Sacrificial Succession explains how to prepare sacrificial successors, hand over leadership to them sooner rather than later then stay on post-succession to prepare the next generation of sacrificial successors.

1. Fall
0

2. 7KEYS
Seven
Keys to
Successful
Succession
By Paul Rattray
1|Page

3. 7KEYS
Seven Keys to Successful Succession
v. 1.0
By Paul Rattray
Published by Sacrificial Succession
26 Spring Myrtle Avenue
Nambour Queensland
Australia
http://www.sacrificialsuccession.com/
This work is made available under a Creative Commons Attribution-
ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0).
You are free to:
 Share — to copy, distribute and transmit the work
 Remix — to adapt the work
 Make commercial use of the work
Under the following conditions:
Attribution — You must attribute the work as follows: “Original
work available at:
Attribution statements in derivative works should not in any way
suggest endorsement of you or your use of this work.
ShareAlike — If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you
may distribute the resulting work only under the same or similar
license to this one.
2|Page

4. 7KEYS
Contents
Contents ................................................................................................... 3
Preface .................................................................................................. 5
Introduction ......................................................................................... 8
Successional Leadership ............................................................... 11
Selfish to sacrificial successions ................................................... 13
7Keys-1 ................................................................................................... 16
Overturn Orders ................................................................................ 16
First last, last first........................................................................... 17
Peace not Disorder ........................................................................ 18
Changing course ............................................................................ 20
Breaking down barriers ................................................................ 23
Conclusion ..................................................................................... 26
7Keys-2 ................................................................................................... 28
Ready Replacements ........................................................................ 28
Selfish to sacrificial orientations ................................................... 30
Ministry mediates mastery ........................................................... 32
Direct succession relationships .................................................... 35
Conclusion ..................................................................................... 38
7Keys-3 ................................................................................................... 41
Expose Egos ....................................................................................... 41
Successor characteristics ............................................................... 42
Heart before head .......................................................................... 44
Bred or built? ................................................................................. 45
Cultural character .......................................................................... 47
Assessing altruism ......................................................................... 48
Conclusion ..................................................................................... 49
7Keys-4 ................................................................................................... 53
Open Oversight ..................................................................................... 53
Transparent treatment .................................................................. 54
Outsider opinions .......................................................................... 55
Incumbents and instructors .......................................................... 57
Conclusion ..................................................................................... 60
7Keys-5 ................................................................................................... 63
Calm Conflict .................................................................................... 63
Desire for greatness ....................................................................... 65
Resolve conflict correctly .............................................................. 66
The ‘Judas’ principle ..................................................................... 68
Conclusion ..................................................................................... 70
7Keys-6 ................................................................................................... 73
Avoid Authoritarianism ....................................................................... 73
Authority aware ............................................................................ 74
Succession rules ............................................................................. 78
Succession outcomes ..................................................................... 81
Successor scenarios........................................................................ 83
Conclusion ..................................................................................... 85
3|Page

5. 7KEYS
7Keys-7 ................................................................................................... 88
Sacrifice Successionally ....................................................................... 88
Ministry of service ......................................................................... 90
Mediatory sacrifice ........................................................................ 92
Mastery of advocacy ..................................................................... 95
Sacrificial succession ..................................................................... 97
Conclusion ................................................................................... 102
Appendix ......................................................................................... 104
Endnotes .......................................................................................... 106
7Keys.
4|Page

6. 7KEYS
Preface
Seven keys to successful succession are often
overlooked in leadership transitions. The unfortunate
result is succession failure and crisis. Surprisingly,
perhaps, the master key to successful transitions is
sacrificial succession. Sacrificial Succession is the
altruistic, mid-tenure handover of leadership mediated
by incumbent for successor success. Sacrificial
Succession includes pre- and post-succession preparation
of altruistic successors. This book shows leaders how to
be successful successors by sacrificing successionally.
Unsuccessful leadership transitions start with
incumbents failing to prepare altruistic successors then
avoiding a sacrificial handover of leadership. This
oversight causes leadership voids and succession crisis.
Applying the Seven Keys (7Keys) of this book helps bring
greater succession success because it puts the onus of a
greater sacrifice on incumbent rather than successor.
Most leadership transitions and successions are
defined by the handover of managerial authority from
predecessor to successor. While succession is usually
associated with leadership transition, its importance to a
successful leadership legacy is often overlooked. This
disconnect between leadership and succession is
evidenced by good leaders having poor successions.
Today, this oversight allows more selfishly than
sacrificially motivated successors to dominate. Due to
these factors coupled with ageing leaderships, especially
in the west, and younger generations of leaders less
willing to take on corporate leadership, transition crisis is
a serious leadership problem1.
Despite the predominance of professional
succession planning and management, leadership
development and placement programs, there is limited
outcome evidence to prove that these “best practices” are
actually working2. The 7Keys to successful succession of
this book explain why these approaches are ultimately
unsuccessful. They also show how these unsuccessional
5|Page

7. 7KEYS
leadership transition trends can be reversed and
reorientated towards more successful successions.
The first of the 7Keys involves overturning orders
by giving those normally coming last opportunities to be
first. Key two is about intentionally readying
replacements as successors rather than leaders. Key 3 is
about exposing egos amongst potential successors to find
those that are more sacrificially orientated. Key four
involves being open to the oversight of other leaders
when choosing successors. Keys five and six are about
calming the inevitable successor conflicts that arise and
avoiding the corporate and dynastic authoritarianism
found in so many successions.
Finally, key number seven, the Master Key,
explains sacrificial succession: the altruistic hand over of
leadership to successors mediated by incumbent, as a
promising solution to transition crisis. Sacrificial
succession requires incumbents to directly prepare
altruistic replacements pre-succession, sacrificially
handover leadership to these successors mid-tenure then
stay on to act as successor advocates post-succession.
Failing to use these 7Keys, and particularly the last
key, in leadership transitions is what causes many good
leaders to have poor successions. Using these seven keys
is critical for successor and succession success. Examples
of successful and unsuccessful successions are shared
later. Despite the numerous—and excellent—succession
planning techniques and technologies, professional
managers and leadership development programs
available, succession crises and leadership voids will
continue to effect transitions until these seven keys are
put into practice.
In short, transition crises will continue to occur
until more leaders start practicing sacrificial succession.
Applying these 7Keys to successful succession will help
end much transitional uncertainty. Succession crisis can
be avoided by using the following 7Keys:
1) Overturn Orders
2) Ready Replacements
3) Expose Egos
6|Page

8. 7KEYS
4) Open Oversight
5) Calm Conflict
6) Avoid Authoritarianism
7) Sacrifice Successional
These seven keys to successful succession are
based on common-sense insights combined with age-old
truths that are as relevant today as ever. They are
supported by some of the latest research into altruism
and leadership showing that sacrificial leaders can indeed
make the most successful successors.
Successful successors willingly serve and prepare
their followers altruistically, sacrificially hand over their
leadership early then stay on post succession to advocate
for the next generation of successors. Each of these
seminal truths is revealed through the following Seven
Keys to Successful Succession.
7Keys.
7|Page

9. 7KEYS
Introduction
In preparing his successors to replace him a
certain leader shared his private and public life with
them. It gave his disciples the opportunity to see not
only how he acted at work but also how he interacted
with his family and friends, rivals and enemies in public
and privately. He told them stories that challenged
established norms and structures.
Together, these potential successors were given
projects that developed their ability to lead as successors.
They learned by doing directly from their leader. He did
strange things that challenged
established orders of the day. This
They were regularly taken leader gave those who normally
aside by their leader over a come last opportunities to be first.
more than three-year period
He put the interests of others before
and reminded of the manner,
timing and place of the his own. In so doing he challenged
impending handover. and overturned existing orders.
Importantly, this leader
modelled these keys to successful
succession, personally and professionally. He directly
prepared his successors for transition by predicting how,
when and where he would sacrificially give up his
leadership. These ready replacements were well
prepared as successors because this outgoing leader
already had an exit strategy in mind with a clear timeline
for transition well before the time he was succeeded.
Also, this leader readied his replacements as
successors rather than subordinates. “I no longer call you
staff because staff do not know what their masters are
doing. Instead I call you my friends, because everything I
have learned from my predecessors I have made known
to you,” their leader said.
These successional candidates, learned
discipline—the base meaning of the word “disciple” by
doing what their leader did.
Because their leader was still in the prime of life,
these potential successors felt he was planning to hand
over leadership too early in his tenure. Nevertheless, this
8|Page

10. 7KEYS
leader knew that an altruistic—and early—mid-tenure
handover of his leadership for the success of successors
was one of the keys to successful successions.
Having these doubts did not, however, stop these
disciples from competing for the incumbent’s position.
Wisely, their leader understood the need to expose egos
so that the selfish to sacrificial motivations of potential
successors could be revealed beforehand. When some of
these potential successors humbly approached their
leader to seek favours in the upcoming transition this key
was applied masterfully.
With his ability to expose egos this leader
understood the selfish to sacrificial motivations of each
successor. In this particular culture the pull of kinship
was strong. Other cultures favour connections over clan,
but these self-serving motivations are common and
insidious to most transitions.
In response to their approach the leader asked,
“What is it that you want?” Their reply [often unspoken],
as with most seeking favour in transitions, was to become
the greatest by becoming successors. The leader went on
to ask them, “But are you able to make the sacrifices that I
am about to make for this succession to occur.
Their self-confident reply, “We can!” The leader
confirmed their self-serving willingness to sacrifice by
saying, “You will indeed make similar sacrifices to me
but the decision about my successors is open to oversight.
This astute leader made sure that he was accountable to
other stakeholders for the crucial decision about the
choice of successor. He knew that being open to
oversight counters bias and provides the balance that is
so often absent in successions.
When the other leadership contenders heard about
this attempt to gain special favour they were
understandably indignant. Gathering the aggrieved
group together the leader dealt with the problem quickly
and transparently. He understood the need to calm
conflicts by dealing with issues of betrayal openly and
honestly—and quickly!
9|Page

11. 7KEYS
Often such conflicts remain hidden and
unresolved in transitions. Incumbents are reluctant to
deal with these matters publically by involving the
interested parties because they fear further conflict.
Instead, this leader skilfully used the conflict situation to
calm things down.
In fact, this situation was used to teach an object
lesson about avoiding authoritarianism. The leader knew
it was the leadership contenders’ desire for greatness that
was at the heart of the conflict. Therefore he went on to
describe the authoritarian leadership norms of the day so
evident in the behaviour of these
succession candidates.
“Just as I have served others Evidence of authoritarianism is
rather than myself and give up found in most corporate and dynastic
my leadership sacrificially as a transitions. Top leaders authorise a
ransom for you, so too must succession and their intermediaries
you do the same as my exercise this authority over their
successors.”
subordinates. Sometimes these self-
serving leaders act like barons and at
other times as benefactors, yet remain authoritarian
nonetheless. Their preference is for strict rules and
established authority.
Rejecting this naturalistic approach to transitions,
this sacrificial leader went on to explain a radical
alternative. The truth of sacrificing successionally is at
the heart of successful succession. Instead of being self-
serving and seeking power, the leader said that they
should be sacrificial. “Altruistically serving others rather
than yourself is the true measure of greatness,” their
leader said.
Reminding his disciples about the first coming
last, the leader went on to say that they too must be
willing to come last and be the least. Then the leader got
personal: “Just as I have served others rather than myself
and give up my leadership sacrificially as a ransom for
you, so too must you do the same as my successors.”
Finally, this outgoing leader said, “Even though I
am sacrificing my leadership early for your successional
success, I am not leaving you. After handing over my
10 | P a g e

12. 7KEYS
leadership, I will stay on after the handover to advocate
for you and help prepare the next generation of sacrificial
successors”.
Eventually these potential successors came to
realise that even leaders who serve others faithfully are
less successful without enacting a sacrificial succession.
The latter (sacrifice) is the genuine outworking of the
former (service) and without a sacrificial succession most
transitions remain ineffective because sacrifice
complements service to make both sides of the
successional coin complete. Because these candidate
successors had personally seen their
leader sacrifice successionally, they
Overturn orders, ready
were well prepared as sacrificial
replacements, expose egos, open
oversight, calm conflict, avoid successors.
authoritarianism and sacrifice Due to observing these seven
successional would echo in the truths first-hand through their
hearts and minds of these leader’s sacrificial transition, they
successors throughout their lives. were impossible for these successors
to forget. Overturn orders, ready
replacements, expose egos, open
oversight, calm conflict, avoid authoritarianism and
sacrifice successionally would echo in the hearts and
minds of these successors throughout their lives. This
successional imprint would live on in the leaderships of
their successors as long as they practiced these seven
keys to successful succession.
Successional Leadership
The sacrificial succession defined in the
previous section involves the altruistic handover of
leadership by incumbent. This transfer of leadership is
specifically for the benefit of successor. It involves
incumbents directly preparing ready replacements
during the pre-succession, sacrificing their leadership
ambitions mid-tenure then staying on post-succession to
advocate for the next generation of successors.
Due to its obvious association with leadership and
succession in particular, an uncritical reading of the seven
steps to sacrificial succession may conclude that the
11 | P a g e

13. 7KEYS
7Keys are as much about leadership and management as
they are about succession. To some extent this is true
since good leadership and management should
ultimately be about having an effective succession.
For example, “Begin with the end in mind,” to
quote Stephen Covey’s second of ‘The Seven Habits of
Highly Successful People’ means starting with a clear
understanding of the planned destination3. Since the
aims of succession planning and management, leadership
succession and development are to have the right people
in the right jobs at the right time, broadly speaking these
goals fit with the 7Keys.
There are, however, a number of important
differences between sacrificial succession as defined in
this book and leadership transition and management
succession norms that need pointing out. First,
succession must come before leadership in order of
importance. This first truth of the 7Keys, which is that
the ‘last must be first’ is not mere semantics. It is
critically important as a starting point for sacrificial
succession to initially occur.
By overturning the order of leadership succession
to succession leadership the intent is to make clear that
for successful successions to eventuate this order must
first be overturned. Second is that to be genuinely
successional, the focus on managers being developed to
fill leadership pipelines must be replaced by a much
greater emphasis on a far wider pool of candidates. For
example, potential successors should come from a variety
of non-managerial fields.
As Stephen Drotter of the Leadership
Development Pipeline rightly says, the operating
definition of leadership should be to make performance
happen so that others become more effective4. Yet the
focus on developing successors to be effective self-
managers who eventually learn to manage others is
limiting. Instead of developing leaders who can take
over if and when needed, the seven keys are
unequivocally about preparing successors as ready
replacements in transitions where the timing and terms of
12 | P a g e

14. 7KEYS
the succession are clearly spelled out by incumbent and
the sacrifice of leadership by incumbent is intentionally
for the benefit of successors.
Selfish to sacrificial successions
To summarise the key differences between
sacrificial succession the master key of this book, and
other more self-interested forms of leadership succession,
is to reiterate its focus. First is the emphasis on readying
replacements as successors rather than developing
leaders or managers to fill future leadership positions.
Second is that that to be genuinely successional
incumbents must sacrifice their leadership for the benefit
of successors mid-tenure. As a direct outworking of
these first two successional differences, the third main
difference involves incumbent staying on as replaced
leader to advocate for the next generation of successors.
Successional leadership is about leaving a
sacrificial succession legacy of ready replacements
prepared as successors, leadership sacrificially handed
over for the benefit of successors and advocacy for the
next generation of successors by incumbent as its most
important elements. Though strange and unnatural,
sacrificial succession is logical and possible.
While these three key phases of sacrificial
succession are not commonly practiced in transitions,
glimpses of successional leadership, a precursor to
sacrificial succession, are occasionally observed. Two
transitions worth mentioning, as examples, are those of
Fannie Mae’s David Maxwell to Jim Johnson and F. W. de
Klerk to Nelson Mandela.
In the case of David O. Maxwell, he voluntarily
relinquished his rights to a final retirement payment of
$5.5 million in 1991 stipulated under his contract with
Fannie Mae, a mortgage security provider5. He took this
action to stop continued controversy over his retirement
compensation. Also, he believing that it could harm his
successor Jim Johnson and the millions of Americans
Fannie Mae served. How different Maxwell’s sacrificial
act turned out to be to the selfishness of his successors
13 | P a g e

15. 7KEYS
James (Jim) A. Johnson and Franklin (Frank) D. Raines6.
Both were ousted due to financial impropriety yet
requested and received huge retirement packages.
In stark contrast, the amount that Maxwell
surrendered contributed to housing for low-income
families. Johnson and Raines on the other hand arguably
contributed to Fannie Mae’s eventual collapse and global
economic crisis. How different can these sacrificial and
selfish succession legacies possibly be?
Another example of a sacrificial succession is the
relatively smooth political succession from Frederik
Willem de Klerk to Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela in South
Africa. Without both incumbent and successor willingly
and intentionally making mutual sacrifices, conflict
rather than consensus would have been almost
guaranteed. Then the history of South Africa would have
been like much of the rest of Africa—plagued by
transition crisis and conflict.
Having a close succession relationship, despite
their strong political and personal differences, was a
crucial factor in the successful succession from de Klerk
to Mandela. Both were obviously motivated by mutual
self-interest. Nevertheless, the greater good of the nation
and the people were ultimately put first by both men.
Their successional leaderships were defined by a
willingness to mutually sacrifice7.
For de Klerk it was sacrificing his future political
leadership ambitions and with Mandela it was serving
peaceful instead of radical political change. Both men left
a virtually unparalleled successful succession legacy in
Africa and jointly won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1993. De
Klerk continues his role in brokering peaceful successions
through the Global Leadership Foundation, which he
founded. Nelson Mandela is honoured as an elder
statesmen and peacemaker.
A fitting quote from F. W. de Klerk about this
tumultuous time in South Africa’s history and the key
role his and Mandela’s successional leadership played in
it is a fitting conclusion to this chapter and introduction
to the ensuing seven keys.
14 | P a g e

16. 7KEYS
“Finally, leaders must accept that there is no end to change -
and must plan for their own departure. As soon as one has
achieved one’s transformation objectives one must start the
process all over again. In a world in which change is
accelerating, fundamental and unpredictable there is no
respite or time to rest on one’s laurels. One of the most
difficult decisions for any leader is to accept that he, too, will
one day be swept away by the unrelenting river of time. The
wise leader will know when to leave and when to pass the
baton to a new generation8.”
A successful succession is essential to effective
leadership yet is so often overlooked as being an integral
part of it. Succession is integral to leadership. So much
so that in this study the order is overturned from
leadership succession to read “succession leadership”.
Many examples of this reorientation will be shared
throughout the book.
Probably the most important reorientation in
thinking necessary to become more successful and
successional is the first of the 7Keys. Overturning orders
requires a willingness to change the way things are
normally done so that other ways can be tried and
applied. Overturning orders is the first Key that starts
the sacrificial process.
7Keys.
15 | P a g e

17. 7KEYS
7Keys-1
Overturn Orders
“If I want to give those who started last the same
as you, don’t I have the right to do what I want
with my own money? Or are you jealous
because I am generous? So the last will be first
and the first last” – The Business Owner
A story is told about a certain business owner
embarking on an unusual successor recruitment drive.
At the beginning of the year the business owner agreed
with a group of workers to pay them fair wages and a
specified bonus following the completion of their 12-
month contract.
After three months, more workers were needed, so
the business owner went out and hired more workers
promising to pay fair wages and a generous unspecified
bonus. The workers gladly accepted. Following that, the
business owner went out and hired more workers on the
same fair payment basis three months later and again in
the ninth month of that year.
Then, in the 11th month, the business owner went
out and recruited even more workers, again promising
fair wages and bonuses. At the end of the year the
business owner asked his manager to gather all the
workers together to give them their bonuses beginning
with those who started last.
Surprisingly, especially for those who started first
and last, everyone received the same generous bonus.
Those who started first and had worked the longest and
hardest complained to the business owner, “These
workers who were hired last only worked one month, yet
you made their bonuses equal to ours—and we worked
for 12 months!” But the business owner answered them,
“Friends, I am not being unfair to you. Didn’t you agree
16 | P a g e

18. 7KEYS
to these terms? Take your bonuses and go. If I want to
give the workers who started last the same bonuses as
you, don’t I have the right to do what I want with my
own money? Or are you jealous because I am generous?
So the last will be first and the first last.”
This story highlights a number of important truths
about human nature, especially in transitions and
successions. For the purposes of this study, a transition is
the context in which a succession, the handover of
leadership from predecessor to successor, occurs. A
transition includes a pre-
succession period, prior to the
Apart from promoting a mutual
interest in and care for one handover of leadership, a
another, it sends a message to succession event, when
those who normally come first leadership is handed over and a
that the leadership is serious post-succession period, which
about giving those coming last involves successor and
equal opportunities. sometimes predecessors.
In successions there is
always an expectation that those
who have worked longest and hardest should have the
best positions and benefits based on their performance
and tenure. By overturning orders and reversing norms
that naturally apply the business owner was better able to
identify the selfish rather than sacrificial motives of those
who had started first due to their stronger sense of
entitlement.
First last, last first
Understanding this first key of overturning orders
by using it correctly opens the door to the other 7Keys.
To genuinely overturn orders means giving successional
opportunities to those that come last and who are lower
in status because those who normally come first and are
higher in status do not need to be given these same
opportunities.
Therefore, a willingness on a leader’s part to
overturn orders is an obvious prerequisite. Applying this
key means deliberately turning the tables in favour of
those who normally come last. It is not about the practice
17 | P a g e

19. 7KEYS
of honouring those perceived to be inferior that can often
be observed by senior leaders almost overdoing their
praise of such ministers and ministry activities.
Instead, overturning orders is about encouraging
social and structural change through these activities.
Apart from promoting a mutual interest in and care for
one another, it sends a message to those who normally
come first that the leadership is serious about giving
those coming last equal opportunities. Practically
speaking, overturning orders means choosing contenders
from outside of the normal management streams to
include those who are genuine outsiders rather than
corporate insiders.
Nurturing successors that are “inside-outsiders”,
to borrow a phrase from Joseph L. Bowers of the Harvard
Business School, means developing internal candidates
who have an outside perspective9. Grooming internal
successor candidates with an outsider orientation
promises stronger leadership transitions.
Despite its positive implications, the main
limitation of this thinking is that managers continue to be
considered the most appropriate leaders. It should be
self-evident that this does not overturn established
orders. In fact, such thinking may actually reinforce
them. To quote the business owner, “So the last will be
first and the first last”, is an outcome statement rather
than an objective to be achieved.
Therefore, overturning orders is a deliberate
exercise in changing norms by making potential
successors from unlikely fields and roles eligible for
leadership. For example, it means making successors of
people from service and technical streams as eligible as
those from management fields.
Peace not Disorder
Overturning orders is not, however, about
engineering disorder or chaos. Instead it is about
changing the normal ways things are done and the
established structures that support them. That is why the
word “orders” is used to describe this key. Orders are
18 | P a g e

20. 7KEYS
the established ways things are done and their
supporting structures.
Most people are familiar with religious and social
orders that have defined hierarchies and structures that
are not easily overturned. For example, think of who is
authorised to speak on behalf of a church or business.
Usually it is pastors in churches and managers in
business. Although its aim is to overturn established
orders, the intent of this key is not to create chaos or
disorder in the process. As such, successful successors
are not to be authors or agents of instability, disturbance
or confusion.
Instead, peace between individuals and
organisational harmony is expected from this process.
This is why the act of putting those coming last first must
be put into practice so that members of an organisation
all alike learn to have an altruistic, mutual interest in and
care for one another. This is a good working definition of
altruism, an important word in this book.
Unfortunately, most proposals for overturning
orders are designed around engineering chaos or
confusion, such as civil revolutions, social engineering or
reverse discrimination, to achieve peace. This is a
contradiction in terms because, in and of themselves,
chaos and confusion cannot beget peace and harmony.
Now those who are familiar with so-called “chaos
or complexity theory”, which refers to inter-relationships
between elements in a system, may take exception to this
definition10. However the main point about complexity
in systems such as leadership and succession is that what
may initially appear to be chaotic can actually have an
underlying order. Finding this underlying order in
complexity can help provide unique solutions to
apparently intractable problems such as succession crisis.
Note that chaos theory does not imply everything
chaotic necessarily has an underlying order. Thus the
exception to the rule about chaotic events usually being
detrimental is when apparently chaotic events occur that
do not appear to make logical sense yet are strangely
successful. One of these strange exceptions is the
19 | P a g e

21. 7KEYS
sacrifice of leadership by incumbent for successor. To
enact this strange exception the sacrifice of incumbent for
successor success must outweigh the self-sacrifice of
successor in their efforts to gain leadership.
While conventional wisdom and natural logic
argues against leader sacrifice for subordinates in favour
of subordinates sacrificing for leaders, this overturning of
orders is actually proven to be the more successful. This
strange truth is expanded upon through each key and
becomes particularly obvious in key number seven,
sacrificing successionally.
Changing course
To apply the sort of strange logic that the business
owner used to weed out those serving selfishly in favour
of those more sacrificially inclined required a complete
change of course. By promoting those who normally
come last, first, in a peaceful manner, the business owner
was enacting a “paradigm shift”, a complete reorientation
in thinking and acting.
For this total change to occur requires a complete
shift in thinking and doing which, in turn, allows for a
new course of action. Philosopher and historian Thomas
S. Kuhn (1922 -1996), says this decision to reject one
paradigm is always simultaneously the decision to accept
another11. It is a complete reorientation from one course
to another that rejects the former in favour of the latter.
In other words, to overturn orders in successions
means being willing to reject transitional norms that
favour the first: powerful, extroverted, and privileged, to
support the last: powerless, introverted and less
privileged. With this paradigm shift in mind, it should
be more obvious that without overturning orders it is
impossible to change these unsuccessional norms.
Therefore, a pertinent example of an established
‘order’ that needs overturning is the preference for
extroverts in leadership. Extroverts are known to thrive
on group activity and dominance. They tend to be
leaders in organisations12. By overturning this order,
introverts who are more stimulated by personal reflection
20 | P a g e

22. 7KEYS
and conscientiousness are given opportunities to come
first. For instance, see Susan Cain’s “The power of
introverts” video on http://www.ted.com/ for this
alternative view.
What this sort of paradigm shift suggests is that
the orders needing overturning are both people and
process orientated. A people orientated change requires
overturning preferences for certain personalities, such as
extroverts in favour of more introverts. Procedurally this
would mean favouring candidates with a track record of
serving and ministering to others over professionals who
have ministered, mediated and mastered using more self-
serving managerial or technical abilities.
Therefore, process orientated changes need to
support the different ways people are chosen and their
performances assessed. For example, this could mean
changing evaluations to be less extravert-centric to be
more introvert- friendly. Also, evaluations would need
to identify the progress or regression of a candidate in
terms of being more sacrificial or selfish. Giving
successional candidates projects and assignments
specifically designed to develop sacrificial orientations
and expose selfish inclinations is another practical
example used so well by the leader in the introduction.
Other orders that need overturning are those that
assume successful successions involve the dynastic
handover of leadership to family members or the
corporate reshuffle of top leaders. For example, many of
the non-western leaders I know personally have prepared
for succession by handing over or are planning to hand
over leadership to their children.
One incumbent has already handed over the
leadership of two non-profit organisations to a son and
daughter respectively. Two thriving training
organisations have chosen dynastic succession from
father to son. Worldwide, dynastic or familial
successions are the most common forms of leadership
transition practiced today.
A natural, especially western, response to these
obvious problems with dynastic successions is to
21 | P a g e

23. 7KEYS
maintain corporate orders. Top leadership responsibility
for managing a transition, leadership development
programs and systematic succession planning and
management systems are all examples of these ‘best
practice’ solutions.
Despite the prevalence of these succession
techniques and technologies, research shows that
maintaining these corporate orders are not necessarily
solving succession crisis13. Some of the main causes of
these corporate failures are that few successors are
prepared as ready replacements and incumbents who
leave too early or too late in a transition are the rule
rather than exception.
However, even with strong evidence that many of
these unsuccessional practices cause transition crisis,
overturning these entrenched succession orders is
challenging. Whenever I share my succession concerns
with colleagues and friends, most honestly admit to their
succession fears and failures. For example, the director of
a large, multinational charity admitted that leadership
succession is ‘something we do badly’.
At the time, he went on to tell me candidly that he
had made no concrete plans for a leadership successor
and neither have most of his counterparts in the
organisation. To date, he has turned this situation
around by handing leadership over to a successor and
staying on as chairman to guide his new successor.
Now he is asking how long he should stay on post
succession and whether it is actually necessary to do so.
Conventional corporate wisdom says he should move on
sooner rather than later. By overturning this order, this
outgoing leader could stay on for a time post-succession
as a guide, advocate and counsellor to his successor.
Obviously this sort of post-succession oversight is
uncommon in corporate settings. Then again, few
corporate or dynastic successions fail at all levels of a
firm at one time. For example, some organisations can
have relatively successful successions at ‘ministerial’ or
supervisor levels in field offices yet are at risk at ‘head
office’ mastery level. This is because specific orders and
22 | P a g e

24. 7KEYS
hierarchies at that level of management are not acting
successionally.
For instance, the head of a large and rapidly
growing small business development firm shared that
while his workers in the field are preparing and
appointing successors quite well, their top leaders,
including him, are aging. No successors have been
prepared to take over these top jobs. He admitted that
this failure to prepare executive replacements was one
the gravest threats to their organisation’s longevity.
Overturning orders at all levels of an organisation are
critical for successful succession to occur properly.
Reasons why these psychological and physical
orders are the way they are is discussed more fully in Key
3, “Exposing Egos”. It suffices to say that much helpful
succession planning and management advice and activity
is focusing on improving transition processes through
better techniques and technologies. Collectively these
activities, often called “practices”, are designed to
maintain status quos not change them.
Though succession improvement practices such as
transition planning and leadership development are
helpful at a process level, they are not usually designed
to impact successions at a cultural or deeper values
level14. One of the reasons for this pragmatic approach is
the widely and rightly held view that cultural values are
much more difficult to change than technical practices.
However it is unlikely that succession orders can
be overturned at a practice level if not supported by a
fundamental change of values in practitioners. This is
especially the case with actions relating to altruism and
self-sacrifice for others. Findings presented in 7Keys 3
notes the importance of the strong link between values
and practices for such sacrificial actions to occur.
Breaking down barriers
The truth of this reality with overturning orders is
borne out by research that shows top leaders, such as
new Chief Executive Officers (CEOs), have a tendency to
pursue their own self-interests at the expense of other
23 | P a g e

25. 7KEYS
stakeholders such as employees and shareholders15.
Unsurprisingly, such selfishness has tragic implications.
For example, ongoing global financial crisis
painfully reveals that prescribed ‘best practices’
performed by selfish practitioners usually fail because
practitioners as leaders dictate practices, not the other
way around. Therefore, to overturn orders, deliberate
action must be taken to break down existing barriers and
boundaries that inhibit the last coming first.
These actions must be intentionally designed to
overturn and expose existing orders, as the business
owner at the beginning of this chapter did. One
important way of doing this is to understand the
hierarchies that normally operate in organisations.
Studying the strong boundaries that occur between
different levels of authority in organisations is as good a
place as any to start observing these orders in operation.
For example, most organisations tend to have
three main levels of authority: ministers, mediators and
masters. Ministers usually serve others as workers or
supervisors with lower levels of authority. Masters are
those who excel in certain fields of professional expertise
or in leading others. Mediators often act as go-betweens
and are most often recognised as managers and team
leaders. It is concerning to note today how so many
government and religious ministers have deviated from
the original intent of the word “minister” which literally
means servant, in order to ‘serve’ others selfishly rather
than sacrificially.
Introducing these terms: ministers, mediators and
masters and ministry, mediation and mastery, as defined
above, are helpful in identifying leadership structures
and leader styles. They also help explain the barriers that
exist between these groups and the strength of these
boundaries in organisations. Each of these functional and
behavioural descriptions of selfish to sacrificial
successions and successors will become more obvious in
the ensuing chapters.
As positions and vocations, these barriers are
recognisable in religious institutions through the orders
24 | P a g e

26. 7KEYS
of prophets, priests and laity. Similarly, in educational
organisations, there are well-defined producers,
reproducers and acquirers of knowledge. Functionally,
in corporations, there is a hierarchy of workers or staff
overseen by managers and supervisors managed by
executives or directors.
See for example the following diagram that shows
how this three-tier people hierarchy tends to operate in
most organisations.
Three-Tier People Hierarchy
People Corporate Dynastic Churches
MASTERS Executives/Directors Owners Pastors
MEDIATORS Managers/Supervisors Managers/Supervisors Elders/Deacons
MINISTERS Staff/Workers Staff/Workers Members
Figure 1: Three-Tier Hierarchy
As a rule, in each of these types of organisation,
relatively strong boundaries exist between each class of
leader. Despite these boundaries or orders being diluted
somewhat by increasingly distributed online forms of
knowledge, power and functions, due to the Internet in
particular, even a casual observer can recognise that these
boundaries of varying strengths and strata remain in
most organisations.
Another way of looking at hierarchies is from a
process perspective. In other words, those authorised to
make decisions and pass them on to others.
Three-Tier Process Hierarchy
Process Managerial Educational Familial
MASTERY Authorise Produce Own
MEDIATORY Exercise Reproduce Manage
MINISTRY Receive Acquire Serve
Figure 2: Three-Tier Practice Hierarchy
As sociologist Basil Bernstein (1924-2000) astutely
observed, people in one category are unlikely to be
accepted in another class until they become a part of that
class. Another rule is that, usually, one can only occupy
one category at a time16. Applied to succession, the
stronger the boundary between each class of successor
(minister, mediator and master) and practice (ministry,
25 | P a g e

27. 7KEYS
mediation and mastery) is in an organisational structure,
the more difficult these orders are to overturn. Similar
rules apply to selfish versus sacrificial styles of successors
and succession.
Conclusion
Notwithstanding these enormous structural and
behavioural challenges, overturning these orders is a
must, because this first key opens the other doors to
successful succession. As with the business owner’s
successor candidates, their tendency to be more selfish
than sacrificial became immediately obvious when their
expectations about coming first were challenged.
Planning and implementing similar challenges to the
status quo as the business owner did will do two things.
First, it will reveal the sacrificial to selfish
motivations of many potential successors. Secondly, it
will give those who normally come last a real
opportunity to be first. This intentional turning of the
tables can be a valuable exercise in the process of
identifying more sacrificial successor candidates and
eliminate those who are more selfishly motivated.
Within this intent to overturn orders peace rather
than disorder or chaos should prevail, even though
apparently strange even illogical outcomes may emerge,
such as the first coming last and last coming first. More
sacrificial rather than selfish successors can then become
contenders. Regardless of these positive intentions, it
must be acknowledged that even a relatively peaceful
overturning of orders by a sacrificial leader such as the
one described in the introduction will not be comfortable.
Any change to a status quo such as that of
overturning orders is by its very strangeness a painful
exercise. However, once this key of overturning orders
has opened the door to these radical changes, the next
key of readying replacements can be enacted safe in the
knowledge that the right door has been opened.
In so much as it depends on you don’t be overly
concerned about the implications of trying to enact these
strange opportunities to overturn orders, as the business
26 | P a g e

28. 7KEYS
owner did. There are numerous ways that this can be
done, and here are some practical examples:
1. Give people who have served faithfully in the field
the same opportunities as potential successors to
those from head office.
2. Offer potential successors from non-managerial
backgrounds, such as technical and social experts,
opportunities to come first.
3. Promote people who have a history of sacrificing for
others, rather than for themselves, first and be
prepared to offer them leadership.
4. Provide potential successors coming or starting last
similar opportunities to those who started first and
normally come first.
5. Permit other personalities, such as introverts, not
normally considered for leadership to be prepared
as potential successors.
6. Reward practitioners who have a sacrificial and
altruistic track record of serving others more than
self-serving professionals.
7. Recognise the selfish orders that need to be
overturned in your organisation and be prepared to
enact altruistic changes.
7Keys.
27 | P a g e

29. 7KEYS
7Keys-2
Ready Replacements
“I no longer call you staff because staff do not
know what their leaders are doing. Instead I call
you my friends, because everything I have
learned from my predecessor I have made
known to you”—The Leader
Having ready replacements is not just about
producing enough leaders and managers capable of
taking over leadership from incumbents. Instead it is
about incumbents intentionally preparing successors to
replace them. Remember the leader in the introduction
who clearly spelled out the timing of the transition and
regularly reminded his disciples about his upcoming
sacrificial succession? He intentionally trained them for
transition over a three-and-a-half year period.
Similar to overturning orders, despite have some
rather ‘strange’ logic that selfless successors are
ultimately more successful than self-
At least once in a successor’s interested ones, readying replacements
lifetime—and for most many is not an ad hoc activity. Deliberate
times—this transitional action is required to track the
journey from ministry to development of a candidate being
mastery will be mediated by prepared as a successor to ensure they
selfishness or sacrifice. are the right person for the job.
Recall the three orders
mentioned in the previous key of
ministry, mediation and mastery that define leadership
levels and practices in most organisations? These same
successional terms can be applied as phases to the
journey successors take as leaders. At least once in a
successor’s lifetime—and for most many times—this
transitional journey from ministry to mastery will be
mediated by selfishness or sacrifice.
28 | P a g e

30. 7KEYS
In this sense, as mentioned briefly earlier,
transition is the context in which a succession occurs.
Leadership transitions must involve a predecessor and
successor and include three distinct phases: 1) Pre-
succession preparation or planning, 2) Succession event
or trigger where leadership is handed over and 3) a Post-
succession phase where successor becomes master17. For
an organisation to continue functioning as an entity, at
some point, this succession process starts again then
continues in cycles.
Pre-succession preparation can be well planned or
ad hoc. Successors normally replace predecessors during
the succession event. More often than not at this point
predecessors leave. Occasionally predecessors stay on
post-succession. Essentially a person’s “ministry” phase
is when they are predominantly in voluntary service or
subordination to others, usually with the aim of using
this period of service to further their career. See the
diagram below which describes these selfish to sacrificial
leadership transitions.
Succession Stages
Stages Pre-Succession Succession Post-Succession
Phases Ministry Mediatory Mastery
Others-serving Sacrifices mid- Altruistic advocacy
Sacrificial Three-
altruism and tenure for with leadership for
Stage
sacrifice successor success successors
Selfish One or Two- Leaves too early during ministry or Stays on too long till
Stage mediatory phase end of mastery phase
Figure 3: Selfish to Sacrificial Transitions
Everyone goes through a ministry phase at least
once in life when they learn something from someone
else. For example, to get a qualification or when first
starting a job. For most leaders, a self-serving ‘ministry’
becomes a stepping-stone to mastery mediated by some
sort of skill or ability. A key question here for preparing
ready replacements is how they serve others—
sacrificially or selfishly—during their ministry phase?
Assessing whether (or not) a person has served
more selfishly with expectation or selflessly without
expectation is an important measure of the man or
woman being considered or groomed as successor. The
29 | P a g e

31. 7KEYS
mediatory phases of successors’ leadership journeys help
define how they mediate mastery.
Here a similar question can be asked to that of the
ministry phase evaluation. In mediating mastery have
potential successors tended to be sacrificially or selfishly
orientated? Their actions during the mediatory phase
strongly determine their mastery orientations.
In assessing the sacrificial to selfish orientations of
potential successors, a key aspect of the mediatory phase
is its role in bridging the gap between the ministry and
mastery phases. As a bridge between ministry and
mastery, here is where selfish to sacrificial succession
orientations are most obvious for assessment purposes.
Selfish to sacrificial orientations
Therefore, a candidate successor who is shown to
be selfish in the first two phases, ministry and mediation,
is unlikely to be a sacrificial master. Conversely, a
candidate successor who has demonstrated a sacrificial
orientation in these first two phases has a much greater
potential to be an altruistic master. Each is more likely to
mediate mastery in their respective successions based on
their selfish to sacrificial ministry orientations.
Because of the need to observe potential
successors—in action if possible—long enough during
their ministry, mediatory and mastery phases to ascertain
their sacrificial to selfish motivations or orientations, the
process of readying sacrificial replacements takes time.
The minimum recommended time is three years and it is
more effective to directly observe successional candidates
as they progress through these phases.
Given that predecessors should be personally
responsible for preparing successors, to do that most
effectively requires candidates be prepared in-house.
How to identify the selfish to sacrificial orientations in
successors are elaborated on more fully in each of the
ensuing keys. Keep in mind the following diagram as an
example of the succession styles that tend to operate in
the three main transitional stages of a succession.
30 | P a g e

32. 7KEYS
Whether well planned or ad hoc, in a transition
there is a pre-succession phase, which occurs prior to the
succession event, which comes next. Following that is the
post-succession stage, which either does or does not
involve replaced leader.
SUCCESSION Transitional Succession Stages
STYLES Pre-Succession Succession Event Post Succession
Transition of Leaves usually with
End-of-term Planning ad hoc or
authority occurs end- no further
succession: systematic
of-tenure involvement
Planning ad hoc or Transition of Stays on to play an
Mid-term
systematic authority occurs mid- influential role
succession:
tenure
Ministry of preparing Mediatory sacrifice Mastery by
Sacrificial
sacrificial successors mid-tenure for advocating for
Succession:
successors successor success
Figure 4: Transitional Succession Phases
It suffices to say that in the process of preparing
ready replacements keeping these three succession
phases or stages top of mind is critical. Particularly
important is the first part of the ministry phase where, if
possible, the candidates should be
unaware that they are being
Particularly important is the considered as potential
first part of the ministry phase successors. This enables
where, if possible, the candidate incumbent to evaluate their
should be unaware that they are
being considered as successors. motives for serving others before
the candidate is conscious that
such activities may contribute
positively to their chances of being chosen as successor.
For a sacrificial succession this ministry of service
phase involves two distinct stages. The first is the one
just mentioned whereby opportunities to serve others are
given to potential successors before they are aware that
they are candidates. Enacting this stage at the beginning
of the preparation phase is to help ascertain a candidate’s
motivations to serve others before he or she has a
position or promotion in mind.
In some cases, particularly in corporate
successions, this assessment may be practically
impossible due to a candidate already being in a
31 | P a g e

33. 7KEYS
leadership position, such as management. Similarly,
many candidates are appointed directly to leadership
positions from an educational ‘ministry’ at university.
With these sorts of managerial appointments, sacrificial
qualities are more difficult to ascertain. As such, these
sorts of educational and managerial appointments are not
recommended by the 7Keys.
Nevertheless, these successional principles can
usually be applied prior to considering candidate
eligibility for a consecutive promotion to another level.
Next in a ministry stage is to evaluate how a candidate
serves others through a leadership position. By
comparing differences between how candidates minister
to others without expecting a promotion then through a
leadership position helps to identify more selfish to
sacrificial orientations. These initial successor
orientations are normally indicative of future ones.
Ministry mediates mastery
The reason that the ministry phase and its two
stages of service prior to and through leadership are so
important is that they tend to set the scene for the future
mediatory and mastery orientations of a successor.
Simply put, ministry mediates mastery. In other words,
the way a candidate chooses to minister is the strongest
indicator of how they will mediate their successions and
master in transitions.
Keeping the key of overturning orders as the
rationale for further action, ready replacements are those
that have been intentionally given ministry opportunities
that require serving and sacrificing for others. As
mentioned earlier, it is unfortunate that many successors
follow technical, educational and managerial ‘ministry’
pathways that do not expose them to or require these
ministry-of-service experiences.
Consequently, many successors mediate
professional mastery in their fields without ever having
learned to serve sacrificially in a ministry phase beyond
self-serving study and hard work to achieve personal
success. Selfishly orientated ministers such as these are
32 | P a g e

34. 7KEYS
more likely to mediate and master through transitions in
a self-interested way. Predictably, such self-interest
ultimately results in authoritarian successions.
Two main succession outcomes can be predicted
depending on successor orientations using the equation:
ministry x mediates x mastery = authoritarian or altruistic
succession. A selfish successor’s ministry orientation will
be predominantly self-serving mediated by familial or
managerial advancement. An authoritarian mastery of
dynastic or corporate power is the predictable succession
outcome of this self-interested transition.
Alternatively, an altruistic succession outcome
involves significantly different successor orientations that
are sacrificial and others-serving. An altruistic ministry
of service should be mediated by a mid-tenure sacrifice of
leadership specifically for successor success. Staying on
post-succession as successor advocate is another
characteristic of a sacrificial successor. An altruistic
rather than authoritarian succession outcome is
predicated by this mediatory sacrifice. See the following
diagram that maps these selfish to sacrificial pathways.
Succession Equations
SUCCESSION SUCCESSION
Ministry (M1) x Mediates (M2) x Mastery (M3) =
ORIENTATIONS OUTCOMES
Self-serving Sacrifice others for Selfish authority of
Selfish: technical or managerial or power and Authoritarian (S1)
vocational service familial advancement professionalism
Others-serving Self-sacrifice mid- Altruistic advocacy
Sacrificial: altruism and tenure for successor with leadership for Altuistic (S2)
sacrifice success successors
Figure 5: Succession Equations
Until the nexus of self-interest is overturned in
favour of a sacrificial orientation then selfishly orientated
successors and successions of varying degrees should be
the expected outcome. Keys to changing this status quo
of self-interest are shared towards the end of this book.
An obvious counterargument to seeking more
sacrificially orientated successors is that there may not be
enough of them or that they may not be assertive or
aggressive enough to be effective masters.
33 | P a g e

35. 7KEYS
Indeed, this is a valid concern if current orders are
not overturned. The truth is that if opportunities are
given for the last to come first and the correct steps for
assessing sacrificial service to others prior to potential
successors becoming leaders, then though leadership
positions are followed, the right successors can be
identified. Recent research into leader self-sacrifice
confirms this truth. Sacrificial leaders are shown to be
particularly effective when their sacrifice is mediated by a
concern for their followers rather than themselves18.
Similarly related findings note that sacrificial
leaders are able to boost follower performance even if
they are atypical of great leaders19. Having a strong
professional will and personal humility are found to be
two of the most important characteristics of altruistic
leaders20. Therefore, one of the keys with finding the right
replacements is mapping how potential successors
develop as leaders.
While it continues to be debated whether leaders
are primarily born and bred or nurtured and naturalised
into leadership, there is a consensus that effective leaders
must develop and mature on the
job. Three interrelated phases of
Leaders cannot start making
sense of service until they are at dependent, independent and
the dependent or interpersonal interdependent growth are
stage of maturity. theorised as leaders mature.
Based on these definitions
leaders must first learn to depend
on others before they can become independent leaders.
Following this first phase more mature leaders recognise
the need to progress beyond independence. As they
mature further, leaders go on to learn interdependence or
to be “inter-independent” 21. Applied to the three
succession phases of ministry, mediation and mastery,
the key question is how potential successors interpret
service to and sacrifice for others through each of these
progressive phases.
While mastery can be equated with maturity, a
sacrificial master is completely different to a selfish one.
Even the timing of their successions is distinct. With a
34 | P a g e

36. 7KEYS
selfish master, their succession tends to end too late or
too early, whereas sacrificial masters make their
mediatory sacrifice at the midpoint of a transition.
Each of these significant differences between
sacrificial and selfish successors are detailed in the final
chapter. For the purpose of explaining this key of
readying replacements in successions, the main factor to
keep in mind is that successors develop differently
depending on their sacrificial to selfish motivations.
Tracking a potential successor’s journey through
these three phases helps reveal their selfish to sacrificial
orientations. Following this as a developmental
framework, findings by Kelly Phipps conclude that
leaders cannot start making sense of service until they are
at the dependent or interpersonal stage of maturity22.
This is primarily because, until then, they are usually not
mature enough to have learned to subordinate personal
goals and agendas in the best interests of others.
Direct succession relationships
On this basis then, potential successors can learn to
develop altruistically through ministry, mediatory and
mastery exercises designed to promote and encourage
sacrificial rather than selfish service. However, due to
these motivations being unnatural—even strange—
preparing ready replacements that are more service
orientated than power hungry takes time.
Remember the rule: ministry mediates mastery.
These three distinct, yet related, phases require
incumbent to be directly involved in preparing altruistic,
ready replacements. These phases cannot be fast-tracked
or circumvented and must be followed through.
Observing how a potential successor facilitates their
succession through these ministry, mediatory and
mastery phases gives a clearer picture of their succession
orientations.
A particularly important insight into a potential
successor’s sacrificial or selfish orientation is gained if a
number of these succession phases can be observed
successively then compared to find indicators of whether
35 | P a g e

37. 7KEYS
the subject is progressing towards one end of the
sacrificial to selfish spectrum more than another.
Karl Popper explains that this form of scientific
analysis is based on the probability of “neighbourhood
selection”23. In other words, by studying the links
between related elements, certain relationships can be
identified. For example, by ordering primary elements in
a numbered sequence. In this case, the order of ministry,
mediatory and mastery orientations related to secondary
sacrificial and selfish orientations. In so doing, certain
neighbourhood relations are created that are observable
and predictable.
Therefore, in transitions the primary sequence is
these three succession phases and the secondary
relationships are the sacrificial to selfish links to these
succession phases. By comparing the selfish to sacrificial
track record of potential successors within and between
multiple transitions, gives a good indicator of each
candidate’s succession orientations. See the diagram
below that compares between four transitions.
Comparing Multiple Transitions
Transition 1 Transition 2
Potential Ministry Mediation Mastery Ministry Mediation Mastery
Successor Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No
Sacrifices How? How? How? How? How? How?
Altruistically Transition 3 Transition 4
or Ministry Mediation Mastery Ministry Mediation Mastery
Selfishly…? Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No
How? How? How? How? How? How?
Figure 6: Comparing Multiple Transitions
Based on this logic, the more transitional
sequences or successions observed the better the quality
of assessment that can be made about potential successor
orientations. Comparing each of these relationships over
time is effective triangulation. This exercise in successor
assessment and preparation is best done directly by
incumbents for their direct successors rather than a
leadership collective of professional mentors and coaches.
While professionals are helpful, especially in
providing specialist advice, facts and information, they
play a different role to incumbent as discipler. Because of
this fundamentally different role and relationship, the
36 | P a g e

38. 7KEYS
earlier use of the word “disciple” was deliberate. It was
chosen to describe successional candidates rather than
more commonly used words such as trainees, learners or
students, etc., because the authenticity of a disciple is
defined by their proximity to their predecessor.
John N. Williams describes this relational
closeness between predecessor and successor as being
“true succession” 24. Integral to this idea about true
succession is that in some sense predecessor directly
influences successor. Along similar, though more poetic
lines, goes the Hebrew saying, “May you always be
covered by the dust of your rabbi25.”
Being a disciple necessitates two things that are
especially important for readying replacements. First it
requires discipline that: corrects, moulds
and perfects the mental faculties and
The authenticity of a
moral character of the disciple. Second,
disciple is defined by
their proximity to their this sort of discipleship works best when
predecessor. modelled by predecessor.
With such “direct succession
relationships” between predecessor and
successor, the primary legitimacy a successor has is due
to their direct succession relationship with predecessor.
Instead of professional managerial and technical skills or
familial and collegial ties being the primary determiners
or mediators of successor success, it is their proximity to
predecessors that counts.
It is worth noting here that enacting direct
succession relationships by incumbents readying
replacements is regarded by some contemporary
leadership studies as being a less effective form of
leadership development26. This is because of an
assumption that building the bench strength of an overall
leadership team is more effective than slating or
shortlisting specific candidates as replacements.
However, direct succession relationships as
defined here are about the direct discipling relationship
between incumbent and successor. The aim is two-fold.
Build the strength of an overall team of successors and
prepare specific successors to take over particular roles.
37 | P a g e

39. 7KEYS
Therefore, direct succession relationships are
primarily about incumbent attitudes towards successors
and vice versa. Remember what the leader said: “I no
longer call you my staff because staff do not know what
their leaders are doing. Instead I call you my friends,
because everything I have learned from my predecessors
I have made known to you.” Treating potential
successors as friends and colleagues rather than
subordinates or staff is a genuine outworking of this
successional truth.
Conclusion
Obviously the potential for abuse in direct
succession relationships is often found in the close ties
necessary between predecessors and successors for these
relational bonds to occur. This risk factor must be
acknowledged. Due to such biases being a problem, in
most successions the rule is that outgoing leaders are
usually not involved in the final choice of successors or
tend to leave prior to their appointment27.
Consequently, few outgoing leaders are directly
involved post-succession in advocating for successors.
Indeed this is a realistic and pragmatic approach,
especially when dealing with leaders proven to be
selfishly orientated. However this approach falls short in
successions for two important reasons.
First, outgoing leaders held responsible for their
own successional outcomes have a higher stake in them
being successful. Second, as will be discussed more in in
the final seventh 7Key, outgoing leaders can have a
positive impact post-succession as advocates for
successors—both for newly incumbent leaders and the
next generation of successors.
On this basis, preparing ready replacements as
successors requires incumbent to sacrifice their time to
personally prepare successors both pre- and post-
succession. This is an integral part of an outgoing
leader’s pre-succession ministry phase and post-
succession mastery phase of a sacrificial succession.
38 | P a g e

40. 7KEYS
Obviously, a reorientation towards personally preparing
ready replacements may be ‘strange’ for many leaders.
Despite these views, research shows that potential
successors value such direct succession relationships
more highly than virtually any other forms of leadership
development28. Incumbents who practice such direct
succession relationships with potential successors will
find this activity personally challenging and rewarding.
Strong bonds between incumbent and potential
successors are formed.
Similarly, organisations that support predecessors
in this activity of directly preparing ready replacements
will find their leadership pipelines start flowing again. In
closing this chapter, it must be acknowledged that
preparing ready replacements through direct succession
relationships between predecessor and successor is
potentially open to abuse.
Due to these legitimate concerns, the next two
keys—exposing egos and open oversight deal with this
potential problem of succession biases and favouritism
openly and honestly, with practical suggestions. Despite
these risks of bias in direct succession relationships, if
ready replacements that are sacrificial rather than selfish
begin to dominate, then selfish orders can and will be
overturned.
To recap, the process of readying replacements
starts with the ability to see that healthy leadership
transitions have three distinct phases: pre-succession, a
succession event and post-succession. For a sacrificial
succession to occur, these three phases involve 1) a
ministry of altruistic service prior to and through
leadership, 2) the primary mediator of these direct
succession relationships is incumbent leader sacrificing
their leadership mid-tenure and 3) a mastery of advocacy
post-succession by outgoing leader is a continuation of
this relationship by advocating for newly incumbent
leader and readying the next generation of successors.
It is important to understand that incumbents and
successors mediate each of these transitional phases
sacrificially or selfishly. Remember the equation:
39 | P a g e

41. 7KEYS
ministry mediates mastery? As a rule, if a sacrificial
succession is not deliberately enacted then, by default, a
more authoritarian succession that is either familially or
managerially orientated is the most likely outcome.
Because each potential successor goes through a
number of transitional ministry, mediatory and mastery
phases in their lifetimes, tracking and comparing
sequences of these transitions is important to ascertain
selfish to sacrificial successor orientations. By comparing
within and between these transitions, the altruistic to self-
interested progression of a potential successor can be
ascertained and tracked.
The next key of exposing egos is particularly
helpful for providing insights into the sacrificial to selfish
behaviour, progression and regression of potential
successors. It exposes the selfish sacrifices that aspiring
successors are willing to make and explains how to deal
with such potential conflicts in a positive way.
To practically apply the main points of this chapter
in preparing altruistic ready replacements in a
succession, keep these main factors in mind:
1. Make sure the pre-succession is long enough to
observe first-hand how potential successors serve
others prior to and through leadership.
2. Note the importance of comparing these two
distinct aspects of a ministry of service over a
number of transitions if possible.
3. Ensure that the primary mediator of direct
succession relationships is incumbent leader who
intentionally prepares sacrificial successors.
4. Ready replacements are prepared for a transition
because of being informed in advance of the
succession timeline by incumbent.
5. Use the succession equation: ministry mediates
mastery to check the sacrificial to selfish progress of
potential successors over a number of transitions.
7Keys.
40 | P a g e

42. 7KEYS
7Keys-3
Expose Egos
“I have paid the price of your succession. You
are now ready to succeed me. Now I will go
back to see which of the others are ready” –
Leader
There was a leader with three followers. One day
they came to him asking, “What must we do to succeed
you?” The Leader answered, “Are you ready?” The first
follower replied, “I think so.” The second, answered, “I
believe so.” The last replied, “Not yet.” “Follow this
road,” the Leader said, pointing into the distance.
Eventually you will come to three gates.
The first and largest gate has written on it one
word: ‘MASTER’. By entering it you will master
whatever you try. On the next and second largest gate
you will find inscribed ‘MEDIATOR’. Upon entering it
you will be able to mediate whatever you want. The last
and smallest gate is imprinted with the word ‘MINISTER’
and upon entering it you will be able to minster to
whomever you choose.
Remember to select carefully, their Leader said,
your successions depend on it.” Following the road, the
first of the three followers arrived at the three gates and
thought, “If I master everything, I can do just about
anything…” Entering the largest gate the follower
became ‘Master’. Next to arrive was the second follower,
who thought, “If I can mediate between anybody I can do
just about everything.”
Entering the second gate he became ‘Mediator’.
Last to arrive was the third follower. Looking at the three
gates he thought, “I am not ready to master or mediate,
but maybe I can serve my leader.” He entered the third
41 | P a g e

43. 7KEYS
and smallest gate and became ‘Minister’. Each went on
their respective journeys using their chosen strengths.
Eventually each arrived at a great river too wide to
cross. Looking around each saw the other and their
leader standing looking across to the other side. “We
must cross the river”, the Leader said. While they were
standing looking at the vast expanse of water, a small
boat with a rough looking boatman appeared. “I only
take two passengers at a time and one stays with me as
payment for the other’s passage to the other side,” the
Boatman growled. Each looked at the other.
Master spoke first, “Boatman, as Master I can offer
you either Mediator or Minister as my payment”.
Mediator followed by saying, “As Mediator, I can offer
you Master or Minister for my passage.” “But which of
you are willing to sacrifice yourself for the other? Only
one of you will set foot on the other side; the other must
remain as my payment,” reminded the Boatman.
Remaining silent, both Master and Mediator shook
their heads. Finally, Minister spoke to his leader, “As
your servant, I will sacrifice myself for your passage as
my ministry to you.” The Leader and Boatman nodded
in agreement. Off they set, leaving Master and Mediator
arguing about who should pay for the other’s passage.
Soon they were nearing the opposite bank.
“Remember our deal”, Boatman threatened, “one of you
must sacrifice your passage for the other.” As the boat
bumped the bank, Minister bowed his head, accepting his
fate. Suddenly he felt himself being lifted onto dry land.
“No!” Minister cried, “I did this for you.” The
Leader replied, “Everything I have learned from my
Leader I have made known to you. I have paid the price
of your succession. You are now ready to succeed me.
Now I will go back to see which of the others is ready.”
Successor characteristics
Three Gates is an analogy about succession as the
handover of leadership. It shows the characteristics of
leadership successors. Any would-be successor should
be able to recognise more of themselves in one of these
42 | P a g e

44. 7KEYS
characters than the others. Peel away the platitudes and
these characteristics are also evident in their fellow
leadership competitors.
Anyone who has ever been involved in or with a
leadership succession knows how competitive such a
contest can be. There are spoken and unspoken
arguments about who is the greatest. Getting someone
close to the leader to put in a good word for you, like a
family member, friend or colleague is a common ploy,
especially in dynastic successions.
Another effective tactic, if used with tact, is taking
the direct approach and personally seeking special
favours. Being willing to serve and even sacrifice in
anticipation of meriting special favour is also a key
strategy of selfish leadership successors.
When we hear about these selfish behaviours most
of us become indignant, right? Yet if we are honest we
have all played these games or thought about playing
them. Most leadership successors are defined by the
succession orientations exemplified by Master and
Mediator in Three Gates.
Even Ministers, in most
Being willing to serve and
even sacrifice in anticipation cases, serve with self-interest in
of meriting special favour is mind. In other words, they serve
also a key strategy of selfish with expectation. This selfish,
leadership successors. ultimately authoritarian,
behaviour is the antithesis of the
sacrificial leadership succession
enacted by the Leader.
Instead, in Three Gates, minister showed by his
willingness to altruistically serve and sacrifice for his
leader glimpses of genuine servant leadership. However,
in Three Gates, the real game changer was the sacrifice by
the Leader of his leadership for his successor’s success.
This definition of sacrificial succession is the main
topic of the last key. For the purposes of exposing egos,
Three Gates emphasises that successors act sacrificially or
selfishly or somewhere in between. Adam Smith (1723-
1790) in “The Wealth of Nations” argues that self-interest
is the mediating characteristic separating the two29.
43 | P a g e

45. 7KEYS
Smith says few people act sacrificially without self-
interest, yet are of better character than those who are
motivated by purely selfish ends.
Similarly, ministry, mediatory and mastery
characteristics can be interpreted by successors selfishly
or sacrificially as Three Gates shows. While selfish
interpretations are the rule, the strange exception is a
sacrificial interpretation of each characteristic. This
involves a ministry of service to others by both
predecessors and successors, the mediatory sacrifice of
leadership by incumbents for
successors and their ongoing
The reason for his failure, mastery of advocacy post-
according to his boss, was that he succession for successors.
had focused on physical qualities A key requirement is that all
and mental faculties rather than
potential successors must undergo
the moral character and ethical
conduct of the candidates. a sacrificial ministry phase before
they can go on to mediate and
master in leadership. Because these
days, many potential successor ‘ministries’ consist of
technical, educational and managerial expertise, they
have seldom learned to minister sacrificially. Naturally
they tend to mediate selfishly.
Heart before head
Therefore, before a sacrificial succession can be
enacted, it is crucial to expose selfish and sacrificial egos.
To do this the focus of successor assessments must first
and foremost be on a potential successor’s character
rather than their mental faculties or physical attributes.
The following true story explains this different use of
priorities in choosing successors well.
A senior manager was charged by his boss with
the job of choosing a successor to replace an
underperforming leader. An experienced manager of
men, he chose a group of candidates who physically
looked the part for the job and passed all the
psychological tests.
His checklist included assessments of their 1)
physical appearance, presentation and style, 2) positional
44 | P a g e

46. 7KEYS
power, standing and status, 3) physical dimensions such
as height and stature, and 4) their personal mental and
spiritual faculties. All passed with flying colours,
particularly the first candidate who the manager was sure
would be accepted by his leader. He was the “one”!
You can imagine, then, the manager’s surprise
when his boss rejected his first choice as candidate and
his shock when his leader informed him that none of his
short-listed candidates qualified as successors. The
reason for his failure, according to his boss, was that he
had focused on physical qualities and mental faculties
rather than the moral character and ethical conduct of the
candidates. This manager is not alone in making this
mistake when choosing successors.
In most cases, the first four physical and mental
qualities receive the most attention. For example, in
many Eastern cultures, points one and two usually
dominate. Status and standing often take precedence
over physical and psychological attributes. Westerners
consider point one and prefer point four in particular.
The predominance of personality tests and assessing gifts
and strengths is indicative of this focus. The point made
by this story is that when considering leadership
successors heart before head must apply.
Bred or built?
If not, then the wrong successors are likely to be
chosen because of an overemphasis on favoured
personalities and physiques and an under-emphasis on
character and conduct. Obviously the steps that the
manager took were helpful in characterising his
candidates. These methods are commonly employed
today because of the recognition that there is an integral
link between the physical and psychological. People are
both bred and built.
Therefore, the manager was right to look at the
physical style and standing of the candidates and in
assuming that some traits, such as personality, are
inborn. Equally, attributes built on through life
experiences were also tested. Research supports both
45 | P a g e

47. 7KEYS
approaches, with the main argument being around the
degree to which a person is born as or built into a
leader30. Historically the trend has been gradually
changing from an emphasis on inborn personality traits
to that of desirable attributes that anyone can develop
irrespective of their original personalities.
Indeed, there is no doubt that certain personalities
may be more naturally suited for leadership31. Research
shows, for example, that extroverts often tend towards
mastery of others and those who are mediatory
orientated may be more open and conscientious, whereas
ministry orientated individuals can be naturally more
agreeable and altruistic.
This normal distribution of natural ministers,
mediators and masters may well produce more
mediatory orientated people in the middle and masters
and ministers at either end of the spectrum as a “Bell
Curve” predicts. However, the main point of the stories
about leaders who overturned orders by promoting the
last first, sacrificing leadership for successors and
focusing on character rather than capabilities is that
exposing egos must ultimately go beyond the physical
and psychological to be genuinely effective.
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Ministers Mediators Masters
Figure 7: Natural Distributions of Leaders
The reason for this truth should be obvious from
the stories and analogies shared so far. All of the
‘strange’ actions described in these cases were unnatural
and challenged established norms. Importantly, they
ultimately did not rely on physical or psychological traits
46 | P a g e