Baby boomers are retiring in record numbers. While many are anticipating with excitement what this transfer means for younger generations, what we are seeing is last minute hand over of key leadership positions with young leaders thrust into roles they are ill-equipped for and organizations even less prepared to receive them. The results, a drastic undoing of the work of the retiring leader if not complete collapse of the organization. Not to mention casualties amongst those stakeholders who either depended heavily on the organization and/or have invested into making it a success. 

For those who like to skim, this article will address What’s going on, What this looks like, and 3 ways leaders can address follow any of the links here to skip ahead.

The best way to predict the future is to plan it

Alan Kay

After delaying retirement in the wake of the 2008 recession, boomers are now retiring in drastic numbers rising from 1 million retirees a year to 3.5 million in 2020 and 2021 alone¹ with those numbers rising as 4.1 million reach age 65 in 2024². They are expected to transfer $68 trillion in wealth, including half the farmland in America³, and 25% of pastorates⁴. However, the organizations they are leaving behind are ill-equipped to take over⁵ including less than half of retirement age farmers expecting to pass their farm to a family member³, and 71% of pastors “concerned about the quality of future Christian leaders⁴”

The biggest issue is simply that leaders have waited too long. This is especially true of organizations still being led by a remarkable founder. To add to the problem these founders are often great at what they do (i.e. achieving the core mission of their organization) and are not educated in organizational administration and governance nor just how devastating the impact of poor structured governance can be to their work and legacy (see also our article “Superman was a Fiction – The Pioneer’s Dilemma”). Leaders in these organizations are often highly revered, effective, and beloved and it is this admiration that often creates a massive blind spot that leadership does realize until it’s too late.   

The man stood on the platform in front of a packed house of the 200+ member organization. An organization he had sacrificially given himself to building for over 40 years. Now in his 70’s and under pressure from his leadership team, he was stepping down because he believed it was what was best for the organization. That was his way. He was known for his selflessness and his love of people. Despite his self-surrender, the feeling of his heart being wrenched out of his chest shown in his eyes as he handed over control of the organization to a recently selected internal board tasked with the dubious assignment of selecting a new leader.

The trap of selecting one’s own leader

See, over the years no clear successor had risen as a potential replacement for himself. So, while all, himself included, agreed that it was time for him to resign, there was no clear path for what would happen afterward. Consequently, what happen next all but killed the organization. The internal board had even less experience in organization governance than him with none having experience leading an organization of this size. Not to mention they got stuck in the conflict of interest that is trying to select one’s own leader.

With no external board or trusted independent advisors to reach to, they attempted to reach out leaders of local partner organizations. This only seemed to make things worse. With no real involvement with the organization prior, they knew nothing of the culture, inner workings, or individuals involved to give sound advice and their public critiques of the board’s concerns only exacerbated the problem. As the people got fatigued, a leader was finally selected while many of the board denied their own nagging hesitations.

Hesitations that should not have been ignored

The new leader was about as ready to step into the role as the organization was to receive him. Clashes, incompetence, and fear wreaked havoc dividing the members. As things got progressively worse, attempts to reach out and find more senior help outside the organization ended up creating more problems than they solved accelerating the organization’s demise.

As an organization whose business was changing lives, such mismanagement literally meant the difference between life and death. In the end, the organization went from 200 to less than 40 members before stabilizing. The worst part, no one wanted this to happen. This wasn’t maliciousness, as maliciousness could have been easily stopped. No, this was a series of well-intentioned individuals both inside and outside the organization ill-prepared and ill-equipped to act on the authority each had been given.

This is a core component to an organization’s long-term sustainability and one that the boomer generation has historically ignored to their peril⁵. However, this aspect can be easily overlooked in both younger organizations which leadership mostly consists of its founders…or incorrectly assume family members will be automatically taking over. Additionally, it can be a touchy subject for organizations with leaders with long tenures as not only do few want to ask, “Who replaces me if the bus hits me on my way to work tomorrow?”, but often in both cases, developing successors or backups can be particularly difficult as the leaders’ long tenures create a ceiling on their career advancement.

This is necessary to protect not only the organization through such transitions, but the leaders themselves. Major strategic shifts including changes in key leaders can be anxiety inducing for all involved. That is why it is imperative to have strong external oversite, trusted internal change champions, and clear, consistent, transparent, communication with stakeholders that not only understand how to operate in such a situation but are equipped the authority needed to do so. Over reliance on internal accountability alone, insufficient resources / training of key leaders especially in the area of corporate governance, and surprises/secrets that suddenly appear during uncertain times can be the death knell to even the most well-intentioned, planned transitions.

Leadership transitions can either breathe new life into an organization or spell its demise. Without proactive succession planning, structured governance, and a commitment to developing future leaders, even the most successful institutions risk unraveling. The lesson is clear: leadership change isn’t an event—it’s a process that must begin long before the need arises. Organizations that fail to recognize this reality may not survive the transition risking not only the future of their organization but seeing the legacy they built crumble before their eyes and jeopardize everything it was built to achieve.

References

¹ Richard Fry, “Amid the Pandemic, a Rising Share of Older U.S. Adults Are Now Retired,” Pew Research Center, November 4, 2021, https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2021/11/04/amid-the-pandemic-a-rising-share-of-older-u-s-adults-are-now-retired/.

² Anne Marie Lee, “America is Hitting ‘Peak 65’ in 2024 as Record Number of Boomers Reach Retirement Age. Here’s What to Know,” CBS News, January 29, 2024, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/retirement-medicare-401k-what-to-know-peak-65/.

³ AgAmerica, “Why U.S. Farmland Now?,” AgAmerica, July 5, 2024, https://agamerica.com/investing-in-agriculture/investor-insights/farmland-ownership-transition/.

⁴ David Roach, “1 in 4 Pastors Plan to Retire Before 2030,” Christianity Today, April 28, 2023, https://www.christianitytoday.com/2023/04/pastor-succession-church-next-generation-leader-barna-surve/.

⁵ Arlene S. Hirsch, “How to Counter the Baby Boomer Brain Drain,” Society for Human Resource Management, March 6, 2023, https://www.shrm.org/topics-tools/news/organizational-employee-development/how-to-counter-baby-boomer-brain-drain.