H E 0

M o n
d
w
e t
M
a
a o
m
i
n
s e M
e
a
u s s
s
r u
r
a
g
e e e
B
s
m u o
d
c
e c
y
P
n e
s
o
p
t s u
l
i
o o a
r
f n
p
W
h
s l i
t
a
u n e
P
n
c i
a
p
c n
g
e
r
e ? O
n
T
s h T
h
s e
c
i
s
i o T
o
r
o e p
i
m
n e
c
 a
p s E
R
l u
r
P
H
a e u
s m
n a a
n
n r
e R
e
i : s
1 o
n ) u
I r
g s c
e
e t
h
s
C
f e o
r m
f e p
a
e s
u r
i
c c s
c o
t e n
s G
i s u
i
v i
o
d
e
e n
p
n l A
e a
n
l
l
s n R
i e
s n p
g l
i i
T
n e
e
p s
r l (
e a 4
z
c 7
a
V e )
a 2
l )
a M
P
s a
e r
k
r k
o
v c H
a e e
a n l
s p
t
k f
e a u
d g l
J e
u o B
l f e
2 s
5
r
t
, o A
2 l n
0 e s
1 s w
0 c e
| r
R
o
e v
p e
l r
i e
e d
s
(
3
4 )
7 R
) e
t
e
n
ti
o
n
o
f
H
i
P
o
s
4
)
R
a
t
e
o
f
e
x
t
e
r
n
a
l
v
.
i
n
t
e
r
n
a
l
h
i
r
e
s
D
o
y
o
u
u
s
e
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
s
f
o
r
s
u
c
c
e
s
s
i
o
n
p
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
?
W
h
a
t
a
b
o
u
t
w
h
e
n
t
h
e
p
o
t
e
n
ti
a
l
s
u
c
c
e
s
s
o
r
s
a
r
e
a
c
t
u
a
ll
y
a
p
p
o
i
n
t
e
d
-
h
o
w
t
o
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
t
h
e
e
f
f
e
c
ti
v
e
n
e
s
s
o
f
s
u
c
c
e
s
s
i
o
n
p
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
?
B
y
t
r
a
c
k
i
n
g
h
o
w
s
u
c
c
e
s
s
f
u
l
t
h
e
y
a
r
e
i
n
n
e
w
r
o
l
e
?
H
o
w
l
o
n
g
d
o
t
h
e
y
s
t
a
y
i
n
t
h
e
r
o
l
e
?
P
l
e
a
s
e
h
e
l
p
m
e
t
o
c
o
m
e
u
p
w
it
h
s
o
m
e
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
b
o
t
h
p
r
e
-
a
p
p
o
i
n
t
m
e
n
t
a
n
d
p
o
s
t
-
a
p
p
o
i
n
t
m
e
n
t
.
T
h
a
n
k
y
o
u
,
T
e
r
e
z
a
J
o
i
n
t
h
i
s
g
r
o
u
p

M
a
r
k
H
e
l
p
f
u
l

/
M
a
r
k
H
e
l
p
f
u
l

B
e
s
t
A
n
s
w
e
r
U
p
d
a
t
e
d
T
h
e
t
w
o
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
w
e
u
s
e
a
r
e
:
1
.
B
e
n
c
h
S
t
r
e
n
g
t
h
-
t
h
e
p
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e
o
f
"
r
e
a
d
y
n
o
w
"
c
a
n
d
i
d
a
t
e
s
2
.
P
i
p
e
li
n
e
U
ti
li
z
a
ti
o
n
-
t
h
e
p
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e
o
f
ti
m
e
w
e
u
s
e
a
c
a
n
d
i
d
a
t
e
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
s
u
c
c
e
s
s
i
o
n
p
l
a
n
t
o
fi
ll
a
v
a
c
a
n
t
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
p
o
s
it
i
o
n
.
D
i
n
a
O
ri
g
i
n
a
l
a
n
s
w
e
r
b
y
D
i
n
a
L
e
B
l
a
n
c
J
u
 l /Mark Helpful
2
6 Dina LeBlanc replied Jul 26, 2010
,
2
0
The two measure we use are:
1 1. Bench Strength - the percentage of "ready now"
0 candidates
2. Pipeline Utilization - the percentage of time we use a
candidate from the succession plan to fill a vacant
C
o management position.
n Dina
tr
i
b
u
t
o
r
s Mark Helpful
: 1
/Mark Helpful

Les Young replied Jul 26, 2010

Does anyone have any readiness/replacement charts they

use that they are
willing to share. Thanks

Thanks,

Les Young

Les Young| Director of Human Resource

Vitro America, LLC(tm) Branch Support Center

965 Ridge Lake Blvd. Suite 300, Memphis TN 38120

p. 901-537-8414; f. 901-537-8435; c 901-412-8738 | email@removed

vitroamericacorporate.com

Binswanger Glass | Super Sky | Vitro America

Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful

Jan Watson replied Jul 26, 2010

Dina-

You mentioed "Bench Strength", what/how do you measure that?

Success,
Jan Watson

Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful

Dina LeBlanc replied Jul 26, 2010

J.P.,

The formula for Bench Strength is management headcount ready for

promotion/management headcount. This is the percent of management that
has been identified as ready for promotion.

Dina
White Papers and Webcasts
Popular
How to Position Managers as Career Agents in Your Company
More White Papers

Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful

B_Long replied Jul 26, 2010

Dina,

Do you have percentage categories? Meaning, would 40% be considered a

good percentage? Are there parameters bands and what would they be?

Thank you
Bob

Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful

lesley harvey replied Jul 26, 2010

HI Tereza

In my experience, you are correct about the first few measurements you
might also consider:
1) that succession planning is in place
2) Percentage of roles covered - this would/could also encompass
identification of Critical Roles - not just percentage of roles covered
3)% Retention of HiPos pre and post identification
4) Rate of external v. internal hires
5) Numbers of Hi Potentials identified for each Critical Position (typically
you would have at least 2 successors for each critical position)
6) Bench Strength readiness - as mentioned by someone else - would
determine how many potentials have you got ready NOW to take a critical
role, how many have you identified tht will be ready in next 12 months, and
how many that will be ready within 24 months. That will give you a Bench
Strength readiness index that you could build upon. So for example in year
1 this would give you your base line - and in year 2 you would expect to
see an improvement in numbers - and a reduction in Critical Roles where
there are no successors identified or no successors identified who would
be ready within 6-12 months.
7) I would also suggest that you look at post and pre succession planning
measure such as numbers of potentials in the talent pool -
8) Gap Analysis has been undertaken in terms of skills gaps
9) Development Plans in place and actioned and monitored and being
implemented to close the gaps.
10) Post implementation you would then have a baseline again from which
to move forward - has the skills gaps narrowed or not ? That will tell you
how successful you have been in terms of selection and in terms of
development (and implementation of learning).
11) Numbers of Identified Successors who have actually been appointed -
(provided the job becomes vacant of course)
12) Reduction in external hiring (numbers and cost)
13) Turnover post taking new role - and length of tenure in position
14) Time taken to be fully operational in new role (again this will tell you
how good your selection and development process is).
15) You might also want to measure the effectiveness of your Selection
Process - for example do you have a Behavioural Competency Model in
place for each Role - and do you have assessment methodologies in
place? If so - the skills gap identification and development process should
be easier to implement. If not - your first step might be to put in place a
Behavioral Competency Model.

I hope these ideas help you.

Lesley Harvey
Director
The Human Edge
(HR Consulting).

Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful

Dina LeBlanc replied Jul 26, 2010

Bob,

Our goal is to increase our bench strength each year by developing the
emerging leaders. We hope to see the emerging leaders go from a rating of
"ready in two years" to a rating of "ready in one year" to "ready now." We
don't use percentage categories, i.e., 40% is good. We simply look for an
improvement in our bench strength each year.

Dina

Mark Helpful
1
/Mark Helpful

Tereza Valaskova replied Jul 28, 2010

Thank you Lesley for your input. Some of the things you suggest are
already in place, some will be useful to consider.
Tereza

Mark Helpful
 0
/Mark Helpful

Ayuba Gadzama replied Dec 21, 2010

Hi,
I am currently implementing a career management system in my
organization. While working on Succession Planning which a subset of the
entire process, I come up with the following as additional measures of
success:
1. Level of executive/top team buy-in
2. Process of identifying HIPOs in place
3. Speed of filling critical roles or vacancies
4. Quality of development plans in place
Regards,
Ayuba

Mark Helpful
1
/Mark Helpful

Peter Spence replied Dec 21, 2010

Have you considered the integration of the organisation's risk

assessment/management system with your succession plan? Linking the
actual individual or HC succession planning to organisation's succession
plan. As an example, where does the succession plan cater for risks
associated with knowledge loss, identification and strategies to mitigate
loss of relationship capital (key partners, customer networks, branding etc)
associated with the individual employee.

Perhaps organisational network analysis may be relevant to your

succession plan - identifying where the staff is really situated within the
organisation, who they are connected to, what there role is and how they
are performing it (i.e. are they key knowledge gatekeepers, relationship
managers/tactiticians etc) and how those positions can be filled to maintain
network (and organisational) strength without leaving structural holes (and
loss of organisational assetts/value). I have a recent post on the HR
toolbox site to discuss and share knowledge on the use of Network
Analysis in the organisation.l

And again, recommending the integration of your succession plan into the
organisation's risk management system - this should give your Board and
Executive more confidence in the HR role and contribution to the
organisation's health. If you do not have a risk management system you
can readily access, it may be timely to invest in one for HR - risk will drive
performance.

Mark Helpful
1
/Mark Helpful

Sachin Gaur replied Dec 22, 2010

Hi Ayuba,
In my current role, I broadly divide the measure of success for succession
planning into the 2 obvious categories: Qualitative measures and
Quantitative measures. Along with this, I also use 2 measure intervals -
one at the time when the succession plan is approved and the next is post
12 months.
Qualitative measures will broadly measure three aspects:
1. Quality of roles: Are we focusing on strategically relevant roles? Do we
know which are the A, B and c roles within the organization?
2. Quality of people on the succession plans: have we assessed the
incumbent for each strategically relevant role to understand the kind of
action that is required - retain / develop / remove? Are we putting our A
players into the succession plan for our A roles? Are we focusing on the
time they will take to get prepared for this role? 3. Quality of preparation
plan for each person on the succession plan: Does each person on the
succession plan have a clearly defined preparatory plan in place which
make the business unit leader comfortable? Will the preparation plan help
each person to become ready at the right time?
Quantitative measures will measure the following:
1. Depth of the succession plans: Normally succession plans are built
with those who can immediately assume a particular role. this is termed as
"Ready Now" and considered to be "1" deep. More elaborate succession
plans will include potential candidates who may be 1 or 2 jobs away. A
succession plan which also has candidates who are "2 Jobs away" is
considered to be "3' deep - Ready now, 1 Job Away and 2 job Away.
2. Strength of the succession plans: this is a numeric value derived by
identifying the total unique names inth succession plans for all positions
divided by the total number of positions e.g. If we have a total of 4 positions
which have a total of 17 names in "ready now" of which 12 are unique (it is
possible for a single person to be considered for multiple positions). In this
case the strength of the succession plans will be =12/4 = 3. this calculation
is done for each of the sections - Ready now, 1 Job Away and 2 job Away
(depending on the depth) - I thought I saw a question on this hence
explaining-apologies for loosing sight of brevity.
3. The number of roles covered: A simple metric that talks about the
efforts put in and the extent of the leadership positions covered. In my
experience as succession planning is a tool for strategic positions this
should not be more than the 25% of the leadership positions of the
organization.
4. Average Diversity (race, gender, GLBT, geography etc): Self
explanatory. Calculated as the % of unique candidates in the succession
plans, e.g. in the example above if 2 of the 12 unique candidates are from
any diversity constituency, the % will be 2/12 = 16.6%
All these metrics are generally useful at the time when the succession
plans are devised, reviewed and approved. At the 365 day mark, I have
another set of metrics that talk about the effectiveness of this exercise.

1. Succession plan utilization: of the positions for which the planning

exercise was conducted, how many opened up during the year and of
those in how many of them did we choose someone from the plan created
a year ago. So from the example above, if post a year of the 4 positions, 2
opened up and for one we selected someone who was in the "ready now"
section of the succession plan, then the utilization rate would be 1/2 = 50%
2. A to A Target vs Achieved %: During the creation of the succession
plans, the discussions will include moving A players to A positions. This is a
measure of how many actual movements have happened in response to
the initial discussion. If a year ago business indicated that there were 4
positions which needed an A player, and if at the end of the year we have
only moved 1 A player and continue with the old incumbents for the
remaining three, then the a to A to A Target vs Achieved is 25%.
3. Internal Vs external hires at leadership positions: This is already
something that you are using.
Although we do connect the succession planning exercise with the Risk
Forecasting and management exercise, the connect is not very strong and
hence do not use any of the risk metrics for evaluating effectiveness.
Another piece that needs to be done separately from the succession
planning exercise is the determination of skill gaps and creation of targeted
developmental interventions.
Hope this is helpful - Sachin

Mark Helpful
1
/Mark Helpful

Nthabiseng Mathenjwa replied Apr 6, 2011

Hi all,

Kindly give your view regarding whether the 'potential' of an employee

(their capability to operate at a higher and more complex level/ position) is
fixed (they are wired that way) or can be enhanced through interventions to
assist employees 'transition' to more complex cross-functional roles? There
are currently two schools of thought in my organization and I need to hear
views from other organizations or what latest research says in this regard.

Regards,
Nthabi

Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful

Morne Buchner replied Apr 6, 2011

Nthabi - can't show you research but can say that both schools of thought
usually have their merits (hence the emergence of two schools of thought).
I'm rather fond of the "proof is in the pudding" approach e.g. have people
try work at the next complexity level and see what they come up with. Yes
it's risky but there are ways to manage this risk. Even with SST approaches
I've seen enough practical evidence to support the notion that people can
be rather creative to get the job done - some people even start depending
on their team to produce the actual outcome (a bit tongue in cheek).
Morne

Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful

Leslie Coward replied Apr 6, 2011

Nthabi, can you share your survey/instrument you use to collect

quantitative data on SP?

Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful

Rebbecca Achayra replied Apr 6, 2011

My apologies for being unable to attend Nthabi. I did contact somebody

and asked for a copy of the transcript.

Many thanks
Rebbecca

Rebbecca Acharya
Business Manager, ICT Workforce Capability
IT Capability and Support Branch
Human Services Portfolio
W: 61551733
F: 61550525

From:

Mark Helpful
1
/Mark Helpful

Cathy Raines replied Apr 7, 2011

Thanks for a good question and discussion.

I cannot point to research though I do think the Center for Creative

Leadership and others have looked into this. I'll share my observations
from 20 years in HR, organizational and individual development roles.

First, I recognize that I have a bias coming into this type of work. I believe
that people can change so I consciously and subconsciously find evidence
of it. When it doesn't happen I look at the underlying reasons - did the
person want to change, did the system support the change, what else
might be going on.

Second, having said that I believe people can and do change, I also think it
doesn't happen as much as it could. Personal, cultural and organizational
habits and patterns are hard to change and take more time than many are
willing to give.

Another point is that making a good fit is both art and science - even to
match the people who have real potential for change with the right
assignment, the right developmental opportunity and the right people to
support the change.

Last but not least, I have indeed seen people broaden and deepen their
skills and competencies. A few areas that come to mind: becoming less of
a victim and more of an agent; better at speaking, influencing, listening and
negotiating; better at planning and prioritizing.

Regards,
Cathy

Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful

Nthabiseng Mathenjwa replied Apr 8, 2011

Thanks very much for your input Cathy, I certainly support the view that
with the right assignment, developmental opportunity and
people/management supporting the employees, change and improvement
is bound to happen.

Appreciated,
Nthabi

Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful

Nthabiseng Mathenjwa replied Apr 9, 2011

Thanks for your valuable input Dr Morne. I quite like your idea of testing the
individual's readiness level by introducing elements of the next complexity
level into their current role and evaluating their performance....
Nthabi

Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful

moagi moleko replied Apr 11, 2011

Colleagues,

What a good question. No employee is fixed at a particular level. Even

psychology suggest that when one has achieved a particular desire, s/he
develops a new drive to achieve even better. Potential is not fixed, maybe
let me make it more complex than this.

Potential is never fixed, however the trig is, if a person has spent more than
10 years in an organization at same level, the question is, what else can
this person introduce. The element of 'human rust' plays a key role. By and
large, people are meant to grow regardless of duration of experience, it is
all about personal drive to achieve. If a person shows potential and interest
to develop, it is never late to empower such person. Here I am not talking
of a person 5 years towards retirement.

Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful

David Clutterbuck replied Apr 11, 2011

What's being described here is the plateaued manager. Some of the best
work ion this topic was done by Andrew Souerwein in the late 1980s. He
found differences between effective (and hence often promotable) and
ineffective plateaued managers. Sometimes, it's the organisation creating
the plateua; sometimes the individual.

Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful

Pilla Nageshwara Rao replied Apr 14, 2011

Dear Sir,

The capacities can not be pre determined but only assessed.The

Performance
is monitored
closely in the specific position and the assessment is given whether the
concerned Employee
is capable of handling the Responsibilities properly.The assessment play a
very important role

adminmgr

Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful

Mike Kennedy replied Apr 16, 2011

Great responses in this thread, thank you to everyone who posted above.

Succession planning is a difficult task given the amount of moving parts

involved. You're not only planning for how the new executive (CEO, for an
example) will do in the role performance wise and the other factors listed
above, but you need the additional data point to be able to anticipate how
he/she will interact with the other Board members.

By grounding your decision in data, you're able to remove bias and focus
on making a decision that will be the best for the business, which is
ultimately important for the organization and its people.

Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful

Cathy Raines replied Apr 18, 2011

To Mike Kennedy's comment - I'm intrigued that you find you can remove
bias. Can you tell us more about the data you use?

Thanks,
Cathy

Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful

David Clutterbuck replied Apr 18, 2011

I have now completed the first draft of Chapter One of my forthcoming book
"If Succession Planning Works, how do the Wrong People keep getting to
the Top?" It takes a pretty hard look at the assumptions behind traditional
succession planning processes. I'd be pleased to send it to anyone on the
network, in return for comments and suggestions. (It's quite long -- 20,000
words -- and doesn't pull punches!)
Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful

Helen Bennett replied Apr 18, 2011

Hi David

I'd be very interested in reading your chapter and providing you with some
feedback - if you can advise how is the best way to get it to me...

Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful

denise lee replied Apr 18, 2011

I would be willing to review the chapter on succession planning. I like

reading anything that says it like it is!

Sent from my HTC

----- Reply message -----

Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful

Mike Kennedy replied Apr 18, 2011

Hi Cathy,
I'd be happy to expand. First, I perhaps should have said "reduce", not
remove as bias will never be completely removed from a hiring decision.
With that said, my organization has a platform that measures and analyzes
the talent analytics of an organization's talent, or employee behaviors (how
they behave) and ambitions (why).

Specific to succession planning, this data is used to "try on" an executive to

plot how he or she will get along with the rest of the management team.

While this is of course not the only criteria used in a hiring decision (nor
should it ever be!), having data about the talent is an incredibly valuable
insight to forecast how well the applicant may get along with the current
team. Here is a blog entry for your reference:
http://www.talentanalytics.com/blog/the-hypocrisy-of-hiring/

Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful

David Clutterbuck replied Apr 18, 2011

That's great Helen. Can you send me an email link and I'll mail it direct?

Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful

Karen Fleming replied Apr 19, 2011

All the measures and criteria in the world will not withstand the interference
of the 'human' element; those senior people in an organisation who over-
ride HR's analysis for succession planning and make their own decisions
regarding who is ready to step up to the next level.. I would be interested to
hear if any of you have found this to be true?

Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful

Morne Buchner replied Apr 19, 2011

Hi Karen
I've had much experience with the over-riding judgment of senior line
managers after providing them with the needed information. It's rather
ironic. When we expect line managers to make a judgment (e.g.
performance ratings) they seems hesitant and when we provide them with
lots of data as in the case of succession management they are less
hesitant. I don't have a problem with it however - ultimately we expect them
to make the decision and (this is where the catch comes in) to take
responsibility for this decision. We can not however short circuit the whole
info gathering part of the game - doesn't work - have tried a few times.
Very good comment - thanks.

Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful

Clinton Wingrove replied Apr 19, 2011

Cathy,

I am not sure that you can "remove" bias but you can certainly "detect
potential bias", "measure the potential impact of detected potential bias",
and then (assuming that your detection and weighting are valid)
"standardise your data".
For example, if you:
(a) ask managers to assess their staff against a Competency Model, rating
individual observable behaviours as well as providing overall ratings for
each competency and overall competency
(b) collect demographic data about the assessor and the assesses
you can then use statistical tools to analyze the data. This can reveal, for
example only, potential:
- harshness leniency in assessors
- biases in terms of value attached to individual behaviours or
competencies
- biases in terms of gender, ethnicity, even function
- biases for or against individuals.

We have been working with organizations since 1976 doing this type of
work and the de-biased data produced can inform all manner of decision
making not merely to produce better performance indices etc.

Very best regards,

Clinton
Clinton Wingrove
Pilat HR Solutions
Cwingrove<at>pilat<dot>com
www.pilat.com

Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful

Mary Raz replied Apr 19, 2011

I have seen senior executives ignore HR's advisement regarding providing

promotional opportunities to "ready now" candidates several times. Some
of the drivers of this very "human behavior" have included rivalry, cronyism,
self-interest, and other forms of Machiavellian behavior.
Mark Helpful
1
/Mark Helpful

Cathy Raines replied Apr 19, 2011

Thanks Clinton and Mike for your comments about removing bias. I, too, do
not think we can remove bias - and, as some of you have implied, "bias" is
the perceived downside of the human factor. We observe, we assess, we
conclude, we judge and we act on each of those elements. When it goes
well, we consider it wisdom.

One element of succession planning and talent management that I'm

especially interested in is more of a 360/multi-rater process. This has some
potential to allow "multiple biases" to surface.

In my experience inside 4 companies during the past 20 years, a good,

probing conversation between a skilled HR professional and a manager
goes a long way. When the manager only remembers the accomplishments
of a staffer, HR can ask how those accomplishments balance with all the
time the manager spent in HR's office complaining about the person. The
reverse is also true: when the manager overlooks accomplishments, HR
can raise the accomplishments too. Sometimes that's harder for HR to do
since many managers only want to talk to HR when there's a problem. My
solution for this part is that HR has to be out in the organization knowing
and seeing all of what's going on, not just waiting for the problems.

Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful

Pilla Nageshwara Rao replied May 7, 2011

Dear Sir,
It is true that HR Role is not considered to follow the succession
planning.The top Managerial
cadre take their own decision in selecting the successor to a Leader in the
Organization.This
lead to a lot of confusion among the cadre.In Our Organization ,the
decision
to appoint a top
successor is always taken by Top Managerial Cadre . In these cases , the
Junior and Senior
levels are not considered .Some times it may be the case a Junior Most is
appointed by passing
the next Successor.HR also not considered.

regards

p n rao

Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful

M. Carrasquillo replied May 20, 2011

I'd be happy to review and offer comments.

Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful

Mary Raz replied May 20, 2011

Same here. I'd be interested. Why does not succession planning work?
Alternatively, we might ask why did the Borgias "grab" the papacy?!

Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful

Andrew Munro replied May 20, 2011

Are you planning succession or managing success?

You might find this short article helpful.

http://www.amazureconsulting.com/files/1/53237870/
IsSuccessionManagementSuccessManagement.pdf

regards

Andrew

Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful

kaiser masood replied May 20, 2011

would be happy to review your chapter and send you my comments

Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful
Katrien D'haeseleer replied May 20, 2011

I would also be happy to comment.

Kind regards,

Katrien D'haeseleer
Euroclear SA/NV
Human Resources - Global Talent Management & Organisational Design
1 Boulevard du Roi Albert II
1210 Brussels
tel.: +32.2.326.10.32
fax.: +32.2.326.23.09

Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful

Cathy Robinson replied May 20, 2011

I would be happy to review your chapter and offer comments.

Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful

David Clutterbuck replied May 20, 2011

If you can let me have a contact email, Cathy, I'll be happy to send.

Professor David Clutterbuck

Practice Leader
Main Office No: +44 (0)1628 606850
Mobile No: +44 (0)7710 170019
Fax No: +44 (0)1628 606851
www.gpcoachingandmentoring.com

Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful

Cathy Robinson replied May 20, 2011

email@removed

Sorry about that.

Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful

kathi livolsi-Schultz replied May 20, 2011

I would be happy to review this as well. My Organization is critically

workingon succession planning and development.

My email is email@removed . Thank you!

Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful

M. Carrasquillo replied May 20, 2011

David, you can reach me at email@removed. Look forward to hearing from
you soon.

Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful

Ricardo Larrabure replied May 20, 2011

Apologies if this lands twice. A company should also limit the number of
times a HIPO can be used to fill a vacancy. In our 100,000+ company, we
had 150 top executives and 2500 HIPO's. In our process, we ensured that
in no instance was one HIPO used more than twice for a possible vacancy.
That limits the downside risk of too much pressure on one individual. The
upside, pushing certain HIPO's into fields where they had modest to little
experience to see if they could survive a move into alien territory.

Ric

www.summit-consultingllc.com
Office Phone: 1-515-222-2292
FAX: 1-515-222-2293
Cell Phone: 1-515-783-6325

Home Phone: 1-515-224-4720

Email: email@removed

1405 Tulip Tree Lane

West Des Moines, IA 50266
Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful

Trish Evers replied May 23, 2011

Hi,

I'd be happy to review the chapter and offer comments - our organisation is
also currently looking at succession planning.

Regards,
Trish

Mark Helpful
0
/Mark Helpful

Pilla Nageshwara Rao replied Aug 19, 2011

Succession Planning can not be measured but it is HR and Departmental

Head to decide who within the Organization can take up the next
responsibility.If any Organization have a low recruitment .This is a clear
indication that the Succession Planning is measured efficiently and the
Succession Planning is followed .

Secondly, the Performance of each and every Employee is thoroughly

need to be assessed and right Employee is given right position in the
Organization. It is again the responsibility of Managers within the
Organization and of course HR in the End.

Thirdly, initial assessment of the Employees who have been elevated as a

result Succession Play a very Important role. The Documentation of such
Procedure should be done and closely monitored by HR and Departmental
Heads.