The Organizational Dynasty

This article serves as a brief introduction to a construct developed by the author – The Organizational Dynasty. The phrase was first proposed in 2020, following a decade of doctoral research and executive-related consulting within the field of sustainability and succession planning. The article is intended to stimulate a thought leadership response within its audience, paving the way for an anticipated popular press publication under the same title.  As the author, the musical experience in my heart, while writing this article is the main Title of Chariots of Fire by Vangelis.

When Past Meets Future in the Present

Growing up in the 80’s, I was mesmerized by all the action movies. For reasons unknown, the ones revolving around the master-student relationship were especially attractive to me. Figures such as Mr. Miyagi and Daniel-san from The Karate Kid or Chuck Norris and Barry Gabrewski from Sidekicks, all seem to have that enduring quality of something that must be passed from one generation to the next. Arguably, none captured this sentiment better than the conversation between Frank Dux and his Shidoshi – Senzo Tanaka in the fictional story of Bloodsport.

Dux: What will happen now?

Tanaka: No more training. I stop now.

Dux: But you have so much to teach.

Tanaka: You don’t understand. In the war, I lost my first family… my son, daughter, and wife. They lived in Hiroshima. I left Japan because of the war. War was wrong. I came here to start over… begin a new family, have a son… another chance to pass on the teaching. For 2,000 years… knowledge passed from father to son… father to son. When Shingo died… it stopped.

Dux: Teach me.  I can do it.

Tanaka: You are not Japanese! You are not a Tanaka!

Dux: You taught me using any technique that works… never to limit myself to one style… to keep an open mind!

Tanaka: Why?

Dux: To honor you, Shidoshi.

I believe one of the core motives behind this conversation is captured in DePriest’s sentiment,

“Everyone of us longs to have someone believe in us. We passionately long for someone willing to invest their life into ours. The problem is that we live in a culture that is possessed and controlled by its own self-created schedules. Most of us are just trying to figure out how to live our own lives much less having the time to become an influence in someone else’s life.”

The fact is, Hollywood might have capitalized on this intergenerational phenomenon but it is a construct as old as human history itself. At the foundation of every royal bloodline lies the desire for immortality. This is what came to be known as a dynasty, the quest to ensure that the royal house will pass from one generation to the next. No king ever dreams about the day when his linage will be wiped of the face of the earth. History testifies to the lengths, measures, and even brutality that some have gone to ensure this sustainability.

Similarly, I have never met a leader who actively plans towards the failure and liquidation of their organization. Quite the opposite! Most leaders would do practically anything to keep the company afloat. Yet history again testifies to the fact that very few achieve this in the long run. For instance, it is documented that less than 3% of family-owned businesses transition to the 4th generation. If these numbers are an accurate reflection of reality, then we are in for a wild ride. The reason for this statement is that groups like Forbes indicated that the largest wealth transfer in history is about to take place.  Cerulli Associates indicated that, in the USA alone, this handover may be as high as $68 trillion over the next 25 years! Though great amounts will flow into foundations, a significant portion will still go to the next generation. This beckons the question, who has prepared the succeeding generation to be stewards of such great wealth?

Why a dynasty and what does it have to do with organizational leadership? Was it merely power-obsessed royals who struggled to imagine any other form of rule that might jeopardize their claim to power? Perhaps. However, I will argue that there are many empowering lessons to be learned from the positive accounts that were documented. The reality is that there exists an extraordinary bond between the past and the future. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that I have a predominant Western worldview, yet lived in Africa most of my life. This worldview mix has allowed me some unique insights into both perspectives, especially relating to the issue of time. From a classic Western paradigm, living only towards the future guarantees that we will repeat the same mistakes over and over, as we do not sufficiently learn from the past. Contrary to this view, the African reality is one where the past is often overemphasized, frequently causing a continuation of pain and suffering. Effective dynasties understood how to build the bridge between the two, making room to live life to its fullest in every present moment.

Exploring the Construct of Dynasty

The word dynasty comes from the Latin dynastia, which finds its roots in ancient Greek. The word denotes ideas such as ‘power,’ ‘rule,’ and ‘authority.’ Throughout history, many dynasties used this power to bring peace and prosperity to their people. Unfortunately, this was not always the case as several rulers used it only for self-gain, at the cost of everyone else. Consider for instance the biblical account of the Davidic dynasty. It is fascinating how each king of Israel is remembered; either as a ruler who sought the will of God, resulting in blessings for the entire nation, or evil at heart, which lead to God punishing the whole nation. Consequently, further exploration of the word dynastia can also be translated as ‘to enable’ or ‘to empower.’ This is the premise from which I have been working during the past two decades.

Recalling some of the common dynastic examples – The Imperial House of Japan or Yamato dynasty was founded in 781 AD and still exists today; there is the House of Romanov, who ruled in Russia; the Khan dynasty, who united Mongolia and later conquered most of China; the House of Bourbon, who reigned over France; or the House of Tudor in England; even in the ancient world where it is believed that Israel’s House of David will endure forever. At present, Wikipedia states that “there are 44 sovereign states with a monarch as head of state, of which 42 are ruled by dynasties. There are currently 26 sovereign dynasties.”

What are some of the practical implications that such an ancient concept holds for the modern-day organizational leader? Let’s start by considering the evolution of industrial theory, now making way for the 4th Industrial Revolution. As a metaphor, the traditional notion of an organization is more often associated with a cold, clinical, well-oiled machine. People are seen as parts of the machine.  A resource to be used and is often abused. As long as they produce, all is well. However, the moment the performance is slacked, they are taken out, cleaned off through some disciplinary process, and put back in. Ultimately, everybody becomes obsolete and are replaced.

During the past two to three decades, there has been a subtle but consistent shift in this view. The organization began to take on an increasing degree of biological and organic terminology, leading to what I now like to call a warm, breathing organism. Aspects like culture, health, resilience, agile, purpose, and spirituality are now common organizational descriptions that we hear all the time. People are no longer seen as mere resources but form part of the very capital wealth of the organization. This shift in understanding demands a refreshed look at our models and terminology. At present, we find a mixture of the classic management sciences and the human-related fields, such as sociology, anthropology, psychology, and even theology, within the organizational architecture.

It was at this point of my work and research into organizational sustainability that something quite remarkable presented itself. I discovered that the number of publications focusing on the succession planning component was truly limited. Most of what I found was simply a process of skills replacement, a mechanical approach similar to replacing an engine part in my car. For some unknown reason, when this replacement process deals with general employees, we call it a promotion (this is by far the most common way of also considering recruitment). However, the moment the focus shifts to an executive level, it is called succession. Is promotion the same process as succession, only at different levels of seniority? For me, the answer is a definitive NO!

Knowledge – The Theoretical Foundation

During the years of my Ph.D. research, I began to systematically work through every publication I could find on the topic of organizational succession planning. The limited results that the review presented, compared to what I found, for instance in the domain of royal succession, was astounding. Allow me to explain. Firstly, as previously explained, succession is not a process of reappointment but ensuring the survival of a specific bloodline. Secondly, succession is a human construct and not a mechanical process. Thirdly, effective succession takes a considerable long time. As a human capital consultant, I cannot sufficiently guide this process at my clients in less than 36 intentional months. Fourthly, succession takes on a whole new dimension when it becomes intergenerational, requiring at least a 20-year age gap as presented by the Strauss-Howe generational theory. Lastly, there is a major difference between leadership diversification and succession. This is a trap that many growing organizations often fall into. Populating the width of the leadership bench is quite different from ensuring its sustainability.

Though several organizational culture challenges exist as an outflow of succession, I will briefly highlight one of them. This is the legacy of a highly entrepreneurial first-generation leader. Frequently, while grooming the successor as a second-in-charge, they become sustainability-orientated and not entrepreneurial. The problem behind this phenomenon is that for the second generation to remain entrepreneurial, they will need the space to do so. If they merely fall in behind the first generation, they will only sustain and optimize what has already been established. This is more often also the reason why the second generation got appointed in the first place. As for the rest of the true entrepreneurs, they most probably already left to start their own thing. Consequently, it requires a very intentional and specialized approach to ensure that this founding mindset is transferred to the next generation.

As the purpose of this article is not to, once again, pin the theoretical basis for this construct, I will encourage you to consider my preceding article – Building Sustainable Leadership Through a Culture of Reproduction. This article was originally self-published on my LinkedIn profile and is a concise exposition of my doctoral dissertation on the subject matter. Therefore, I will only summarize a few critical aspects.

My point of departure was that there are some insightful succession frameworks for consideration, yet most seemed to be either inadequate or overly complicated. The need to explore an existing model that already stood the test of time and was open to vigorous empirical scrutiny became imperative. The result of this research process now culminates in what I have called The Organizational Dynasty framework. It is a process that ensures the survival, success, significance and sustainability of a living organization through intergenerational leadership. On a side note, this approach should not be confused with any form of nepotism, though the framework is perfectly suited for any family-owned business.

The research basis is the 3,500-year history of the Jewish people, fixated on a period directly after the destruction of Jerusalem (approximately AD 70). Somehow, even though the Jews lost their national and spiritual anchor point of Jerusalem, they still managed to keep their sense of identity and culture intact for 2,000 years. Not only has the Jewish people survived this diaspora, but as a culture, they are still thriving across the globe.

The Organizational Dynasty Framework

Building on the Jewish mindset, The Organizational Dynasty Framework (ODF) explores six elements, divided into two levels of function. The first level is the environment that must be intentionally crafted for internal leadership reproduction to take place. The reality is that more often we only see 30% reproduction taking place, while 70% ‘new blood’ is brought in from the outside. The ODF seeks to turn this figure around with 70% of our own ‘sons and daughters’ being raised internally and 30% fresh DNA being brought in from the outside to counter a kind of inbreeding that may lead to challenges, such as group thinking.

The three context reference points that must be established on the first level are as follow. Firstly, is the organization’s spirituality that clearly articulates constructs such as purpose, identity and mission. Secondly, an organizational culture that is conducive for reproduction throughout the entire company. Thirdly, a relational framework that acknowledges and honors all stakeholders, both internal and external.

Once this environment has been established, seeds can be sown towards intergenerational succession. The second level also entails a three-fold approach. Firstly, to ensure that the narrative, or as some refer to it as the institutional history, is transferred to the next generation in such a way that they personally own and continue with it. Secondly, that the lifestyle of the predecessors is openly and transparently modeled to the successors. This will include the required skills and knowledge blocks for the relevant roles to be assumed. Finally, an alignment with the internal belief system of the organizations.

Wisdom – A Thought-Provoking Case Study

In 2016, I was approached by the CEO of a large global consulting engineering group, which specialized in infrastructure development. The request was simple “please assist me to design an effective internal succession process for my company.” At that point in time, we knew that it could not take on the form of a succession pipeline and must be founded on a platform that provided the opportunities for people to grow and develop within the identity of the company. Therefore, we began to work on the first platform appropriately called the Future Business Leaders. The platform was populated by a selection of middle-aged professionals, all demonstrating the potential to transition from classic engineering work to becoming the next generation of executive leaders.

Simultaneously, we realized that there was also a need for a Future Technological Leader platform. We explored forward and backward integration by establishing a University of Life platform for young professionals and a Succession and Mentoring platform for the individuals who were on their way to retirement. Next was an Executive platform for the existing executives, a proposed Project Leader platform for the project managers, and a Bursary Student platform for the varsity-bound students.

The beauty of the process was that each platform shared the same six key building blocks; however, presentation and facilitation was done from different perspectives. The following metaphor applied: a water slide, where the water that flows from top to bottom, represented the six elements. Now picture several large pools inside this water slide. Each pool represents a platform. The people in each pool may be sitting on large inflatable tubes and find job fulfillment to remain in any one of these pools. Yet some might want to take on the challenges of riding the rapid to the next pool. The fact that you are in a specific pool does not lead to the conclusion that you must continue to the next pool. This is a matter of personal calling and mastery. Each pool has a lifeguard who took responsibility for the pool. The lifeguards in turn were all members of the Succession and Mentoring pool; the grand splash at the bottom of the ride.

The process presented several advantages. Firstly, the fact that belonging to a pool did not create the expectation that you need to move to the next pool, in other words, must be promoted. Secondly, it created an amazing sense of belonging within the organization due to the high degree of inter-functional relationships that were being fostered. Thirdly, traditional aspects, such as skill and knowledge transfer, almost happened automatically as a result of the process. Finally, the predictive nature of the process ensured that you could also handpick the best candidate for succession and not have to put them through some sort of a probation period once they were promoted.

Understanding – A Global Investment Strategy

The limitation with most monarchial dynasties was that a king only had a few sons if he was blessed to have any. The entire system was dependent on blood offspring. Fortunately, the ODF is not limited by this challenge as it can accommodate an extensive range of candidates.  Through the establishment of diverse potential (or talent) pools, specific to a company’s context, stability can be ensured and continuous human capital growth provided.

However, in light of the rapid changing organizational landscape, many leaders feel ill-equipped to handle all these complexities. Traditional notions of business were almost guaranteed to take place within a homogenous ethnic-cultural environment. Few companies can still make such a claim. Therefore, one of the more efficient ways to deal with the increase in diversity is through the support of artificial intelligent systems. Most leaders are no longer in a position where they can only trust their gut feeling when it comes to their future successors. Consequently, balancing the gut feeling with smart systems is not only wise but allows for ample opportunity to explore previously uncharted territories of human capital investment. Breakthrough technologies such as the Shadowmatch behavioral system and the NXTmove structural integrity analysis are but some examples of what is available on the market.

Additional contextual understanding we discovered from case studies includes the fact that no single organizational environment ever looks the same. The framework needs to be shaped and tailored to fit each context. Secondly, a culture of succession can only be established through the leader – the CEO/MD of a company. It certainly requires the buy-in of the rest of the leaders but if you have an absent father/mother in the house, it will cause a lot of strain on the children. Thirdly, as was the reality within the referenced case study, the executive leaders continuously played a pivotal role throughout the entire process. For example, the CEO of the company hosted the Future Business Leaders on several occasions, investing in and stretching their business acumen. Finally, poaching the crown prince of the neighboring kingdom will seldom prove sufficient when they take over your company’s throne.

Concluding Thoughts

Here is the real beauty of the story, I am also the product of an organizational dynasty. Though it is a young one, I have been privileged to be part of it for my entire professional career. My peers and I represent the first generation of intergenerational successors. When the time is right, we will be ready and able to take over from our founding members. Yes, the organizational family often frustrate the life out of me; and yes, I often do not agree with their choices and actions. However, they remain my tribe. Since our establishment in 1996, we have grown to become a multi-national organization with offices in six nations and activities spanning over 20 countries. We have over 50 entities in the group, spanning various spheres of society, ranging from non- to full-profit ventures. Yet at our core, we all share the same purpose and mission that makes us the unique family who we are.

The business I currently have the privilege to lead – CCI Professional, is but one of these expressions. Though we have the opportunity to capture and structure many of these thoughts and ideas on sustainability and succession planning, they did not all originate from our research. They are the ongoing result of this life-giving environment; a family I am proud to call my own! Long may this organization endure, for when I sleep at night, I can rest assured that my own succession bench is already well in place.

Returning to my initial questions of why a dynasty? The simple answer is that it deals with the preservation of a ruling bloodline. Consequently, our response as to why an organizational dynasty is very similar. It’s more than just building a successful company; rather ensuring that each generation remains committed to the purpose of why the organization exists and aligned to the mission it set out to accomplish.

Post Script

As noted in the introduction, the article is a concise introduction, an abstract if you will, of an anticipated popular press publication by the same author. The framework of the Organizational Dynasty is an evolving process that is continuously being challenged by a team of leaders and consultants. The outcome is to ensure the highest quality of empirical standards behind the theoretical knowledge base, the wisest pragmatic approach to implementation, and a context-sensitive understanding of global diverse environments.  For more information, please contact the author, Dr. Marcel Hattingh, at marcel.hattingh@cci.ac.za / +27 (0)83 608 7139, or any of CCI Professional’s consultant team members.

Additional resources references include:

• Bartz, J. P. (2009). Leadership from the inside out. Anglican Theological Review, 91(1), 81-92.
• Heskett, J. L., & Schlesinger, L. A. (1996). Leaders who shape and keep performance-orientated culture. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Noe, R. A. (2010). Employee training and development (5th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
• Strauss, W. & Howe, N. (2009). The fourth turning: What the cycles of history tell us about America’s next rendezvous with destiny. New York: NY, Broadway Books.
• Van Alstyne, M. W., Parker, G. G., & Choudary, S. P. (2016). Pipelines, platforms, and the new rules of strategy. Harvard Business Review, April, 54-60.

Read the article here