A recent Mavence poll asked Corporate Affairs directors and senior leaders a simple question: “Does your company have a succession plan in place for your role?”

The corporate world is a very diverse place, and roles and remits can vary widely across regions, to say nothing of particular sectors. The results, however, paint a decidedly more monolithic picture: 81% – a full four out of five leaders – have no succession plan whatsoever. Only 13% have even a basic list of potential successors, while a mere 7% maintain a “warm” pipeline of candidates that could step into the role. The implications for this overwhelming trend in overlooking future planning are stark.

The first question that arises from this finding is, “how did we get here?”, and a driver of this disconnect is a fundamental one when it comes to succession planning. When operations are stable and leadership is performing well, it can be framed as a question of justifying investment, and preferred outcomes: why devote time and resources to planning for a departure that isn’t imminent, and which – given the positive state of affairs – the company would rather hope to be far off? The urgency simply isn’t there, nor is the willingness to rock the boat when it is sailing smoothly.

This shortsightedness is not unique to any one function, but the extent to which it dominates the narrative in Corporate Affairs settings is striking. When 81% of Corporate Affairs leaders have no identified successors, we need to ask whether this is a symptom of something deeper, which brings us to an even more provocative question: does this unwillingness to look ahead imply a certain lack of esteem when it comes to how companies assess the value the function brings, or the presumption that it does not particularly need careful consideration ahead of time? Typically, functions deemed genuinely strategic have robust talent pipelines. They’re treated as mission-critical capabilities that cannot afford disruption.

The absence of succession planning for Corporate Affairs suggests that despite the rhetoric about stakeholder capitalism, ESG, and reputation management, many organisations still view this function as somehow less essential than their commercial or operational counterparts. This stands in contrast to the rigorous demands that boards ascribe to succession plan in unambiguously vital functions, like Chief Financial or Operations Officers.

There’s another dimension to this problem: HR’s capacity to support succession planning for Corporate Affairs is often limited by a fundamental knowledge gap. How can HR business partners effectively identify, assess, and develop successors for a function they frequently don’t understand?

Corporate Affairs requires a unique blend of political acumen, crisis management capability, stakeholder navigation, and strategic communications expertise. These competencies don’t map neatly onto standard HR frameworks, amplifying risks that succession planning falls through the cracks, is deferred indefinitely, or becomes poorly managed. Under these conditions, the default response to a departure in leadership becomes “emergency mode”, with significant (and often underestimated) costs:

  • Limited market access. Emergency searches force you into the active candidate market – those currently looking for approaches. You miss the broader landscape of high-performing leaders who aren’t actively seeking new roles but might be ideal successors with proper cultivation.

  • Restricted candidate targeting. Without advance planning, many hiring managers are limited to a reactive posture, reviewing applicants rather than proactively identifying and pursuing specific candidates whose experience and capabilities align with strategic needs.

  • Market timing disadvantage. In a reactive position limited to the current active market, a company in need is wading into a “seller’s market” up against other companies in similarly dire straits, further putting a premium on the best candidates who will be able to command multiple offers and negotiate accordingly.

Strategic succession planning and executive search operate in a different market entirely—one focused on candidates who aren’t applying anywhere, who require careful identification and cultivation over time. This approach delivers demonstrably superior outcomes, but only when there’s adequate lead time.

The organisations that get succession planning right treat it as strategic risk management rather than administrative HR process. They recognise that leadership transitions, be they planned or unexpected, represent moments of significant vulnerability and opportunity. They also recognize that making the investments in both time and energy to proactively identify and cultivate potential options before they are needed help build resilience and get the inside track help deliver demonstrably better outcomes in the long run. This is the kind of foresight and sustained network engagement that Mavence delivers, working to the same strict standard that the most effective boards demand of all their critical functions – not just the traditionally high-profile ones.

If you’re a Corporate Affairs leader or sit on a board overseeing this function, and the 81% statistic resonates uncomfortably, our Mavens can help open a conversation that can put you on the right path for the future. Succession planning requires acknowledging that leadership continuity is a strategic capability, and as sparring partners to strategic leaders across diverse organisations, we know how to help sharpen the case for rigorous preparation. Because the question isn’t whether transitions will happen – it’s whether you’ll be ready when they do.