Succession Planning Volume 3
Building a Succession Plan That Works
Thanks for joining us once more! Over the past two weeks, we’ve been exploring Succession Planning as it appears under the ARC-PA 6th Edition Standards. We discussed why Succession Planning matters, not as an exit strategy, but as a proactive approach to continuity, stability, and leadership readiness in PA education. Last week, we looked more closely at how the A and E Standards collectively drive this expectation, even though no single standard is labeled “Succession Planning.”
In this final blog of our series, we turn to the most practical question of all: what does a compliant, operational Succession Plan actually look like in practice?
Drawing again on insights shared by two of our consultants, Drs. Tina Butler and Jennifer Eames, in their November 18 webinar, this post focuses on moving Succession Planning from a written concept to something that can be activated immediately when needed.
The Operational Plan
One of the clearest messages from Drs. Butler and Eames was this: a Succession Plan does not live only on paper. While ARC-PA expects programs to have a written Succession Plan, compliance depends on whether the plan is operational. In other words, could your program implement it tomorrow if necessary?
An effective written Succession Plan should clearly outline the following:
who assumes leadership if the program director is unexpectedly absent
how interim leadership is appointed
the institution’s role in hiring and onboarding new leadership
recruitment strategies for both internal and external candidates
a realistic timeline for transition
Importantly, those timelines should include specific timeframes rather than nebulous intentions. ARC-PA expects clarity, not placeholders.
Operational Readiness
What often causes programs to struggle is not the lack of a written plan but the absence of operational details. Drs. Butler and Eames highlighted several areas where programs frequently stumble during leadership transitions.
Access to ARC-PA Systems
Multiple individuals should have access to the ARC-PA Portal before the transition. Portal access is not automatic, even for institutional officials, and must be requested in advance. If the program director is suddenly unavailable, someone else must already be authorized to submit required forms and notifications.
Clear Communication Channels
Shared or departmental email accounts can prevent information from being siloed with a single individual. This ensures continuity when responsibilities shift and helps avoid missed deadlines.
Knowledge Transfer
Critical documents, calendars, reporting schedules, and institutional contacts should not live solely with one person. Succession Planning should include a straightforward process for transferring institutional knowledge and administrative responsibilities.
Website and Public Information
Program websites are a frequent source of compliance issues. Leadership changes, interim appointments, and contact information must be updated promptly. Outdated websites are often overlooked until they become citations.
Operational Succession Planning anticipates these details and assigns responsibility for each step in advance.
Who Should Be Involved in the Plan
At a minimum, Succession Planning must involve:
individuals named in the plan
senior institutional officials responsible for program oversight
Ideally, however, the broader leadership team should also be aware of the plan. Succession Planning works best when it is transparent, normalized, and shared, and not treated as confidential or reactive.
This approach reinforces the idea that leadership continuity is a shared responsibility, not the sole burden of the program director.
Developing Future Leaders Before You Need Them
Another key theme from the webinar was intentional leadership development.
Succession Planning is not simply about naming an interim program director. It is also about the exciting prospect of identifying and mentoring future leaders over time.
Effective strategies may include:
assessing individual strengths and leadership interests
offering mentorship and leadership training
gradually increasing responsibility
observing how individuals respond to expanded roles
This process benefits programs even when no transition is imminent. It distributes leadership capacity, reduces burnout, and strengthens team cohesion.
Most importantly, it ensures that when change does occur, programs are prepared rather than scrambling.
Assistant Director Roles as Succession Planning in Action
One particularly practical recommendation emphasized by Drs. Butler and Eames was the intentional use of Assistant Director roles within PA programs. These positions offer an elegant solution to two persistent challenges: the need for an active Succession Plan and the reality that program directors carry an extraordinary number of responsibilities.
Assistant Director roles enable real-time leadership development, rather than theoretical development. By delegating defined areas of responsibility, whether in didactic education, clinical education, assessment, or operations, programs begin building leadership capacity long before a transition is needed.
Just as importantly, these roles create space for mentorship, skills development, and observation of leadership strengths, all while reducing the unsustainable burden that often falls on a single program director. In this way, Assistant Director positions represent Succession Planning already “at work,” strengthening program stability while supporting healthier, more distributed leadership.
Stability Versus Panic!
It’s worth repeating what we emphasized at the start of this series: Succession Planning ensures stability, rather than “anticipating failure.” In many ways, it’s like an insurance policy that swings into action when the unexpected strikes, so that disruption is kept an a minimum.
Programs with thoughtful Succession Plans protect students from disruption, reduce institutional risk, maintain compliance during transitions, and demonstrate maturity and foresight
Under the 6th Edition Standards, ARC-PA signals that leadership continuity matters for both accreditation and the long-term health of PA education.
Closing Thoughts
I want to extend sincere thanks to Dr. Butler and Dr. Eames for their clear, practical, and generous sharing of expertise. Their webinar helped bring much-needed clarity to a complex and evolving area of the 6th Edition Standards. I also remind readers that webinars presented by Scott Massey PhD, LLC are always free.
Be sure to tune in next week! These blogs are written with PA program directors and leaders in mind, providing practical insight, clarity, and value as our profession continues to evolve, and it is always our pleasure to share what we have learned!
