What happens when a family council agrees on a succession plan involving both the current leaders and the next generation, but some family members don’t follow through?
Consciously or unconsciously, their day-to-day actions may begin to drift away from what was agreed and expected.
The result: the succession process starts to derail. Imbalances and interference come into play, leading to serious negative consequences for both the family and the business.
Imbalance among family shareholders
The owner family loses stability and tensions rise. Trust and legitimacy erode. Some family members are pushed into the role of mediator, even though they never asked for it.
Unity and commitment to the shared project are questioned—along with the family legacy itself.
Interference that undermines management
These behaviors can seriously destabilize the effectiveness of the CEO and the leadership team. Performance evaluation and motivation become distorted. Informal power structures emerge, and mixed messages from leadership create confusion at the top.
Decision-making slows—and at times grinds to a halt. Conflicts go unaddressed and begin to fester. Confidence in the company’s future declines among all stakeholders.
These dynamics tend to give rise recurring behaviors and attitudes, both in predecessors and successors. These are the warning signs to watch for.
Succession from the predecessor’s perspective
1 – The empty agenda syndrome
The exit is formalized, but no one talks about what comes next. No one asks: How are you going to spend your time? There are no personal, social, advisory or individual projects in the wings. The business remains their main source of identity.
When the role disappears, a void emerges. The predecessor steps away from the formal position but has no alternative life agenda, personally or professionally.
They drop by the office unannounced. They weigh in on decisions that have already been delegated. They make constant offers “to help out.” They step into matters that are no longer theirs, justifying their actions with: “If I’m not here, things won’t move forward,” or “I’m not useful at home—here I am.”
2 – Presence without a role
They attend management meetings without a defined function. They ask questions and dig for information. There are no clear boundaries around access to people or data. “I don’t give orders,” they say, “I just ask how things are going because I need to stay informed.”
2 – Oversensitivity to not being consulted
The successor’s autonomy is interpreted as ingratitude. They feel offended when no one asks for their input. What they are really thinking is, “You people don’t need me anymore.”
3 – Nostalgia for authority and hands-on execution
“Things worked better when I was in charge.” They idealize the past and downplay the firm’s current challenges.
4 – Confusing support with control
Helping is understood as hovering, supervising and even correcting successors in public. There is no overt obstruction, but there is also no real letting go.
Succession from the successor’s perspective
1 – A sense of intrusion
Successors struggle to establish real leadership and legitimacy. They avoid confrontation to avoid hurting the predecessor. Over time, they begin to feel a mix of gratitude and frustration.
2 – Decisions that are “approved” but never implemented
They waver when it comes to making and executing decisions. Doubts surface in phrases like, “Let me check first,” or “That’s how it’s always been done.”
3 – Informal power structures that reveal weak authority
Successors learn about decisions after the fact. Managers keep going back to the predecessor “just in case.” Comments like “We’ll see,” “This is how we used to do it” or “That won’t work here” become increasingly common.
4 – Borrowed authority instead of real leadership
To avoid conflict, the successor hesitates to lead. Necessary decisions and changes are postponed to avoid confrontations with the predecessor.
Consensus is overused. Decisions stall or become overly cautious. Fear of making mistakes grows. Emotional and personal exhaustion sets in. Legitimacy erodes. They may even be tempted to imitate the predecessor’s style, even when it no longer fits the business.
Practical ways to manage succession more effectively
- Build a clear post-succession agenda for the predecessor before they step down. Explicitly define their future role: shareholder, board member, mentor, institutional representative and so on.
- Clarify what is delegated and what is not, and which management decisions will no longer require participation of the predecessor.
- Agree in advance on meetings and spaces the predecessor will not attend and functions they will no longer perform.
- Identify and negotiate the true “non-negotiables.”
- Communicate clearly and publicly to the leadership team and the organization, openly backing the successor.
- Set clear objectives for the successor and accept that mistakes are part of the process.
- Make decisions formally and rigorously in the appropriate forums: the shareholders’ meeting, the board of directors and the family council.
- Help the family understand that avoiding conflict out of respect or gratitude is a mistake.
- Support the predecessor. Succession is not a single decision or event; it is a process that unfolds on two parallel levels: the formal, structural level and the psychological level.When identity and life purpose are tied too closely to the business and job title—and power is lost at the same time—the conditions for a perfect storm are in place.
The succession process needs to be completed without delay. This requires clarity and firmness about actions, accountability and timelines. Emotional sensitivity should be reserved for how those decisions are carried out.
Predecessors must recognize that the greatest challenge is not building the business, but knowing how to let go and pass it on. And successors must understand that a company is not simply inherited—it has to be earned.