Reflections From Our May HR Leadership Roundtable
At our recent HR leadership roundtable, one theme surfaced again and again: succession planning is becoming increasingly more complex.
Organizations are navigating rapid business change, evolving leadership expectations, leaner structures, and increasing pressure to more quickly prepare leaders for roles that may look very different in the near-future than they do today.
What made the conversation particularly interesting was how consistently HR Leaders described a shift away from traditional replacement planning and toward more flexible, talent-centered approaches.
Rather than asking, “Who is next in line for this role?” many organizations are beginning to rethink succession planning more broadly. The conversation focused on understanding what capabilities will matter most in the future, how leaders can be prepared for ambiguity and unrelenting change, and how organizations create meaningful developmental experiences in high visibility, high stakes roles.
HR Leaders also discussed the growing challenge of planning for leadership in environments where roles, leadership teams, and even business models are evolving simultaneously.
Across industries, HR Leaders described the same underlying challenge: how do you prepare leaders for roles that may look completely different by the time they are ready to step into them?
From Role-Based Succession Planning to Talent-Based Development
Historically, succession planning has focused on identifying replacements for specific roles. Who is the next CFO? Who could eventually become CEO? Who is “ready now” versus “ready later”?
But many of the HR leaders in the room challenged whether that approach still works in today’s environment. Several participants noted that by the time a role opens, the business often needs something very different than what leaders originally planned for. Leadership requirements are evolving faster than succession plans themselves!
As a result, organizations are spending less time asking, “Who replaces this role?” and more time asking, “What set of developmental experiences does this talented person need to be ready for the next big role?” These include the use of “bridge experiences;” for example, cross-function rotations, scope stretch assignments, exposure to boards and investors, and leading a strategic transformation or business turnaround
The discussion also challenged the idea of planning succession one role at a time. Instead, participants explored what it might look like to think about succession as a leadership system, considering how executive teams complement one another and what combinations of strengths will be needed in the future. Furthermore, several leaders discussed creating development opportunities through temporary role redesign. For example, a CFO aspiring to become CEO might take on responsibility for an operational function to build broader business experience, without requiring a permanent change to the organization’s reporting structure.
It was a reminder that succession planning is ultimately about ensuring organizational continuity, not the simple block-and-tackling of individual role replacement.
Preparing Leaders for a Future That Doesn’t Exist Yet
One of the most thought-provoking tensions in the conversation centered around this question:
Can the leaders who successfully built today’s business also lead the business of tomorrow?
Some leaders noted that internal candidates are often deeply tied to the systems, assumptions, and business models that created past success. But future business environments may require entirely different ways of thinking and operating.
Others pointed out the opposite challenge: trying to identify and develop people capable of adapting to futures that do not yet fully exist.
One leader described succession planning as needing to become an “always-on” process rooted in ongoing scenario planning. This aligns well with the other themes about creating bridge experiences and talent pools, key levers to include in the scenario plans.
Assessments, Leadership Readiness, and Demonstrating Humility
Another strong theme throughout the discussion was the role of assessment in leadership decisions.
Several HR Leaders described assessments as one of the few “constants” available in environments where roles, businesses, and markets are changing rapidly.
The conversation focused on the leadership qualities that appear to matter most in uncertain environments. A few capabilities surfaced repeatedly throughout the discussion:
- Curiosity
- Learning agility
- Humility
- Resilience
- Coachability
- Relationship-building
- Self-awareness
Interestingly, many leaders shared that external executive hires often fail not because of competence gaps, but because of relational and cultural issues.
Several HR Leaders emphasized that the most successful external executives tend to spend their early months listening, asking questions, and building trust rather than trying to immediately prove expertise.
One participant summarized it simply:
“The instinct is to show off their skills. The successful ones don’t do that.”
This led to an important secondary conversation around onboarding and the first 90 days.
Many organizations acknowledged that they wait too long to support senior leaders with coaching, feedback, or transition guidance. Others discussed the importance of helping leaders understand not just their intent, but how they are actually being perceived by a new team.
AI as a Development Tool, and a Risk
The group also spent significant time discussing the opportunities and risks of using AI in talent decisions.
HR Leaders saw enormous potential in using AI tools in areas such as:
- Aggregating large amounts of employee data
- Identifying patterns across assessments and 360 reviews
- Comparing talent profiles against future business strategies
- Exploring possible career pathways or developmental opportunities
At the same time, the group consistently emphasized the need for human judgment and caution when using AI in leadership decisions.
Several HR Leaders noted that AI can be particularly useful not for making decisions, but for expanding thinking.
For example:
“What could this person do?”
may become a much more valuable prompt than:
“Should this person get this role?”
At the same time, the group raised meaningful concerns around ethics, discoverability, legal and privacy concerns, and overreliance on AI-generated conclusions in leadership decisions.
The consensus was clear: AI can support better questions and broader insight, but organizations still need human judgment, context, and discernment.
Inclusion Still Matters in Leadership Pipelines
Toward the end of the discussion, participants reflected on the role organizational culture and inclusion play in building strong leadership pipelines.
What was interesting was that the conversation did not focus heavily on programs or policies. Instead, leaders discussed the importance of creating environments where people feel they can contribute authentically.
The conversation served as a reminder that succession planning is ultimately about identifying and developing talent. As organizations think about future leadership pipelines, inclusion remains an important part of ensuring they are not overlooking talent and perspectives that will be critical for future success.
Final Reflections
If there was one overarching takeaway from the roundtable, it was that succession planning is becoming far less about identifying replacements and far more about building adaptable leadership systems.
Organizations are operating in environments where roles are changing faster than ever, leadership expectations continue to evolve, traditional career paths are becoming less predictable, and future business needs are increasingly difficult to define.
And increasingly, that requires succession planning to become more flexible, more developmental, more systemic, and “always on.”
By David Sowinski, Ph.D., Senior Partner and Eileen Linnabery, Ph.D., Partner.