The founder built the firm from the ground up, focusing on personalized client relationships and a hands-on approach to leadership. They are known for their deep connections in the industry and a reputation for integrity.
The ambitious and eager successor joined the firm a decade ago. The founder mentored them and quickly rose through the ranks, thanks to their innovative ideas and keen understanding of market trends.
As the founder approaches retirement, the successor begins to propose bold changes, such as expanding into digital financial services and automating client interactions. The founder, however, is wary of these changes, fearing they’ll dilute the firm’s personal touch and alienate long-time clients.
Their differing leadership styles become evident. The founder is methodical and values face-to-face interactions, while the successor is data-driven, preferring efficiency and scalability.
A pivotal moment occurs when the successor suggests entering a new market with a younger, tech-savvy demographic. The founder sees this as risky and unnecessary, preferring to stick with the firm’s traditional high-net-worth clientele.
The tension between maintaining the firm’s legacy and embracing innovation creates friction, with the founder feeling that the successor’s ideas might tarnish the company’s reputation.
The founder, struggling to let go, begins to micromanage the successor’s decisions, leading to a series of confrontations. Frustrated by the lack of trust, the successor questions whether they can lead the firm with the founder still in the picture.
Once strong and based on mutual respect, their relationship begins to fray as both wrestle with their insecurities—the founder’s fear of obsolescence and the successor’s fear of failing to meet expectations.
The personal dynamic adds complexity: the founder views the successor almost like a family member, which makes the tension even more painful. Conversely, the successor feels both the weight of the founder’s legacy and the desire to break free and establish their own path.
A turning point occurs when an important client voices concerns about the firm’s direction, forcing the founder and the successor to confront their differences.
The story culminates in a candid conversation where the founder and the successor finally address the underlying fears driving their conflict by using Values and Behaviors Assessments. They reach a compromise allowing innovation while preserving the firm’s core values.
The ending could be hopeful, with the founder finally stepping back and allowing the successor to take the reins fully, or bittersweet, with both characters acknowledging that change is inevitable, even if it’s uncomfortable.
Understanding the importance of Values and Behaviors Assessments in preventing Your Succession Plan Bloodbath is crucial. These Assessments can help you prevent succession plan bloodbaths before they happen.
It’s essential to use separate Values and Behaviors Assessments. This ensures a comprehensive evaluation of the potential successor’s fit for the role.
- Behaviors measure 10% of success and HOW & WHAT to do.
- Values measure 90% of success and WHY you do what you do.
Values and Behaviors Assessments will provide the required benchmarks and understandings to help the Founder, and the Potential Successor answer these questions before the succession plan bloodbath happens.
What are your Values and Behaviors, and what are the best Values and Behaviors of a Potential Successor?
Contact Simon Reilly for a free consultation to prevent a Succession Plan Bloodbath. Call 250-248-6012 or click here to schedule a conversation.
Thank you for the opportunity to be of service.
Simon Reilly
International Values and Behavioral Analyst, Business Coach, Speaker and Author
Executive Coaching Tips for Financial Advisors
Speaking at a City Near You