Leadership Assessment & Succession Planning

Execution Steps

1. Leadership Competency Model Framework

Define competencies customized by leadership level:

Core Competencies by Level:

Proficiency Scale:

2. Performance vs. Potential 9-Box Grid

9-Box Framework:

                          PERFORMANCE
              Low (1)          Medium (2)         High (3)
         +------------------+------------------+------------------+
         |                  |                  |                  |
  High   |  ENIGMA          |  HIGH POTENTIAL   |  STAR            |
  (3)    |  High potential   |  Strong potential |  Top talent      |
         |  but not          |  needs continued  |  Ready for       |
P        |  delivering yet   |  performance      |  significant     |
O        |  Invest &         |  development      |  advancement     |
T        |  redirect         |  Accelerate       |  Stretch & retain|
E        +------------------+------------------+------------------+
N        |                  |                  |                  |
T   Med  |  DILEMMA         |  CORE            |  HIGH PERFORMER  |
I   (2)  |  Moderate         |  CONTRIBUTOR     |  Strong performer|
A        |  potential,       |  Solid, reliable  |  moderate        |
L        |  underperforming  |  backbone of org  |  potential       |
         |  Coach or         |  Develop in role  |  Reward & retain |
         |  redeploy         |  & expand scope   |  selectively     |
         +------------------+------------------+------------------+
         |                  |                  |                  |
  Low    |  UNDERPERFORMER  |  EFFECTIVE        |  WORKHOUSE       |
  (1)    |  Wrong role or   |  Adequate in      |  High performer  |
         |  wrong person    |  current role     |  reached ceiling |
         |  Manage out or   |  Maintain or      |  Recognize &     |
         |  reset           |  right-size role  |  retain in role  |
         +------------------+------------------+------------------+

Calibration Methodology:

Performance Assessment Criteria (separating performance from potential):

3. Succession Planning Framework

Critical Role Identification:

Roles scoring 3.5+ are critical roles requiring active succession planning.

Successor Readiness Assessment:

Bench Strength Rating:

Emergency Succession Plan:

4. Leadership Pipeline Analysis

Bench Strength Dashboard:

Target Bench Ratios: C-Suite: 1.5:1 minimum; VP: 2:1; Director: 2.5:1; Manager: 3:1

Pipeline Flow Analysis:

G4 (Manager)     →  G5 (Director)    →  G6 (VP/SVP)      →  G7 (C-Suite)
[X] leaders         [X] leaders          [X] leaders          [X] leaders
[X] HiPos           [X] HiPos            [X] HiPos            [X] HiPos
[X]% promote rate   [X]% promote rate    [X]% promote rate    --
Avg time: [X] yrs   Avg time: [X] yrs    Avg time: [X] yrs   --

5. 360-Degree Feedback Framework

360 Design Parameters:

360 Analysis Template:

Key Insights to Extract:

• Blind spots: Self-rating significantly higher than others (gap > 0.5)
• Hidden strengths: Self-rating significantly lower than others
• Rater group divergence: Large gap between direct reports and manager (indicates different leader in each context)
• Consistent development areas: Low scores across all rater groups

6. Individual Development Plan (IDP) Template

IDP Structure:

Development Actions (70/20/10 Model):

7. High-Potential Identification Criteria

Three-Factor HiPo Assessment:

HiPo Threshold: Score 3.5+ on ALL three factors. Missing any one factor disqualifies from HiPo designation.

Common HiPo Identification Pitfalls:

8. Leadership Team Effectiveness Assessment

Team Effectiveness Dimensions:

Scoring: Below 3.0 on any dimension = dysfunction that requires intervention.

9. Flight Risk Assessment

Flight Risk Scoring Model:

Flight Risk Rating:

Retention Intervention Toolkit:

10. External Talent Market Mapping

External Pipeline for Critical Gaps:

11. Talent Review Meeting Facilitation Guide

Pre-Meeting Preparation (2-3 weeks before):

Meeting Agenda (3-4 hours per session, 10-20 leaders reviewed):

Facilitator Ground Rules:

• Evidence-based: every placement requires specific examples
• Challenge bias: ask "would you say the same if the person were [different demographic]?"
• No anchoring: manager presents, then others share independent assessments
• Separate performance from potential: likeability is not a criterion for either
• Document actions with owners and deadlines

12. Leadership Development Program Design

Program Design by Level:

Output Template

# Leadership Assessment & Succession Plan: [Organization]

**Date:** [Date]
**Scope:** [X] leaders assessed across [X] levels
**Assessment Methods:** [9-box calibration, 360 feedback, succession review, etc.]
**Facilitated By:** [Name/Team]

---

## 1. Executive Summary

[2-3 paragraphs: overall leadership health, key strengths, critical gaps, bench strength, recommendations]

**Total Leaders Assessed:** [X]
**High Potentials Identified:** [X] ([X]% of population)
**Critical Roles with No Ready-Now Successor:** [X] of [X]
**Overall Bench Strength:** [Strong / Adequate / Weak]
**High Flight-Risk Leaders:** [X]
**Key Recommendation:** [One-line]

---

## 2. Leadership Competency Assessment

### Competency Model
[Competency framework by level per Step 1]

### Aggregate Competency Scores
| Competency | Avg Score (All Leaders) | Strongest Level | Weakest Level | Development Priority |
|-----------|----------------------|----------------|--------------|---------------------|
| | | | | |

---

## 3. 9-Box Talent Grid

### Aggregate Distribution
| Box | Count | % | Action |
|-----|-------|---|--------|
| Star (High/High) | | | Stretch and retain |
| High Potential | | | Accelerate development |
| High Performer | | | Reward and retain |
| Core Contributor | | | Develop in role |
| Enigma | | | Redirect and coach |
| Underperformer | | | Performance manage |

### Key Talent Profiles
[Individual profiles for Stars, HiPos, and concerning cases]

---

## 4. Succession Plan

### Critical Roles and Bench Strength
| Role | Criticality | Ready Now | Ready Soon | Bench Strength | Action |
|------|-----------|-----------|-----------|---------------|--------|
| | | | | | |

### Emergency Succession
[Emergency succession for top 5-10 critical roles]

---

## 5. Pipeline Analysis

[Bench strength dashboard by level, pipeline flow analysis]

---

## 6. Flight Risk Assessment

[High and critical flight-risk leaders with retention interventions]

---

## 7. Development Priorities

### Organization-Wide Development Themes
[Top 3 competency gaps requiring programmatic investment]

### Individual Development Plans (Top Talent)
[IDPs for Stars and High Potentials]

---

## 8. External Talent Needs

[Roles requiring external search due to pipeline gaps]

---

## 9. Leadership Team Effectiveness

[Team effectiveness assessment for senior leadership team]

---

## 10. Recommended Next Steps

1. [Immediate action with owner and deadline]
2. [Second action]
3. [Third action]

Quality Checks

• Performance and potential are assessed separately with distinct criteria -- never conflated
• 9-box calibration includes evidence requirements and bias mitigation -- not manager opinion alone
• Succession plan identifies ready-now, ready-soon, and ready-future for each critical role -- not just "successor TBD"
• Emergency succession is documented for CEO and all C-suite roles
• Bench strength is quantified with ratios by level and compared to targets
• High-potential identification uses three-factor model (Ability, Aspiration, Engagement) -- not just performance
• 360 feedback analysis includes rater group divergence and blind spot identification
• Flight risk assessment uses multi-factor scoring, not manager gut feel
• Individual development plans follow 70/20/10 model with specific actions, not generic "attend training"
• Leadership competency model differentiates behaviors by level -- same competency, different expectations
• Talent review facilitation guide includes bias mitigation protocols
• Pipeline analysis includes promotion rates, time-in-role, and demographic diversity checks
• Development program design differentiates by leadership level with appropriate content and experiential elements