{"id":7204,"date":"2025-07-18T15:24:34","date_gmt":"2025-07-18T15:24:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/aomtodayprod.wpenginepowered.com\/?p=7204"},"modified":"2025-08-14T19:26:22","modified_gmt":"2025-08-14T19:26:22","slug":"why-some-ceos-sabotage-planning-for-their-successors","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.aom.org\/today\/why-some-ceos-sabotage-planning-for-their-successors\/","title":{"rendered":"Why Some CEOs Sabotage Planning for Their Successors"},"content":{"rendered":"

By Daniel Butcher<\/a><\/p>\n

When the president or CEO is getting up there in age, organizations face a crossroads: The success or failure of succession-planning and leadership transition often hinges on the degree of the outgoing leader\u2019s support for those processes.<\/p>\n

Academy of Management Scholar Donald Hambrick<\/a> of Pennsylvania State University, who published an article in Academy of Management Review<\/em><\/a> on this topic, said the inspiration for the research was the insight that CEOs have different deep-down feelings and beliefs about their professional mortality and desire to be involved in who their successors will be.<\/p>\n

\u201cIf we think about those as two things, one\u2019s ability to think about others\u2019 and their own mortality and their willingness or eagerness to be involved in picking a successor, as there are various combinations, a total of a total of four different combinations, in fact, including the most sinister\u2014the person who just can\u2019t fathom ever going away,\u201d Hambrick said.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe CEO can\u2019t even think about retirement and so sabotages succession efforts or may get involved in succession-planning efforts half-heartedly but end up sabotaging the most promising one or two people\u2014that\u2019s one pathology,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n

Another kind of pathology is demonstrated by leaders who have a hand-picked successor or want to hire a particular type of executive\u2014a vision that may not align with that of the board and other top leaders.<\/p>\n

\u201cOne of the other types we uncovered was the person, the incumbent CEO, who\u2019s very prepared to think about eventual departure, so no problem there, but has very concrete ideas about who the replacement should be,\u201d Hambrick said. \u201cOf course, lo and behold, the replacement is often somebody who\u2019s essentially a clone of the incumbent themselves.<\/p>\n

\u201cSo you can see how these different combinations can give rise to all sorts of problems in the executive ranks among people who would love to be considered as CEOs,\u201d he said. \u201cIt creates real problems for boards, and boards often have a hard time confronting an incumbent about succession, especially if the incumbent is performing well.\u201d<\/p>\n

***<\/p>\n

A sample of Hambrick\u2019s AOM research findings:<\/em><\/p>\n