Gaps in key areas signal a need for leadership succession planning.

What signals leadership succession needs to be on the radar

If you’re paying attention to how organizations stay steady through change, you’ll notice a simple truth: leadership isn’t something you sort out only when someone retires or leaves. It’s a rhythm you plan for, long before disruption hits. In the world of talent development, the clearest signal that a company should map out a leadership succession approach is straightforward: gaps in key areas within the organization. When critical capabilities, roles, or bench depth are missing, that’s a loud invitation to start developing a pipeline of leaders who can step up when the time comes.

Let me explain why this particular cue matters. Leaders don’t just fill jobs; they guide strategy, culture, and daily operations. If you look around and notice that several critical roles lack obvious successors, the organization becomes vulnerable during transitions. A retireing executive, a sudden resignation, or a role redefinition can leave a gap that isn’t easily filled from the outside. That’s not a failure of people; it’s a signal that the internal pool isn’t ready to take on the next wave of responsibility. Succession planning aims to prevent those moments from becoming a crisis. It’s about continuity—keeping the ship steady even when the crew changes.

Gaps aren’t the only thing you might see, but they’re the most telling

People often assume that a strong talent pool is obvious because there’s stellar performance, long tenure, or a series of well-executed training programs. Those are valuable, no doubt, but they don’t automatically reveal whether there are ready leaders for the future. Think about it this way:

• A company may have high retention and strong performance reviews, which are great for day-to-day operations. But if you can't point to a robust succession plan for mission-critical positions, you’re looking at potential vulnerability a few years down the line.

• An array of training programs shows you’re investing in current capabilities. Yet, unless those programs are tied to future leadership needs, they may help today without guaranteeing leadership continuity when the top roles open up.

So, the telltale sign isn’t that things are running smoothly now. It’s what happens when the future—your top roles becoming vacant—meets your current bench. If there isn’t a clear path for who could fill those roles, that’s your cue to start building one.

A practical way to spot gaps (without turning it into a tedious exercise)

Here’s a straightforward way to think about it—without getting lost in jargon or long meetings:

• Map the critical roles. Not every position needs a plan, but the roles that drive strategy, governance, or core operations do.

• Define leadership requirements. What skills, experiences, and behaviors make someone successful in those roles?

• Assess the current bench. Who could step up? Who would need development, and in what area?

• Highlight the readiness gaps. Are the potential successors ready now, in six months, or in two years? Which gaps are the biggest risk?

• Prioritize development actions. Pick a few high-impact moves—stretch assignments, mentoring, targeted learning—that will close the most urgent gaps first.

• Set a cadence. Revisit the plan on a regular schedule so it stays aligned with the business’s pace and needs.

If you’re ever tempted to skip this step and “just groom the obvious ones,” pause. A rapid pulse check on readiness saves time and avoids surprises later.

Why not read the signals you might be tempted to trust instead

It’s worth noting again what doesn’t necessarily signal readiness for leadership transitions:

• Established training programs. They’re excellent for upskilling, but they don’t guarantee a future pool of leaders. Training and succession readiness overlap, but they aren’t interchangeable.

• A high employee retention rate. Great for morale and stability, yet it doesn’t automatically mean there are strong candidates prepared to move into top roles when needed.

• Consistently strong performance reviews. They indicate who’s performing well in their current role, but not who’s ready to take on different, larger, or riskier responsibilities.

In short, the absence of gaps isn’t the same as a plan. Gaps in key areas are a stark reminder that you need a deliberate pipeline for leadership.

From gaps to a living plan (yes, a real, useful thing)

So you’ve identified gaps. Now what? Here’s a practical pathway you can adapt to most organizations:

• Build a leadership competency model. Clarify what top leaders need to do well in your context—strategic thinking, cross-functional collaboration, decision-making under uncertainty, and so on. This model becomes the compass for all development.

• Create a candidate map. List potential leaders across levels and functions. Include not only high-performers but those with high potential who may need targeted development.

• Design development plans. For each potential leader, map concrete steps: stretch assignments, cross-functional projects, mentorship, and targeted learning experiences. Tie these steps to the business needs you identified.

• Use development right where it matters. Put learning into real work: job rotations, special projects, or temporary leadership of a task force. The aim is to build capability in context, not just in a classroom.

• Establish governance. Have a small leadership council or a cross-functional sponsor group review progress, adjust plans, and ensure funding and time are allocated. This keeps the pipeline honest and aligned with strategy.

• Measure impact. Track not just completion of programs, but how well the organization fills critical roles when vacancies arise, how quickly new leaders achieve impact, and what stays resilient through transitions.

A quick caveat: this isn’t a one-and-done exercise. The business environment shifts, roles evolve, and so should your succession plan. The strongest pipelines are living documents, updated with new data, lessons learned, and changing priorities.

Where CPTD-informed thinking fits into this

If you’re exploring talent development through a CPTD lens, you’ll recognize how essential it is to connect workforce planning with leadership development. The CPTD body of knowledge emphasizes diagnosing organizational needs, designing and delivering development interventions, and evaluating their outcomes—applied specifically to the realities of the business. Here’s how that translates to succession planning:

• Diagnose needs with business realism. Look beyond the team you see today and map where leadership impact will be needed in the next 3 to 5 years. This lines up with knowing the organization’s strategic priorities and the roles that will drive them.

• Design and deliver targeted growth experiences. Use a mix of stretch assignments, mentoring, and micro-learning to build leadership capabilities in the people who can fill critical gaps.

• Evaluate outcomes with practical metrics. Track time-to-fill, readiness levels, and performance of successors in real roles. The aim isn’t to prove fancy training; it’s to reduce risk and preserve operational continuity.

A small, relatable tangent here: you don’t need to reinvent the wheel every time. A simple nine-box grid, paired with a clear set of leadership competencies, can be a reliable way to visualize readiness across the organization. Combine that with a handful of high-impact development moves, and you’ve got a compact, effective approach that fits most teams.

A concise example to ground the idea

Picture a mid-sized software company facing a wave of leadership transitions as several senior roles approach retirement. The leadership bench isn’t deep, and some critical product areas lack obvious internal successors. The human resources team uses a straightforward plan:

• Identify key roles: VP of Product, Head of Engineering, Director of Sales.

• Define what those leaders must do: cross-functional alignment, strategic experimentation, market-facing decision-making, and talent development of direct reports.

• Assess the current bench: a few strong managers, some capable engineers, and several sales directors who excel in execution but haven’t demonstrated broad strategic impact.

• Targeted moves: assign stretch projects, pair with a mentor from the executive team, and enroll in leadership-focused learning modules tied to strategic growth.

• Governance and review: quarterly check-ins with a small panel from the executive leadership team to adjust the plan based on shifting goals.

In a year or two, the company sees a visible rise in readiness for the senior roles, a smoother internal transition during turnover, and a more confident leadership culture. It’s not magic; it’s a deliberate, data-informed approach that keeps the organization resilient.

Closing thoughts: the signal is simple, the work isn’t

Gaps in key areas within the organization are a clear, practical signal that leadership succession planning deserves attention. They’re not a warning about someone’s performance; they’re a warning about future risk and continuity. When leadership may be needed at the helm sooner than expected, having a prepared bench isn’t just nice to have—it’s essential for sustaining momentum and protecting strategic goals.

If you’re navigating CPTD insights, remember this: talent development isn’t only about today’s skills. It’s about shaping the people who will steer strategy tomorrow. Start with the gaps, map the needs, and build a development plan that grows leaders in the context of your business. The payoff isn’t just filled roles; it’s a steadier trajectory for your organization through change.

Let’s keep the conversation practical. Do you have a favorite method for identifying leadership gaps in your organization? Have you seen a simple, effective development move that helped turn a potential gap into a strong rising leader? Share a quick example; even small shifts can make a big difference when you’re building a durable leadership pipeline.