a key position by reorganizing, moving the work responsibility to another function or organizational unit? If the answer is yes, then replacing a key job incumbent may prove to be unnecessary. But, as in redistributing work to a team in the same part of the organization, assess whether the inheritors of key position duties are trained adequately to perform the work and can do them without sacrificing productivity in their present jobs. If both conditions can be met, consider moving responsibilities to another part of the organization to avoid replacing a key job incumbent.

Question 5: Can a Key Position Be Rendered Unnecessary by Outsourcing the Work?

If the answer is yes, then replacing a key job incumbent may be unnecessary. The same results may be achieved more cost-effectively than by replacing a key job incumbent. Pay particular attention to two key issues when answering the question: criticality and control. If the work is critical to the continued sur-

vival of the organization, then outsourcing it may be unwise because that may vest too much influence in an individual or group having little or no stake in the organization’s continued survival. If the work must meet stringent, specialized requirements for which few external sources can be found, then outsourcing may also prove to be unwise because controlling the activities of an external contractor may become as time-consuming as performing the work in-house.

Question 6: Can a Key Position Be Rendered Unnecessary by Using Flexible Staffing Approaches?

Can the same results be achieved through the use of permanent part-time or temporary part-time staff, rotating employees, or internships? If the answer is yes, then replacing a key job incumbent may be unnecessary. However, as in outsourcing, pay attention to criticality and control. If the work is critical to the continued survival of the organization, then using innovative staffing approaches may prove to be unwise because that will grant too much influence to an individual or group with little or no stake in the organization’s existence. If the work must meet stringent, specialized requirements that require mastery, then part-time talent may not be able to achieve or maintain that mastery.

Question 7: Can Combining the Approaches Listed Above Obviate the Need for a Replacement in a Key Position?

In other words, is it possible to split apart the key results or outcomes desired from the key position and handle them separately—through reengineering, team-based management, organizational redesign, or other means? If that question can be answered yes, then it should be possible to ensure that the organization achieves the same results as those provided by the key job incum- bent—but without the need for a replacement. Use the worksheet in Exhibit 11-2 to decide when it is possible to answer yes to any one—or all—of the questions listed above.

Innovative Approaches to Tapping the Retiree Base

Succession planning and management is not an all-or-nothing proposition. It is also possible to meet staffing needs to get the work done by tapping the very group that is causing some of the problems—that is, baby boomers who are nearing retirement. And that is also not an all-or-nothing proposition in the sense that discouraging people from retiring, while one option, is not the only way to tap into the power of those who are eligible to retire.

The word retire—taken from the Middle French word retirer (which means ‘‘to draw back’’)—is being reinvented now. Much evidence exists to support that.4 Older workers are delaying their retirement due to a rollercoaster stock market and eroding health insurance coverage, which is (in turn)