Back to Blog & Insights

Leadership

Transfer Critical Know-How Before a Role Opens

A successor list does not prove readiness. Give a second person a representative piece of critical work, including its relationships and judgment calls, while the current role holder can still observe and close gaps.

By WWA Editorial Team 4 min read
Two greenhouse colleagues reviewing production schedules and supplier details beside rows of plants

A name on a succession list cannot run the workflow

When one person alone knows how to manage a critical workflow, preserve a supplier relationship, or make a difficult operational call, leaders have an immediate continuity problem. A succession chart may identify a possible replacement, but it does not show whether that person can perform the work when timing, context, and trade-offs matter.

The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development defines succession planning as identifying and developing talent for leadership and business-critical positions. It also notes that effective programs typically include practical, tailored work experience relevant to future roles. That distinction matters: credible succession depends on practice, not nomination.

SHRM similarly argues that succession should extend beyond executives to business-critical managers and individual contributors. The practical question for leaders is therefore not simply, “Who could take this role?” It is, “What can someone else run now, while the role holder is available to help?”

Choose the role by exposure, not hierarchy

Start where concentration of know-how creates operational exposure. Look for work that stalls when one person is absent, relationships whose history lives mostly in one person’s memory, or recurring decisions that lack a usable rulebook. The critical role may belong to a department head, but it could just as easily belong to a specialist who coordinates production, customers, systems, or suppliers.

Focus on one role at a time. Describe what the organization would struggle to deliver if the role holder became unavailable. This keeps the exercise tied to business continuity instead of status or title.

Define the smallest representative assignment

Do not transfer an entire job at once. Select a contained assignment that includes the role’s essential combination of execution, relationships, and judgment. It should be meaningful enough to reveal readiness but limited enough for the current role holder to observe and intervene.

For example, imagine a greenhouse manager who controls a supplier-and-production handoff. She asks a colleague to run one upcoming cycle: confirm availability with the supplier, align delivery timing with the production schedule, flag quality concerns, and recommend adjustments if conditions change.

The manager provides the relevant records and introduces the colleague as the operational contact for that cycle. She explains the supplier’s communication preferences, previous friction points, and which production constraints can or cannot move. The colleague then runs the handoff, while the manager remains available for support rather than taking back control.

Observe the decisions, not just the outcome

During the cycle, the manager watches how the colleague frames questions, balances supplier limitations against production needs, escalates concerns, and documents commitments. A completed delivery is not sufficient evidence. The purpose is to see whether the colleague recognizes the same risks and can explain the reasoning behind each decision.

Afterward, they review what happened. They update contact notes, decision thresholds, and the workflow itself. Any gap becomes a development target: another cycle, a narrower technical lesson, or practice handling a different exception. Because both people are still available, corrections can occur without waiting for a vacancy.

Transfer context without making promises

Relationship transfer requires more than sharing contact details. Include the relationship’s purpose, history, expectations, sensitivities, unresolved issues, and boundaries on authority. Decision transfer should likewise cover which factors matter, what evidence is consulted, when escalation is expected, and what trade-offs are acceptable.

This assignment is not a promise of promotion. Leaders should state that it is a continuity and development opportunity, and that future staffing decisions remain separate. That clarity protects the value of the exercise while allowing several employees to build relevant capability.

An SHRM contributor has highlighted the gap between nominal readiness and the transfer of knowledge, client relationships, and decision context, recommending that succession be treated as ongoing organizational resilience. Readiness becomes more credible when demonstrated repeatedly in real work.

Leaders should also avoid assumptions about who can learn. AARP reports LinkedIn platform research indicating that workers age 50 and older continue adding technology skills and contribute experience, adaptability, and leadership to mixed-age teams. Assign practice based on relevant potential and development needs, not age.

The final test is straightforward: Can a second person perform a representative assignment, navigate its relationships, explain the judgment involved, and improve after feedback? If not, the succession plan is still a list. If so, the organization has begun turning concentrated know-how into shared capability.

Sources