The
Transfer of Organizational Power in Family Held Firms by Michael Sales, Ed.D. ©2003 |
||
|
|
PLEASE DO NOT QUOTE WITHOUT PERMISSION Reprints
are available Art of the Future
Introduction: What happens to a
Family Business
when Power is not Transferred? • Chet is
threatening to quit the $150 million/year distributorship founded by
his father
and uncle because, even though he's president of the company, he can't
set realistic
salaries for his relatives working in the firm and
he can't get their support for his new key
account marketing strategy. The
founders, now in their late 70s, still hold the controlling shares. • Max's
discount store has grossed over $4 million/year for ten years, yet he
or his
heirs will probably have to liquidate his estate's major
asset--the business--for the value of its
inventory, receivables and fixtures because Max refuses to pass on what
he
knows to qualified employees who could buy him out. • Chris
and Charles have been working in their father's hardware/real estate
business
for ten years, but get no real, substantive guidance from him on
resolving
their tension-filled conflicts. When
they fight, he mumbles a set of clichés about how well he got
along with his brother and father. Their
mother is very concerned that Chris
will turn Charles out on the street even though everyone in the family
"knows" that it will be difficult for him to get work outside the
family firm. • Geraldine
can't understand why her mother would oppose her appointment as head of
their
family firm's main fabric manufacturing plant.
Mom keeps talking about how impolite Geraldine is to her
aunts and
cousins who aren't even in the business and places little emphasis on
her
daughter's ability to
handle big decisions. • Two
years ago Scott was given full control of the family's auto maintenance
shop. But customers don't come in nearly
as much as they did when his dad ran the operation, and he can't seem
to keep
good personnel in his employ. As a
result sales have declined significantly. • Tony
was recently hired as a senior vice-president by a technology firm
owned by a
family who founded the company to overhaul a flagging division. His
salary is
over $150,000/year. Recently he had a
dream in which he couldn't buy a pair of shoes because the owner kept
the real
money locked in a desk drawer. Like the
other professionally trained managers at the company, Tony thinks about
leaving
because he can't seem to get the resources he thinks he needs to do the
job he
is thought he was hired to do. Each of
these brief, but troubling, vignettes about an individual family
business
contains a common theme: Something
is going or went wrong in the process of transferring organizational
power and
control from one generation of ownership and management to the next. The preceding generation hasn't been willing
or able to fully empower those they
selected to direct their companies to do so.
Their difficulty in accomplishing this
objective point up a key finding in the study of family owned
businesses: The
succession crisis is the most treacherous of all family business
transitions,
and the dynamics of this traumatic passage are not at all well
understood.
Most family owned firms do not survive
beyond the working life of the founder. Only
approximately six percent remain in the same family
over the course
of three generations. To make a change
in these statistics, a great deal needs to be known about the process
by which
power can be transferred successfully from one generation to the next. The ideas developed in this article are
based upon extensive interactions with scores of people involved in
family
businesses and a familiarity with the literature of the field compiled
by
researchers and practitioners working in the family business arena.
We will explore several strands of
thought here to: 1)
identify factors and strategies that must be considered to avoid the
predictable pitfalls of the succession transition, and 2) focus
on those attitudes and behaviors that can enhance the family firm's
competitive
condition during succession while simultaneously strengthening the
cohesiveness
of the family unit. In the
sections below we're trying to understand a set of questions that are
all relevant
to the process of transferring power in a family business*: • What is
Organizational Power and who has It? • What
are the sources of power and authority
in a family owned business? • Who has
an interest in maintaining the status quo and resisting a change in the
power
structure? • When
should succession planning begin? • What is
the role of strategic planning in the transfer of family business power? • Who
should be involved in business and family planning conversations? • Why
is it so important for a firm's current
leadership to learn to teach? • How and
when are outside consultants useful to the succession planning process? What
is Organizational Power and Who Has It? In the search
for effective step-by-step
guidelines to succession planning and management in family business, it
is easy
to overlook the basic questions of exactly what is
being transferred and who has this commodity called Organizational
Power. Being clear about what
needs to be transferred is important because, without a definition, how
is it
possible to know if a goal has been accomplished?
Many in the family business arena are
not comfortable discussing the power of one group or the lack of power
of
another. For some there is something in
this conversation that affronts our nation's deeply held democratic and
egalitarian values. For others, the
meaning of power is obvious and, therefore, there is no need to discuss
it. Yet ask members of that group what
it is that is being transmitting, and many owners can't say with
precision. They may talk about
transferring assets as if
that were synonymous with transferring power, but this is not accurate. For still others there is no desire to
transfer power, and to begin talking about it might open a floodgate of
distressing emotions and conflicts. Since
the transfer of power in family businesses involves the attempt to
transmit
loyalty and obedience of personnel, customers and suppliers from one
set of
owners and leaders to another, it always evokes the feelings
affected individuals and groups have about
themselves and others in the situation. For
our purposes: Organizational
Power is
the
ability of a person or group to get
things done and make things happen according to their
ideas and plans. This is
the emotional force that owners want to cultivate, and it is what one
generation of owners wants, or should want, to transfer to their
successors. The
Owners' power can be observed via many metrics, including: • The
level of commitment people feel to the organization's mission and
business, • The
excitement and attraction staff members feel about the owners' ideas
and
activities, • The
ability of owners to attract and/or compel the attention of employees, • The
possession and manipulation of resources such as capital, technology,
expertise
and information that employees, suppliers and customers need to
accomplish
their own goals, and the • The
overall success of the business as measured by financial results. While
the owners obviously have a great deal of the power in a family firm,
they
don't have all of it, and this dispersion of power throughout the
system exerts
constraints on the ability to transfer this "asset" within the owning
group. To find out more about where
Organizational Power resides we should analyze who the stakeholders are
in a
family enterprise. Who
Are Organizational Stakeholders and What do they Want? Many
children of owners, especially those who have not had extensive work
experience
outside of the family firm, hold the naive belief that their family
holds all
of the power in an organization. When a
succession planning process is built on the assumption that all, or
even most,
of the Organizational Power is concentrated in the hands owners and/or
potential owners, this is a plan that is headed for trouble. In reality,
power and control in organizations is usually distributed to a variety
of stakeholders. As Ivan
Lansberg and others from the
national Family Firm Institute have pointed out[1], the family
business system is made up of many
players as captured in the figure below. Each
one has its own agenda, its own expectations and
anxieties.
As
represented in Figure 1, the three general categories of stakeholders
are found
in the firm's owning system, its family system and its business system. Organizational Power holders include, but are
not necessarily limited to, people in the following roles: • The
Founders • The
Current CEO • The
Management Corps, which usually includes non-family members • People
with Specific Knowledge about the Company's products and production
processes • Groups
of
workers at all ranks who have unified around
some area of common interest
• The
customers • External
entities, like family members who are shareholders but inactive in the
business, influential members of the family who are not shareholders,
and
communities where the organization has its operation.
Depending
on the specifics of the situation, Organizational Power can be
distributed to
any combination of these stakeholders. Each
stakeholder can identify some aspect of
organizational functioning
that reflects their own power. Furthermore,
because actors in a family business system
are often
members of more than one subcomponent of the system, they may
experience internal conflict
about changes in the ownership and leadership of
the firm since
a change in one direction may be positive from one perspective but
negative
from another. For example, an increase
in the power of a twenty-eight year old child may be viewed positively
by a mother
from the standpoint of the family system, but negatively by the same
woman
reflecting on her concerns about the young man's ability to guarantee
her
dividend payments. Knowing who
organizational stakeholders are, what
they want and what
they are currently getting from
the status quo is a key factor of an effective plan for the transfer of
power
in family businesses. The greater
the
investment by any particular stakeholder in the current power
structure, the
stronger the resistance to succession, i.e., the
less likely it is that the heirs will be empowered.
On the other hand it may be that various
stakeholders are very dissatisfied with the current power structure and
this
can heighten the anxiety and unwillingness of the owners being
criticized about
letting go of control. Here are
three examples of how stakeholder dynamics can generate a
"conspiracy" against success planning, according to the specifics of
the situation--specifics that require the close attention of those
seeking to
transfer Organizational Power: • Stakeholders
with an ownership perspective view the
business as an investment from which
they want a certain level of return. They
will be concerned about a shift in leadership that
could have a
negative impact on their net worth and their continuing income stream. Owners are especially anxious about
transitions that will intensify existing or latent power struggles
within the
family. For example, if the owner(s)
active in the business are married
and have important and unresolved conflicts, they may
not want changes that reduce time and energy tied up in the business
leaving an
unhappy couple more unwanted availability to each other. • Managers
and Employees who have established a
pattern of relating to
the current owners that works well for them may be very reluctant to
welcome a
successor to power because new leadership might introduce a much more
formal
set of performance standards. • Suppliers
and Customers who are used to dealing
with the current
owners and getting what they need through that channel may be very
reluctant to
deal with a successor. Added to
these stakeholder constraints on the succession process is the Western
cultural norm that almost
prohibits anyone in a family from discussing the future of the family
beyond
the lifetime of one of its members. The
enormous emotional and economics implications of death or disability
seem to
make them almost impossible subjects to engage in any sort of a
planful, open
fashion. Making
the big assumption that current owners really want to promote a
succession
process--in spite of their own anxieties and the resistance of
others--they
still have to know how to inventory
their own power base and do what
they can to transfer the foundation of their ability to affect
organizational
action to their successors. The next
section presents one way to do that. Where
Does Power Comes From? We all
know Organizational Power when we see it overtly displayed by a
dominant figure
or when there is a conflict between people or groups who have some
degree of
power. But we may not be able to put
a
precise label on the types of power we're observing.
In considering how to transfer Organizational
Power, it is useful to understand the basic sources of power
that owners
have at their disposal. This
understanding is a tool that the firm's
succession planners can use to:
There
are a number of conceptual frameworks for analyzing the sources of
power. They each have their pros and cons
in terms
of their applicability to specific business situations.
For the sake of this article we will discuss
four sources of Organizational Power available to owners that can be
transferred
to successors under certain circumstances[2]. The
delineation between these bases of power
is not that sharp and it is not surprising to see several different
types of
power displayed in the same instance. Yet,
it is useful to have some basic categories as a
starting point for
the study of power transfer. They
are: 1. Control over
Rewards and Punishments 2. The Power
Invested in Social Roles 3. Expert Power 4. Leadership
Power
1. Control over
Rewards and Punishments It is
obvious that owners can manipulate many of an organization's rewards
and
punishments, such as the ability to hire and fire, promote and demote,
raise
and lower pay, express or withhold recognition, fund or refuse to fund
projects
and/or developmental activities. Their
control over these domains may not be complete (managers and
supervisors, for
example, frequently wield the power of reward and punishment) but, as
the final
arbiters of budgetary decisions, this power of owners is extensive.
Control
over rewards and punishments would appear to be the form of power that
may be
most easily transferred from one generation of ownership to the next. This is so because rewards and punishments
can frequently--thought not always--be quantified and clearly described. For example, as an employee, you know what
you're getting in your paycheck; or, as a customer, there's not much
ambiguity
when you have lost a long term discount. At
the point where actual decision making authority
over the majority
of a firm's assets is held by a successor, everyone in the organization
will be
influenced by the reality of who "puts butter on their bread." It might
be easy for heirs to understand this sort of power, but can still be
very
difficult for living owners to give up their actual control over these
tools. Current power holders may be
accustomed to and very much enjoy the position of influence they hold
in the
lives of their employees and family members.
Many owners are used to having people say "How high?" when
they say "Jump!" Owners may see the succession
process as a direct threat to
their power not only in the business but also in the family. How much
clout will they have with their kin
if they lose the ability to manipulate the family assets?
Succession can bring up ideas and feelings
about the manipulation of rewards and punishments that owners view as a
criticism of their capabilities, as when, for example, fault is found
with the
compensation system. Disapproval of
their decisions can definitely remind owners of their mortality. If they are not at ease in contemplating such
topics (and who is?!), they may be very reluctant to turn over the
tools of
their offices to anyone. From
another perspective, owners who are experienced in wielding the power
of
rewards and punishments may believe with good reason that the business
will be
seriously injured by potential successors who don't have experience
motivating
personnel. For example, supervisors and
workers who performed for "the old man" may find ways to take
advantage of "junior." Given
that the business is a vessel for the owner's dreams (especially in its
first
generation form) and given that owners frequently had to go to heroic lengths to establish
the business as a viable entity, they
will be
reluctant to let anyone who seems unskilled take over the reward and
control
levers. Furthermore, many
designated successors may not feel
comfortable using these levers over others actions, especially if they
have
known the men and women who they are now being asked to reward and
punish since
their childhood. And, how empowering
does it feels to be an employee who has been with a company for twenty
years to
be rewarded and punished by someone whose shoes you used to tie?! The situation is especially sensitive if, as
an employee, you are convinced that the
kid would not have a shot at the job if she or he were not the boss'
child. Any owner would think twice
before putting his or her children in this sort of situation. Whatever
the reason, our experience with family firms demonstrates that many
owners are
reluctant to empower designated successors by turning over control of
rewards
and punishments fully to them. Unfortunately,
not doing so extends the succession
transition and
frequently creates a crisis in which the heirs feel that their parents
are
denying their adulthood by refusing to allow them to wield full reward
power. The
recommendations section discusses some approaches to transferring the
control
of rewards and punishments to successors in a thoughtful, effective
fashion. 2.
The Power Associated with Social Roles Society
depends upon the acceptance of authority. When
the police officer tells us to pull
over, most of us do. We feel guilty if
we stand in the express lane at the supermarket if we are carrying
fifteen
items and the sign says we should only have ten. And
when we work for somebody and they tell
us that our shift is from 8 to 5, the majority of us will agree that
the person
who pays our salary has a right to require us to perform in specific
ways and
to evaluate our efforts against their standards. To the extent that we have
internalized values that entitle
certain people by virtue of their
position to tell us what to do and
how to do it, we have invested those roles with power. Therefore,
anybody in an accepted authority
position, such as a member of a company's ownership group, can exert
the power
is that others give to that position. By the
same token, to the extent that we do not invest a position in social
system
with authority, the person in that role can't depend on his or her
title to
make things happen and must turn to other sources of power to exert
influence. For instance, Many
factors have undermined traditional respect for authority in the The
dilution of traditional authority has probably had mixed consequences
for our
society, and this is not the forum for a discussion of that topic. Furthermore, the ability of any family firm
to affect general social trends is probably minimal.
But the impact of the loss of power
held by traditional authority figures on an owner's Organizational
Power is
clear, regardless of how one judges
this social reality: It is less
likely that a boss will command respect simply by the force of his or
her position in the 80s than it was in the
50s. This can
be a hard reality for many owners to accept, perhaps especially for
those with
fulfilling experiences in hierarchical organizations such as the
military. When a position to be denied the
respect its holder
feels is deserved, the person occupying the role may feel highly
insulted and
react accordingly. Owners
who feel slighted in their roles frequently turn to
punishments as a substitute power. The
unfortunate consequence of the
punishment strategy is that punitive behavior tends
to evoke overt and covert resistance such as work
slowdowns,
unionization, turnover of personnel, sabotage and theft, to name a
few,
which then lead to more punishments and greater distance and mistrust
between
the owners and their work force. In terms
of transferring the power of their roles, owners facing the actual or
potential
loss of their role power can take steps to bolster the legitimacy of
their
authority. They cannot remake
society,
but they can, for example, tighten the selection processes
through which
one becomes an employee of the firm in ways which weed out people who
are
overtly hostile to authority. Unfortunately
this approach can result in the owning
family hiring a
team of "yes people" who conform quickly to rules and regulations but
do not demonstrate much creativity or individuality of thought. Another approach is suggested in the
recommendations section. 3.
Expert Power A person
or group who is seen as having information and skills that are critical
to
others is seen as an expert by the
people in need. They exert a great
deal
of influence over those to whom their knowledge is important. Presumably,
the current ownership of an organization will know a great deal about
many firm
and family specific content areas, including, but not limited to: • the
industry that the firm is in, including who's who and who does what, • how
organizational roles fit together in support of • the
types of raw materials used, • the
tactics and behavioral patterns of suppliers, • the
technologies that the company uses to transform the raw materials into
its
products and services, • the
firm's market places and the peculiarities of its particular customers, • how to
get along with and motivate the typical employee that works for the
firm, and • the
history of both the company and the family--both how they are distinct
and how
they are intertwined. Elaborating
for a moment on the last point, knowledge of the family's history and
status
can be an extremely important type of information.
Prospective successors frequently
underestimate how much they need family support to effectively take
over the
reins of power at their company. For
example, in several of the vignettes that began this article the
dissatisfaction of an owner's spouse with some aspect of the succession
process
was undermining the empowerment of heirs. More
on this topic will be presented in the section on
Tools for Power
Transfer. Each of
these specific content areas listed above contains a number of
subdivisions, and
having knowledge in any one of these topics is also a source of power. Transference
of Expert Power from one generation to the next is frequently not easy,
but in
the main it can be done. Doing so
depends on: 1) the capacity
and willingness of senior owners to teach
their successors everything they know, 2) the degree to
which present owners take
delight in transmitting their knowledge and wisdom about the operation
and the
family, 3) a successor's
desire to learn and his or her
willingness to be told that there is still more to understand, Good
teachers transmit their expert knowledge, and they enjoy doing so. They study
their own skills and insights, and
they spend time designing ways to communicate that knowledge and
information. They can and want tell to
tell their students how they collect and analyze information. They show students how to conduct an exercise
or lead a meeting or write up a plan. Very
often they are open to feedback and suggestion. Frequently,
they let their students guide them
toward the topics that should be discussed and they know how to use
student
questions to make the points they feel are important. These
are exactly the kinds of skills we think that family business owners
must
develop to transfer their power. Unfortunately,
many senior owners are unwilling to take the time and make the effort
to train
others in their areas of expert knowledge. They
stay involved in the operational details of their
organizations
long past the time where that is effective for either the firm or for
them
individually. They do so because they believe that operational activities
allow them to maintain their involvement in their enterprises. They do not see that there are more fruitful
executive roles for them when their
off-spring come to the firm, such as constantly shaping the attitude of
employees toward quality and customer service. Owners who are
intimately involved in
operational details late in their careers sometimes also hobble their
firms by
refusing to acknowledge that the fields where they have been expert
have
changed dramatically over time. This can
mean that the company keeps working with antiquated processes and
technologies. The successful
owner/teacher is one who is also interested in learning something that
is really
new and important from his or her successors. Tragically,
some owners apply energies should be turned toward empowering others
and
supporting the learning of others to a kind of close supervision that ultimately
burdens them with a multitude of responsibilities and worries which
make it
nearly impossible for them to retire or assume roles supporting the
development
of their successors. Owners should
and can have big organizational roles as long as they want to stay in
the
business, but they should try to work out of being shop floor
supervisors as
soon as possible after the first few years of their organization's life. Owners
who don't share their knowledge can't be good teachers.
When they are defensive, when they don't like
open communication, when they guard their information and insights from
their
successors as though they were treasures to be protected from thieves,
they are
likely to end up in power struggles that hurt the business and the
family. Another
group of worrisome owners are those who retire too early, including the
group
who continue to show up at work but don't or won't teach.
Their behavior leaves their heirs with no
choice but: a) to
learn everything on their own (and maybe learn it wrong),
b) to
fight it out with the current owners (and often any other heirs), or c) end
up assuming the role of owner in name only, with other
stakeholders--like
skilled workers--possessing real control over organizational power. The
other side of the expert power transfer equation is that those who
would
inherit an existing business under a succession plan have to assume the
responsibility for their own learning. They have to be
very aware of behaviors that make it
difficult for
others to teach them, such as resenting or discounting the real
expertise of
their parents and other relatives. When
owners and successors run into trouble understanding something, e.g.,
purchasing policies and its relationship to inventory control and
marketing
strategy, this problem should be recognized by both "teacher" and
"student" and problem solving strategies should be introduced. There
are significant benefits to having objective trained outsiders assess
the
quality of the owner/successor training
relationship. Outsiders who have
educational credentials can help construct the owner/successor training
relationship.
4.
Leadership Power When the
members of an organization and/or the members of a family feel that an
organization's leadership represents some attribute or philosophy that
they
admire and respect deeply, they give the leader power by identifying
with his
or her values and behavior. That
identification fosters trust in the leader The leader
strikes others in the organization
as inherently good or talented in some way that is worth emulating. He or she has "presence." At the
level of highly visible business figures, Lee Iacocca of Chrysler is
one of
many examples of an executive that many
people find attractive. His
out-going
behavior, his decisiveness, his ability to understand consumer tastes,
and his
capacity to express himself publicly are all part of a big package of
traits
that makes Iacocca not only a national celebrity but a down right
lovable kind
of a guy as far as a lot of people are concerned. H.
Ross Perot, the electronics entrepreneur, or
T. Boone Pickens, the takeover specialist,
are examples of another kind of executive people respect.
They are not known as particularly lovable,
but they sure are bold and articulate! Identification
with a leader is what people feel about someone who is charismatic
, and many,
many entrepreneurs who start family businesses radiate energies and
display
character traits that attract others to them.
Their vision and commitment gives them power. Owners
cannot transmit their charisma--their Leadership Power-- to their
successors
directly. But they can encourage their
successors to express their own passion. Helping
people find a vision that they are passionate
about, supporting them in expressing that
passion
and connecting it to traditions that have gone before is what a mentor
does. Authentic emotion is one of the
qualities that others recognize, and
honest expressiveness leads to trust. People
who found a business to realize some compelling and
highly
personal vision are almost driven to achieve their dreams.
People will follow a man or a woman with a
dream. And for
most entrepreneurs their dream is not simply one of material success,
although
that's usually part of the picture. Being
a "prime mover" who makes something happen in an
industry
or a community or brings a new product or service into existence are
characteristic of the visionary family business leaders who inspire
trust in
others. Many
leaders who are powerful in a particular industry also
captures some qualities that his or her
extended family and its community of
origin care about deeply in his or her behavior. The
family business leader who carries on the family tradition and by doing
so
gains the support and frequently the financial backing of the family. Support of the extended family may be
especially crucial to the survival of a family business
beyond the second generation. Aunts,
uncles and cousins who are not share
owners of an enterprise may still be significant stakeholders in its
development. Their positive feeling
about the business leader represents an aspect of the organization's
goodwill
that can't be quantified. This
dimension of the influential family business leader's activity is
frequently
overlooked in part because it can be hard to study one's own family. Current owners and their successors
frequently discount their family's value system at their own risk. Owners should keep scrapbooks about their
families for periodic discussion with successors. This
is one way to transmit the family's
legacy and the organizational power that
goes with it to successors. Here's
an example of a powerful family tradition from my own background. We have a scrapbook about
our activities going back over 100
years. One item is a clipping from a
newspaper dated 1917 in which my great-grandfather, a retailer, talks about how he has always been guided by
an "honesty policy" in dealing with customers and suppliers. I had never seen that article before a few
weeks ago, but I do know how much pride my family has always taken in the fact that even after
being in a variety of different businesses
for 100 years, we can't recall an
instance where a customer has accused us of stealing from them or
misrepresenting ourselves. Of course,
our view of the family's business history may
not be how all of our customers actually see us.
But it is absolutely clear to me how
important this self-perception has been to the esteem of my family for generations. Appearing
to violate this norm is to invite
criticism from every corner of the family.
Living up to my great grandfather's standard is a
pre-requisite to being
passed the torch of family leadership. When
my father died his obituary called him a "civic
leader." That is what a member of
my family is supposed to be. Every
family has its own legacy, its own source of pride.
Making the connection to the family tradition
is an important step in truly inheriting Leadership Power.
Tools
for the Transfer of Organizational
Power
The preceding sections have identified
what Organizational Power is, how owners can wield it and what some of
the
common obstacles are to transferring it to potential successors. In this section we turn to concrete
suggestions that owners and potential successor can use to facilitate
the
process of installing a new generation of leadership in an existing
business. Ideas are presented for each
of the four types of power discussed.
However, before turning to these
recommendations there are several
preconditions that have to be considered: • The
present owners should have at least the espoused intention of
transferring
their power, and they should have designated an individual or group
upon whom
they want to confer their authority and influence.
Prior to this designation, the owner should
have truly arrived at his or her own assessment of the potential heirs
capabilities in this particular company. • The
designated successors should have expressed some interest in having
organizational power in the family business. • Both
parties should have an explicit agreement to give and receive feedback
to each
other in a process where both expect to gain new insights into the
workings of
the business and the family.
If any of these three pre-conditions are
not fulfilled, the owner/potential successor team should meet with
someone who
can raise up the issue of succession
planning in a serious fashion and give them objective feedback on their
communication process. As an example of
what this process might look like, the
Furthermore, both before and during the
process of transferring power to successor, owners have a
responsibility to
assess how much organizational power they really have.
They can do this by studying current events
and looking over the history of their leadership. Return
to some of the indices of power
identified in the Introduction. How
responsive are personnel to the owner's priorities?
What is the level of turnover in the
company? How much conflict occurs before
plans are implemented? How successful is
the company financially? How long
has
the financial picture looked that way? How
is the company doing in relationship to other firms in
the industry? Frequently it
can be helpful for owners to
work with outsiders such as consultants or members of an advisory board
to gain
a more objective assessment of their organizational power.
The family business retreat where
family members with a direct and indirect stake in the business are
convened is
another setting in which owners can get a sense of how much real
influence they
have on stakeholders of all sorts. If
the retreat is harmonious and supportive of the organization's
strategy, the
owner's "Power Profile" is probably positive. If
the retreat is acrimonious and the owners
have to virtually coerce and cajole people to attend and participate in
an open
fashion, the Profile may well be negative, i.e., the owners don't have
the kind
of influence in the family that facilitates the transfer of power in
the
business. Non-family members can also be
invited to the retreat to explain their view of matters and learn how
family
decisions will affect business functioning. Given that
the contemplation of succession is so frequently difficult for owners
because
it conjures up thoughts about the reality of the owner's mortality, outsiders--including
close friends or religious counselors as well as family business
consultants
experienced in such issues--can also be useful in discussing those most
powerful emotions: awareness of one's
own death. There is really no
euphemistic way to describe the anxiety we all feel about the fact that
we will
die, but it is also true that the succession planning process won't be nearly as fruitful as it can be if
the owner has already begun to talk with someone about his or her own
death or
incapacitation. In a sense, being willing
to have serious conversations on this subject is one of a family
business
executive's most important acts. Making
the very big assumptions
that family business owners
have begun to take these steps, we can now turn to what it would take
to pass
on the various kinds of power family business owners possess. To
transfer Power over Rewards and Punishments, candidates for
succession
should first observe current owners as
much as possible and build up a catalog of the types of rewards
and
punishments that are currently being used. This
means literally keeping a written log of
situations and
discussing them with the leader/parent. If
situations are noted where the current owner talks
about wanting to
influence someone to change their behavior but seems unwilling or
unable to
act, the successor/student should ask why, not to point out some
shortcoming of
the parent but rather to gain insight into the power issues that the
owner
confronts. Successors
should be particularly mindful of the current owner's "Criticism and
Punishment/Recognition
and Reward Ratio". Positive feedback
has fewer complications than negative feedback and punishment, except
in those
situations where the positive feedback is used as a device to avoid
real
problems. Punishment and criticism are
correlated with turnover and other conflicts with the labor force. Punishment may seem necessary to the
successor, but if the Ratio of Punishing Behavior to Rewarding Behavior
observed is high (i.e., over 1:1) then the successor might be able to
affect a
change in style that will enhance his or her power in the work place
over that
of the current owners. As much
as possible, the owner and the designated successor(s) should
engage in a
systematic analysis of stakeholder needs as
part of a plan to reward certain sorts of
attitudes and behavior and de-motivate others. This
analysis should be done periodically with formal or
informal
interviews or surveys, depending on the size of the business. For example, third
generation family business with over 100 employees
should survey
the firm's personnel yearly and hold a meeting of all family members
with a
stake in the business at least every eighteen months.
This sort of preparation will be very
beneficial to both the business and the family at the actual point of
succession because both employees and family members will have a clear
picture
of what rewarding and punishing actions the owners are likely to take
in
response to various situations. As
indicated in the discussion above, to
transfer Expert Power, current owners should do as much as they
can
to become good teachers and successors should treat their status as
students
very seriously. Each owner/successor
team should keep track of situations where the owner has demonstrated
some
competency of importance to the firm's survival and success. The domains to notice include, but are not
limited to: • Financial
management and planning • Motivating
personnel • Customer
Relations • Quality
Control • Production
Process Control • General
Networking (including community relations) • Marketing,
Selling Strategies and Public Relations, • Industry
Awareness and • Family
Management These
topics should be discussed in three hour training session to be held
weekly or
monthly beginning on the current owner's 55th birthday or the potential
successor(s)' 30th birthday, which ever comes first. These dates are
selected because of their
importance in the typical path of the adult life cycle.
Regardless of the exact age when the training
begins, The better the health of the current owner, the more
effective he or
she will be at transmitting knowledge of the business. The
owner should also give as much support and feedback as possible to the
successor's initiatives,
especially if their business consequences are thought
through and developed into formal proposals.
The successor will never get to display his or her mastery
of a
particular business content area if the
chance to try things out is not provided within the family firm. The more times an idea is rejected as not yet
ripe by the current owner, the more impatient the potential successor
will
become with the pace of the power transfer process.
The current owners should be particularly
sensitive to any instance where they are reluctant to undertake an
innovation
that the successor can demonstrate to be the existing or emerging
industry standard,
i.e., the way that successful competitors are doing things or the way
that
thoughtful business theorists say things should be done.
Formal
strategic planning activities
can also be very helpful in the
transmission of expert power because they focus everyone's attention on
where
the business needs to go and how to get there. This
process can make the training needs of the company
much
clearer. For example, introducing a new
product in a new market place frequently requires a thorough awareness
of cost
controls because it is so frequently the case that unexpected expenses
are
incurred with innovations. Who has a
handle on how to do that? If the
successor needs training in statistical process control, for example,
to help
the company get to where it needs to go then the current owner should by all means support that educational
process, even if the new learnings give the successor a competency the
owner
does not have. As
indicated above, relatively little can be done at the level of the
individual
firm to affect those social trends which affect the Power of Social
Roles. However,
the owners can take steps to reinforce whatever predisposition’s
employees and
family members have toward respecting the authority of roles. There is the strategy of not hiring people
who have a record of clashing with anyone in authority.
That record shows up not only in employment
data, but also--and more importantly--in the give and take of
interactions. If an
employee or a family member has many negative emotional responses to an
owner,
there is a possibility that person is
"counter-dependent," i.e., that
the person in question depends upon the
authority figure a
great deal but the dependency is expressed is through a sort of
automatic and
rigid hostility. This is not the
sort
of person that it is going to be easy to transfer power to. On the one hand, the counter-dependent person
doesn't really want the authority figure to go away.
On the other hand, the counter-dependent
person will deny that the authority figure has any right to the power
he or she
possesses. Unfortunately,
it can be risky to decide to transfer power only to someone or group
who
appears to conform easily to authority, because highly creative people
tend to
have a hard time accepting authority figures. It's
all too easy to decide that someone is
counter-dependent or has
some other problem, and miss the fact that the potential successor has
just the
kind of insight and drive the business needs to move ahead. Friends,
spouses and outsiders with experience distinguishing between hostility
and
independence of thought can help owners and successors sort out issues
related
to the acceptance of authority. Beyond
the approach of limiting selection, owners can also influence the
attitude
of potential successor and employees
toward them as authority figures by demonstrating their own flexibility
and
openness to input. By encouraging
participation in decision making processes of all sorts, current owners
can
establish a climate in the work place and the family where authority
figures
are seen as supportive rather than punitive. A
tradition of participation and openness will imbue an
authority role
with more power in this egalitarian phase of our national history and,
therefore, result in more real power being transferred during a particular firm's
succession process. Transfer
of Leadership Power can be achieved
in at least two ways. One is
another use of the training sessions
described in the discussion of Expert Power in this section. Instead of focusing on the content of
the
job, however, the teacher/student (owner/successor) relationship would
address stylistic issues, i.e., how the owner behaves
when employees and other family members
respond to him favorably. Of
course, there is no hard and fast division between any one type of
power and
any other, but it is clear that some owners handle situations in an
effective,
authoritative fashion that inspire trust and respect while other owners
miss
the same sort of opportunities. Some
owners remember important dates in the lives of their employees and
customers,
for example. Some owners consciously
develop good listening skills. Some hone
their presentation abilities. Others make people laugh and
tell
wonderful humorous stories that make a point about the way to do
business or
the appropriate way to conduct one's self. Any
and all of these behavioral
characteristics should be noted and
discussed by both
the successor and the current owner as they think about what's needed
to
transfer the Power of Leadership. Engaging
key employees and family stakeholders in a process to articulate a shared vision for the business becomes is a second
strategy to assist in the true transfer of Leadership Power. An organization's shared
vision is a statement
of both its mission (i.e., the
business that the organization is
in) and its operating values (i.e.,
the kinds of values and behaviors that
people in the business are expected to display as they pursue their
organization's objectives). Shared
vision
activities should integrate well with an organization's strategic
planning
process. To the extent possible, a shared vision should integrate the ideas
and perspectives of all power holders. The
power of a shared vision is threefold: • It is
an internal compass that
everyone in the organization can use
to assess their attitudes and behavior, • A
shared vision carries a message for
everybody because
it deals with values (A clerical
employee may not understand the nuances of inventory policy, but he or
she
certainly can comprehend the idea that an organization does everything
it can
to satisfy the needs of its customers, for example.), • A
compelling vision acts as a magnet
attracting personnel and family members
alike who want to work for an organization that does great things. The When the
ownership organizes a shared vision program, it creates an opportunity
to
communicate its passions--including important family traditions hopes
and
values--for the enterprise and its basic values to potential successors. While knowledge and discussion of these
forces do not guarantee the passage of Leadership Power from one
generation to
the next, they will certainly help successors augment their own
leadership
power with the insights of their forbears if they want to do so. Recapping our suggestions: These ideas are
by no means a complete
listing of the mechanisms by which power can be transferred between
generations, but the family business that takes the approaches
suggested here
seriously will go a long way toward empowering successors and present
owners. Successors will know what to
do, they will have had a chance to express their own opinions and
demonstrate
their skills and they will have the endorsement of organizational
stakeholders. Owners will have left a
legacy of accomplishment and insight that their successors will draw on
for
many years ahead. Furthermore,
because actors in a family business system are often members of more
than one
subcomponent of the system, they may experience internal conflict about
changes in the ownership and leadership of the firm since a change in
one
direction may be positive from one perspective but negative from
another. For example, an increase in the
power of a
twenty-eight year old child may be viewed positively by a mother from
the
standpoint of the family system, but negatively by the same woman
reflecting on
her concerns about the young man's ability to guarantee her dividend
payments. * Readers
might want to review a companion piece
written earlier entitled
"Succession Planning in the Family Businesses," which appeared in Small Business Reports in February,
1990. The present article differs from
that
one in that the focus here is on the transfer of power during
the
succession transition. The other study
was primarily interested in actions that could be taken throughout the
life
cycle of the firm and the family to make the succession transition more
predictable and less painful. [1]Ivan Lansberg et al.,
"The Succession Conspiracy," Family
Business Journal [2]This discussion is derived
from J.R.P French and B. Raven's "The Bases of Social Power," in J.H.
Turner et al. (eds.) Studies in
Managerial Process and Organizational Behavior, |