Executive Succession Series: Failing to plan is planning to fail - Part 2
Debbie Morrison • March 4, 2022

In the first part of this Succession Planning series, we explored the pitfalls associated with a lack of succession planning. In part two, we look at what executives and boards can do to implement a succession plan, nurture internal talent and discover future leaders. 


How Organisations Can Discover Future Leaders

In 2022, demand for executives who exhibit agility, accountability and understanding of how to develop diverse, inclusive workplaces, implement sustainable climate-change focused practices and employee-centric cultures is increasing. Although traditional skills such as delivering strong commercial performance remain crucial, better soft skills and innovative thinking are critical areas of focus for boards and executive teams looking to identify potential executive successors. The following suggestions can help business leaders get started with succession planning or refine existing ones.

 


Candidate Pipelines

Rapidly shifting industry trends, economic recovery and stabilising growth is creating movement at the executive level as organisations pivot having focused on recovery. The organisations that are prepared, with a structured succession plan will be best placed to navigate sudden or unexpected changes in leadership.



Good Preparation

The market for top talent is increasingly competitive. To stay ahead, companies need to establish leadership development programs that can help them identify and prepare a range of internal leadership candidates for potential executive roles.



Innovative thinking

Fresh thinking and a modern approach to executive succession planning that extends beyond traditional skills matching and encompasses DEI, sustainability and commercial considerations are paramount for driving innovation and growth. Organisations need to give consideration to a broad range of potential internal and external candidate pools, not only for permanent and interim executives to ensure they can cover a variety of scenarios but to explore a broad range of perspectives, thinking and skills. This helps boards establish a clear profile of the qualities and attributes that are necessary for future success.


Effective Onboarding & Transition Processes

Investment in robust, effective and supportive onboarding and transition processes are of paramount importance. With so much at stake, few companies can afford for executives to fail in their new roles, especially given the impact executives can have on business performance and success. Arguably, quality onboarding and transition support and processes are more important for executive appointments, especially since Only 27% believe their organisations provide the necessary resources to support their move into a C-level role according to McKinsey. Compounding the issue, McKinsey found 50% of leaders reported that it took them six months to become effective in their new roles.


Ensuring that executive transitions are controlled, thorough and collaborative is key. Providing new executive appointments with access to critical information, organisational methodologies and supportive board members can greatly reduce the time it takes for them to become effective in their new role, creating a win-win scenario.


Develop Future Leaders Early 

Successful succession programs should be part of wider leadership development and talent management plans. Treating succession as a short-term need, rather than a long-standing, structured process denies organisations the opportunity to start developing future leaders early in their employment.


Two key steps to developing potential future leadership talent early are talent assessments & leadership development plans. Discovering the competencies, skills and gaps of your existing employees through talent assessments and benchmarking those against the critical skills needed for executive positions can help identify candidates who demonstrate the highest potential for future leadership roles.


Career development plans can then be created based on the skills required for success in the role, anticipating the future needs and goals of the organisation.

 


Continuously Refine Your Plan

Organisations that develop the best leaders create executive succession plans that include selection criteria based on the future needs of the business. These criteria are often based on performance forecasts, future direction and anticipated market conditions hence the need for continuous refinement and adjustment of not only the assessment criteria but the skills required of future executives. 


Incorporating flexibility for adjustment in succession plans, career development plans and selection criteria help organisations remain current and future-focused.


How ELR Can Help

Decades of expertise and insights derived from the assessment of countless executive candidates enable us to craft flexible, forward-thinking succession plans that identify the most suitable talent for a myriad of executive positions in the FMCG sector.


We help organisations identify, assess and screen the talent best suited to future leadership positions based on your business’s unique requirements. Their skills and expertise are also benchmarked against the FMCG leadership talent pool, ensuring you have a structured succession plan and career development program to cultivate the best performers.


If you’re interested in understanding how we can help develop a talent pool of future leaders, you can arrange a confidential discussion with one of our experts today by clicking this link '
chat'.

By John Elliott June 26, 2025
You don’t hear about it on the nightly news. There’s no breaking story. No panic. No protests. Just rows of vegetables being pulled out of the ground with no plan to replant. Just farmers who no longer believe there’s a future for them here. Just quiet decisions — to sell, to walk away, to stop. And if you ask around the industry, they’ll tell you the same thing: It’s not just one bad season. It’s a slow death by a thousand margins. 1 in 3 growers are preparing to leaveIn September 2024, AUSVEG released a national sentiment report with a statistic that should have set off alarms in every capital city: 34% of Australian vegetable growers were considering exiting the industry in the next 12 months. Another one-third said they’d leave if offered a fair price for their farm. Source: AUSVEG Industry Sentiment Report 2024 (PDF) These aren’t abstract hypotheticals. These are real decisions, already in motion. For many, it’s not about profitability anymore, it’s about survival. This isn’t burnout. It’s entrapment. Behind the numbers are people whose entire identity is tied to a profession that no longer feeds them. Many are asset-rich but cash-poor. They own the land. But the land owns them back. Selling means walking away from decades of history. Staying means bleeding capital, month by month, in a system where working harder delivers less. Every year, input costs rise, fuel, fertiliser, compliance. But the farmgate price doesn’t move. Or worse, it drops. Retail World Magazine reports that even though national vegetable production increased 3% in 2023–24, the total farmgate value fell by $140 million. Growers produced more and earned less. That’s not a market. That’s a trap. What no one wants to say aloud The truth is this: many growers are only staying because they can’t leave. If you’re deep in debt, if your farm is tied to multi-generational ownership, if you’ve invested everything in equipment, infrastructure, or land access, walking away isn’t easy. It’s a last resort. So instead, you stay. You cut your hours. Delay maintenance. Avoid upgrades. Cancel the next round of planting. You wait for something to shift, interest rates, weather, prices and you pretend that waiting is strategy. According to the latest fruitnet.com survey, over 50% of vegetable growers say they’re financially worse off than a year ago. And nearly 40% expect conditions to deteriorate further. This isn’t about optimism or resilience. It’s about dignity and the quiet erosion of it. Supermarkets won’t save them, and they never planned to In the current model, supermarket pricing doesn’t reflect real-world farm economics. Retailers demand year-round consistency, aesthetic perfection, and lower prices. They don’t absorb rising input costs, they externalise them. They offer promotions funded not by their marketing budgets, but by the growers’ margins. Farmers take the risk. Retailers take the profit. And because the power imbalance is so deeply entrenched, there’s no real negotiation, just quiet coercion dressed up as "category planning." Let’s talk about what’s actually broken This isn’t just a market failure. It’s a policy failure. Australia’s horticulture system has been built on: Decades of deregulated wholesale markets Lack of collective bargaining power for growers Retailer consolidation that has created a virtual duopoly Export-focused incentives that bypass smaller domestic producers There’s no meaningful floor price for key produce lines. No national enforcement of fair dealing. No public database that links supermarket shelf price to farmgate return. Which means growers, like James, can be driven into loss-making supply contracts without ever seeing the true economics of their product downstream. But the real silence? It’s from consumers. Here’s what no one wants to admit: We say we care about “buying local.” We say we value the farmer’s role. We share those viral posts about strawberries going unsold or milk prices being unfair. And then we complain about a $4 lettuce. We opt for the cheapest bag of carrots. We walk past the "imperfect" produce bin. We frown at the cost of organic and click “Add to Cart” on whatever’s half price. We’re not just bystanders. We’re part of the equation. What happens when the growers go? At first, very little. Supermarkets will find substitutes. Importers will fill gaps. Large agribusinesses will expand into spaces vacated by smaller players. Prices will stay low, until they don’t. But over time, we’ll notice: Produce that travels further and lasts less. Fewer independent growers at farmer’s markets. Entire regions losing their growing identity. National food security becoming a campaign promise instead of a reality. And when the climate throws something serious at us, drought, flood, global supply shock, we’ll realise how little resilience we’ve preserved. So what do we do? We start by telling the truth. Australia is not food secure. Not if 1 in 3 growers are planning to exit. The market isn’t working. Not when prices rise at the shelf and fall at the farmgate. The solution isn’t scale. It’s fairness, visibility, and rebalancing power. That means: Mandating cost-reflective contracts between retailers and suppliers Enabling collective bargaining rights for growers Building transparent data systems linking production costs to consumer prices Introducing transition finance for smaller producers navigating reform and climate pressure And holding supermarkets publicly accountable for margin extraction But more than anything, it means recognising what we’re losing, before it's gone. Final word If you ate a vegetable today, it likely came from someone who’s considered giving up in the past year. Not because they don’t care. But because caring doesn’t pay. This isn’t about nostalgia. It’s about sovereignty, over what we eat, how we grow it, and who gets to stay in the system.  Because the next time you see rows of green stretching to the horizon, you might want to ask: How many of these fields are already planning their last harvest?
By John Elliott June 20, 2025
If you're leading an FMCG or food manufacturing business right now, you're probably still talking about growth. Your board might be chasing headcount approvals. Your marketing team’s pitching a new brand campaign. Your category team’s assuming spend will bounce. But your customer? They’ve already moved on. Quietly. Like they always do. The illusion of resilience FMCG has always felt protected, “essential” by nature. People still eat, wash, shop. It’s easy to assume downturns pass around us, not through us. But this isn’t 2020. Recessions in 2025 won’t look like lockdowns. They’ll look like volume drops that no promo can fix. Shrinking margins on products that no longer carry their premium. Quiet shelf deletions you weren’t warned about. The data’s already there. According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, consumer spending is slowing in real terms , even as inflation eases. The Reserve Bank confirmed in May: household consumption remains subdued amid weak real income growth . And over 80% of Australians have cut back on discretionary food spending , according to Finder. They’re still shopping, just not like they used to. A managing director at a national food manufacturer told me recently: “We won a new product listing in April. By July, it was marked for deletion. The velocity wasn’t there, but neither was the shopper. We’d forecasted like 2022 never ended. Rookie mistake.” That one stuck with me. Because I’ve heard it before, just in different words.