There has been a lot of talk about transitions lately. The peaceful turnover of power from one President to the next is one of the hallmarks of our democracy, and regardless of which side of the political fence you spend your time on, this time should be no different. Coincidentally, I happened to have a meeting just yesterday with some members from Human Resources about succession planning. Succession planning happened to start the day I first stepped into my new administrative role about 18 months ago. Was I nervous? After all, here I was just starting in a new position, and I was already being asked to identify a few individuals who could replace me and under what circumstances they could do so. In full disclosure, I wasn't nervous at all - in fact, I view succession planning as a key part of what leaders should be doing. Why wouldn't you want to assure that the work that you started and the culture that you have helped build on your team continue after you are no longer in the position? Succession planning is not only the right thing to do, even on day one of your job, but it is also a key part of talent management, which every leader should view as his or her responsibility.
So all of this talk about leadership transitions and succession planning got me thinking. Has their ever been an example of a "good" transition of Presidential leadership in which the previous President hands off to one of his (unfortunately, we have still yet to have a "her" as President) hand-picked successor, one that he has played a major role in developing and placing in a position to be successful? Well.... I started with our first President, George Washington. He certainly handed off power to another member of his party (the Federalist Party), but even if you believe that John Adams was a successful President (and I do believe that), one could certainly argue that he wasn't necessarily "developed" or mentored by President Washington. In fact, John Adams was famously said to have described the Vice Presidency as "the most insignificant office that ever the invention of man contrived or his imagination conceived." Okay, strike one. How about one of Franklin D. Roosevelt's (FDR) Vice Presidents? John Nance Gardner, who served as FDR's Vice President from 1933 to 1941 was once quoted as saying, "The vice-presidency isn't worth a pitcher of warm piss." Ouch. Not really what I would call a ringing endorsement. Strike two. What about Harry Truman? He was FDR's Vice President in 1945, but he only became President of the United States after FDR died in office (actually, he only was Vice President for 82 days!), so he doesn't really count. But we could say that Truman was fairly successful. Let's skip ahead a few Presidents to George H.W. Bush. He served as Vice President for two full terms under President Ronald Reagan, but as much as I hate to admit it (when I was in the Navy, all I heard was what an incredibly nice, friendly man President Bush was), Bush 41's presidency was not all that successful either. Strike three.
So, it would seem that succession planning plays no major role in arguably the most important office in the world! Very disappointing. How about in the sports world? I like sports analogies, and I think there is a lot that we can learn from successful sports teams. The quarterback position is one of the most important positions on any football team - we often hear of NFL teams drafting quarterbacks out of college and then having them sit on the bench to learn from the coaches and be mentored by the veteran quarterback. Once the younger quarterback has had time to develop, the veteran quarterback steps aside and continues to mentor and coach the quarterback from the sideline. Sounds great, right? Succession planning at its finest! But again, as I think about some of the great quarterbacks, even if they "mentored" younger quarterbacks for a few years (think Joe Montana and Steve Young, or Brett Favre and Aaron Rogers), the veteran quarterback usually leaves the team to go play somewhere else, rather than sitting on the bench to watch the younger quarterback play.
But absolutely my all-time favorite succession story (in this case, perhaps not altogether successful, but certainly not a failure either) from the sports world comes from the Tour de France! Greg LeMond was the first, and after the last two Americans - Floyd Landis and Lance Armstrong were declared ineligible due to doping violations - the only American to ever win this grueling bicycling race. Greg LeMond was a promising cyclist, finishing first in the 1983 World Road Racing Championships and third in the 1984 Tour de France, recruited by Bernard Hinault ("The Badger") to race for his Team La Vie Claire in the 1985 Tour. Hinault was chasing history by trying to win his fifth Tour de France (only three other men have won five Tours - Jacques Anquetil, Eddy Merckx, and Miguel Indurain) and needed strong riders on his team to help him win (in bicycle road racing, there is usually one rider who is the designated team leader - everyone else on the team rides to help the leader win). Hinault convinced LeMond to join him, partly by promising that he would work just as hard for LeMond the following year as a member of his team (they would, in essence, switch roles). Again, succession planning perhaps as it is designed to work!
During the 1985 Tour, Hinault had trouble and fell behind. At one point (I remember watching this live on television), LeMond found himself in a position where he could easily have taken the race lead and worn the vaunted Yellow Jersey for one day. The Team Director told him that he must not do this - he was riding for Hinault and not for himself. LeMond agreed (very reluctantly, I might add) and Hinault eventually won his fifth Tour. Hinault again publicly promised that he would ride as hard for LeMond the following year as LeMond had done for him at the 1985 Tour. Well, to make a long blog post a little shorter, I will summarize the 1986 Tour. LeMond won his first Tour de France and the Badger came in second. Hinault had challenged LeMond throughout the race, and to many it seemed as if he was actually trying to win the race. Hinault later claimed that he was only pushing LeMond so that he would win. So, maybe this example still meets our definition of successful succession planning?
Unfortunately, I don't have a lot of great examples of successful successions from either the sporting world or from our nation's Presidential history (at least today - maybe in a future blog post!). Suffice it to say that I still think succession planning is absolutely vital to an organization's success. Succession planning is an important aspect of talent management, and it assures a safe, effective transition of leadership for the future.
No comments:
Post a Comment