Lusia Kornelius and Zucky Bauleth-Nashima
Succession planning within Public Entities (PEs) has been overlooked, and failure to implement it can lead to operational inefficiency, derailed strategy implementation and financial losses. When key officials retire or leave unexpectedly, institutions are compelled to conduct external searches for replacements matching the qualifications and years of expertise. While replacement is inevitable, the process is usually lengthy, as it requires an extensive hiring process, which can contribute to operational stagnation and sometimes a management vacuum. These recruitment processes can incur financial implications, which could otherwise be utilised to fund key company projects and improve service delivery.
Beyond recruitment, PEs tend to suffer loss of institutional knowledge when senior officials who possess extensive knowledge leave without passing on the skills to their successors. There has been an increasingly pervasive “culture of acting” in PEs, where officials are appointed temporarily without clear pathways to permanent management positions.Such substitutions can have an impact not only on the entity’s productivity but also on the employee, who may not have confidence in carrying out the responsibility. It can also cause uncertainty and impede strategic talent development while affecting the work atmosphere and contributing to employee conflict, misunderstandings and discrimination within the company or division. With succession planning, replacement can be done in an undoubtable and transparent manner.
It is also imperative that PE’s major strategic objectives be endorsed at the ministerial level, rather than solely relying on boards of directors/commissioners/councillors. The ministerial regular monitoring and evaluation over PEs can ensure projects’ alignment with the mandates, national development goals and priority areas at a given time. It also ensures effective continuity during the change management process. The nation has seen projects discontinued, programmes abandoned, and strategies shifted when the entrusted party intentionally or unintentionally vacates the office.This often leads to waste of resources and service delay and may also hinder the overall national economic development.
While budgetary and resource limitations are mostly stated as barriers to implementing succession planning, investing in internal talent development and formalising succession frameworks can lead to cost savings in the future. A 2021 report by the Namibian Institute for Public Policy Research recommended that strategic allocations toward leadership development should be prioritised to avoid higher costs due to turnover, recruitment, and training. Implementing succession planning, on the other hand, can boost employee transition and growth, increasing staff morale and employee retention.
Furthermore, institutions that lack succession planning often experience stagnation, client turnover and competitiveness in their line of industry, enabling the private sector to gain a more competitive advantage. On the other hand, potential investors and development partners who often provide funding to the PE are sensitive to poor corporate governance and leadership of their funded institutions. Hence, the leadership crisis may affect their trust and contributions and sometimes lead to withdrawal. From the management perspective, the irrecoverable financial loss because of change management creates various uncertainties, including financial bailouts, and where the government cannot assist, cessation of PE operation, like the case of Roads Contractor Company and Air Namibia. These bailouts often coincide with leadership crises and job losses at the same institution.
In efforts to ensure effective and efficient business continuity, we recommend that the following form part of the strategic initiative to ensure succession planning implementation in PEs.
- Prioritise talent development within the internal structure: There should be intentional programmes aimed at investing in mentorship, training, and leadership development to build a resilient internal structure and reduce dependence on external recruitment. This not only ensures efficient and effective operation but also promotes professional growth, thus reducing employee turnover. Employees are positively motivated by the career advancement within the institution.
- Endorsement of succession planning objectives at cabinet level. Strategic objectives related to leadership continuity and talent development should be explicitly endorsed by ministers, ensuring accountability and commitment. This approach aligns with recent government directives emphasising ministerial responsibility for performance.
- Succession planning as a mandatory Key Performance Indicator (KPI): Incorporate succession planning metrics into performance evaluations for senior managers and ministers. Recognising it as a core KPI encourages proactive talent development.
- Develop context-specific frameworks and policies: Scholarly recommendations can be incorporated in PEs for better succession planning. For instance, the incredible Muadinohamba Succession Development Progression Framework is one worth emulating. Dr Muadinohamba’s doctoral research encompasses a framework tailored to Namibia’s cultural and organisational context. Several other studies have also deliberated succession planning.
- Capitalise on impactful research findings: Another dimension is to put the researcher’s findings into practice. The research committees in public institutions should act beyond approving research proposals to implement findings and recommendations. A call for academic and institutional leaders to be evaluated against impactful findings that have been undertaken during their tenure. That way, there will be no tangible solutions collecting dust in academic or institutional repositories. It also encourages researchers to align their research objectives with national development goals.
- Increase transparency and accountability: There should be public disclosure of leadership succession plans, performance agreements, and governance reports, promoting trust and ensuring responsible stewardship of state resources. Strict timelines can ensure timely reporting and early detection of noncompliance and underperformance.
Succession planning is not only a human resources concern but also a strategic leadership responsibility, and neglecting it can lead to financial implications, poor service delivery and a toxic work environment. As Namibia ventures into a political change and renewed focus on governance issues, policymakers must prioritise strategic succession frameworks that cut across PEs. This way, Namibia can achieve a smooth leadership transition, safeguard its public institutions, promote sustainable growth and ensure efficient use of resources for timely national development.
*Lusia Kornelius holds an Honours Degree in BBA and Logistics and Supply Chain Management. She is an MBA Management Strategy candidate and an aspiring procurement expert.
Zucky Bauleth-Nashima is a technical procurement officer in the health sector. She holds an MBA in Management Strategy and has a keen interest in public health governance.
