The question arises not just because Oracle recently announced that two executives are the company’s new CEOs, succeeding Safra Catz, who had been CEO or co-CEO for the past 11 years. Making the succession more intriguing, Catz has been elevated to the board of directors with a previously unheard-of title, while founder Larry Ellison continues as chairman of the board and chief technology officer, but with duties that are by no means transparent. Result: We know who Oracle’s CEOs are by title, but who they are in reality may be less obvious.

The stakes in Oracle’s unique succession experiment are extraordinarily high. The company’s stock has suddenly rocketed, doubling in the past four months, making Oracle the world’s 12^th most valuable company. It’s a magnificent performance, but investors might like to know, especially now—who’s really running the show?

In the plain vanilla version of managing a big corporation, it’s simple: The CEO runs the show, and the board oversees the CEO and overall management of the company. It doesn’t wade into day-by-day decisions. But in some companies, 11% of the Fortune 500, the board is led by an “executive chair” who is not the CEO but who participates in the company’s management while also running the board. Typically, the executive chair is the previous CEO, and the new CEO typically reports to that person. “When you’re executive chair, the buck stops with you,” says Charles Elson, a corporate governance expert who has served on multiple boards. “It’s a title change with little meaning. You’re still running the show, period.” Think of it this way: “executive chair” = “real CEO.”

At Oracle, the board made long-time CEO Ellison executive chair in 2014, and Catz and Mark Hurd became co-CEOs. But then things get murky. Ellison quickly stopped calling himself executive chair and adopted his current title, though the company doesn’t seem ever to have announced any change in his role. (Oracle has not responded to queries.) Catz and Hurd continued as CEOs until Hurd took a leave of absence then died in 2019, after which Catz carried on alone.

With that as background, look at Catz’s new title: Executive Vice Chair of the Oracle Board of Directors. It’s a bit odd because in corporate governance, “there is no such title as vice chair of the board” says Elson. Corporations are required to have boards, and boards must have chairs, but that’s it. In addition, it’s hard to see how a board could include Catz as executive vice chair, even as an honorific title, unless it includes Ellison as executive chair, in reality if not in title; otherwise the vice chair would hold more power than the chair.

All of which suggests that Oracle’s new CEOs, Clay Magouyrk and Mike Sicilia, may not quite be CEOs in the usual sense. With two of them, the corporate bucks never fully stop with either. Plus, with at least one board member who is also a declared executive, they’re outranked.

So how many CEOs does Oracle have? Officially two, arguably four. And who knows, maybe it will all work spectacularly. What we know for sure is that no matter how this set-up goes, CEOs, directors, and ambitious executives will study it for years.

Fortune Global Forum returns Oct. 26–27, 2025 in Riyadh. CEOs and global leaders will gather for a dynamic, invitation-only event shaping the future of business. Apply for an invitation.

Sibling rivalry. Lying. Greed. Betrayal. A controlling, narcissistic father and a crumbling family empire with no one to hold it up.

Though we could be looking at any number of Shakespearean tragedies, the above is a loose plotline for the HBO show Succession. While the show is fictionalized, there are dysfunctional families and dysfunctional companies everywhere. Often, the two coalesce in a dystopian reality that makes for great entertainment but terrible business. It also gives the false impression that families that go into business together will only ever implode their relationships with their clients, their shareholders and each other.

In truth, well-educated leaders understand that the unpredictable and shocking final episode of Succession is what it looks like when you don’t have a succession plan—something that should be in place long before the head of the company passes away or Dr. Phil is called in for an intervention.

In real life, effective succession planning can save companies, not destroy them.

No one knows this better than Ivan Lansberg and Devin DeCiantis, who co-wrote The Enduring Enterprise as a tribute to the work they do together at Lansberg Gersick Advisors, an advisory company dedicated to serving the world’s leading family enterprises.

“One of the things that’s so unique about succession is just how predictable and inevitable it is,” DeCiantis says. “Not all risks are going to present themselves in such an obvious way to every single organization.”

“This is one of the reasons why we’re out there talking about this,” he adds. “We want more people to attend to this proactively rather than reactively.”

Yet reactively is how many companies—including family-run ones—respond.

Why do so few companies think about succession planning?

“Despite the fact that we’ve been at this now for 30 years, warning [people] that this is an important thing to do,” Lansberg says, “lots of very sophisticated companies globally don’t have good succession plans.”

Domestically, data from PWC’s 2023 US Family Business Survey reveals that in 2021, only 34% of family-run businesses had a robust, documented succession plan in place. So what’s preventing so many businesses from proactively creating succession plans if they’re so important?

The answer, Lansberg says, is layered—particularly when it comes to family businesses.

“Many entrepreneurs launch into building companies, and at some point in their development… limitations of their own biology come in and hits them in the face, and they start wondering, ‘How are we going to continue this enterprise? And how do I pass it on to my kids or not?’” he says. “Wrestling with that question becomes a very important feature, not just for the family’s continuity as an enterprising family but for all of the families that live off the enterprises that… [these] founders create.”

Still, broaching topics of death and hierarchy aren’t things that most families are naturally hard-wired to discuss.

“If you do the mental experiment of sitting with your parents to talk about what’s going to happen with the family when they’re no longer with you, it’s a scary proposition,” Lansberg continues. “It raises the question of how we’re going to deal with life without them, but it also erases all of the uncertainties of… my kids being greedy. Are they pursuing other objectives and not caring about us, and so forth and so on.”

Succession planning takes time

Another issue is one of obsolescence. According to Lansberg, reinvention is often necessary for a company to survive in the current marketplace. This can include bypassing blood lineage by bringing in non-family executives who may be able to offer fresh perspectives that can move the business forward. But most families may avoid these discussions out of fear.

“The sum total of all of these factors leads many companies to get caught flat-footed at the very moment when these issues need to be clarified and thought through,” Lansberg says. “And unfortunately, because of that, many end up failing.”

Scrambling can easily be avoided, DeCiantis adds, but disaster prevention takes concerted effort.

“It behooves any organization that desires long term success to… be more proactive and not just wait for the heart attack or the final episode of an HBO series to inspire them to attend to something that actually does take a considerable amount of time,” he says. “Succession planning isn’t something that you sit down to at 3 [p.m.] on a Friday afternoon and finish at 4 [p.m.] and call it a day, and you say, ‘Okay, I’ve got the plan, [so] let’s go and execute this now,’ and by Monday morning, there’s a new regime in charge.”

Which companies are doing it right?

In their book, DeCiantis and Lansberg show family business leaders across the world who they say have gotten succession planning right. In addition to highlighting notable family-run companies like Kikkoman, Samsung and the New York Times, the duo have profiled global companies that are still standing strong after surviving military coups, war, economic challenges, terrorist conflicts, technological shifts and political instability.

Here are just a few notable examples:

Toraya

One marker of success that DeCientis and Lansberg have seen replicated around the world in many cultures and industries—as well as in this company in particular—is submitting to the patronage of a powerful political entity. For instance, Toraya’s founding family has been making Japanese sweets (wagashi) for the Imperial House for over four centuries.

“Toraya was the preferred sweet maker to the Imperial House,” DeCiantis says. Because the family’s wagashi became desirable to the crown early in the first generation, he adds, they were given an imperial crest, which cemented their lifelong relationship to the now constitutional monarchy.

“[Toraya’s] success was so tied to the Imperial House that when [the capital] moved from Kyoto to Tokyo in the 1800s… Toraya [moved] with them,” he adds. “Their success is vested in the integrity that comes with the blessing of the Imperial House.”

CEMEX

Another enduring enterprise in the book is CEMEX, a pioneering Mexican family business founded by the Zambrano family in 1906. DeCiantis and Lansberg say that the family navigated economic upheavals and global market expansions to transform the company from a regional cement firm into a global leader in building materials.

IKEA

Founded by Ingvar Kamprad in 1943, the Swedish startup leveraged its early mail-order business to become a global leader in home furnishings. It also deployed modular strategies in business and ownership to overcome significant economic challenges and shifting market dynamics and maintain its commitment to affordable, high-quality, resilient designs.

Looking to the future

For companies that are hoping to weather the storms of unpredictability—whether they’re economic, political or familial—Lansberg and DeCiantis say that while being rooted in tradition has its merit, growing with the times is a more direct route to success.

“You have to think about the company… you want to build, not the one that exists today,” Lansberg says, “and then break down the skill sets you need to be able to succeed at that company.”

DeCiantis adds that success in succession is possible—“You just need to be intentional and patient and invest the time [and resources] necessary to get it right.”

This article originally appeared in the July 2025 issue of SUCCESS+ digital magazine.

Photo by dotshock/Shutterstock.com

If you’ve ever seen the HBO original series Succession or have heard of the Murdoch family’s succession drama, you might already know that succession planning can get messy. A succession plan needs a lot to succeed, and gaining the support of key stakeholders, such as the board of directors or investors, is essential.

When developing a leadership pipeline, be it the CEO position or other major role, securing the support of these integral members of your company will ensure your plan runs smoothly. And while the ideal scenario would be for your stakeholders to embrace your plan with open arms, unfortunately, this is often not the case. To help facilitate an easier transition for your company, we spoke to experts to understand how to gain buy-in from investors and the board on a succession plan.

3 tips to ensure a succession plan goes over smoothly 

To develop a succession plan that stakeholders will support, experts agree that it comes down to clear communication, identifying the right talent and preparing them for the role early on.

1. Focus on Communication

The most important action a leader can take to ensure a trouble-free transition is to communicate clearly and often with the investors and the board of directors about the plan, says Marissa Rodriguez, the founder and CEO of Through Experience, a platform that helps CEOs grow their e-commerce business. 

“Uncertainty can often breed confusion and chaos,” she says. “This is why it’s so important that leaders overcommunicate, have clear intentions and can give others a sense of direction.”

To provide clarity on the process, Rodriguez advises developing a plan with key milestones and dates that everyone can reference, from identifying and training potential successors to their eventual assumption of the role.

2. Create a culture of succession planning

Raising a succession plan to your investors and board of directors might cause concern, but if your company is always planning for leaders’ replacements, it will feel like the norm to key stakeholders.

Mary Josephs, founder and CEO of Verit Advisors, an investment banking advisory firm, recommends giving “constant attention to succession for all major roles across the organization. This means early talent identification, coaching and training, exposure, and support.”

To build a company accustomed to succession planning, Christine Edwards, principal at The Red Bee Group, a business consulting firm, recommends that the CEO and CHRO identify potential leaders who are two to four levels down on the organizational chart and begin orienting them early on. “A process by which directors can meet with those leaders earlier on in their careers is helpful, as is bringing those leaders to the board or committees to discuss issues,” she explains. 

For potential leaders outside of the organization, Edwards says, “benchmarking external candidates with a smaller group of directors is also healthy and provides the ability to compare skills and accomplishments.”

3. Invest in potential talent

Once potential leaders are identified, it’s critical to invest in them to ensure they are ready to fulfill the role when it’s time. Having talent pinpointed and already familiarized with the role prior to their transition will help investors and board members feel confident in your plan.

To prepare a successor for the job, Josephs recommends giving them time to shadow the exiting leader before they assume the position.

“This is expensive, as it often includes the next executive shadowing the previous executive for six months to a year. However, it is well worth the investment. It provides time for transitioning key relationships and trust (investors, team, clients, industry, COIs, etc.), understanding client and team nuances to be effective, [and a] safe space to practice decisions,” Josephs says.

Getting key stakeholders’ buy-in

To gain your investors’ and board members’ support, you’ll need to have plenty of discussions about the plan in order for everyone to feel comfortable moving forward.

According to Edwards, the leader or CEO should begin the conversation by discussing any upcoming leadership shifts before they happen and delving into why they are happening. “Repeating those discussions a few times before the changes are made provides ample time for the board to reflect, ask questions and signal agreement with the changes,” she says.

Josephs recommends the CEO share their vision on what strengths and capabilities will best serve the organization. “It [might] paint the picture on why we would look outside the organization, or why there are strong internal candidates,” she says.

To gain buy-in from your investors and board of directors on your succession plan, Rodriguez says you’ll need to be aligned on these five issues:

• Why are we doing this succession plan?
• What does success look like at the end of the transition?
• What does success look like long term?
• What could go wrong? How are we going to mitigate those possibilities?
• What benefits emerge from this transition to the overall business?

Challenges to succession planning 

When succession planning, roadblocks are inevitable. Here are some challenges that might arise during the process and ways to navigate them.

1. Conflict of interest

Be wary of conflicts of interest when doing succession planning. For example, if the incumbent has shares in the company, this could lead to bias in their decision-making during the process, such as supporting a potential successor who would increase or maintain their financial interests rather than choosing a candidate that is best for the company’s long-term success.

To navigate these issues, Henry Penix, CEO and executive chairman of Soaak Technologies, which specializes in sound frequency composition therapy, says to look to your company’s bylaws or operating agreement to locate what your business has decided when it comes to succession. 

“These documents will also mention what happens with shares in a company owned by a majority or significant shareholder. Typically, things like voting control, the purchase of shares outstanding and management are clearly and legally defined,” Penix says.

The board of directors will use these internal rules to ensure that the succession planning process is fair and unbiased.

“Conflicts of interest should always be monitored,” Josephs says. “One should not stay in a position if they are no longer the best leader to drive shareholder value. But it can be enticing to stay if stock prices are growing, increasing personal wealth. The culture needs to be about the organization’s overall growth.”

2. Lack of buy-in from the board of directors or investors 

Even if you have spent months developing a concrete succession plan, there’s always the possibility that the board of directors and investors won’t give their support.

“If the investors/board of directors do not align with the initial intention of the succession plan, it will be a challenge for the leader,” Rodriguez says. “If they do not want the leader to leave and are not receptive to this intention and idea, then the leader might have to sell them on the reasons why it is to their advantage to bring in a new leader.”

3 Personnel issues

It can get sticky when someone who’s seen as a natural choice to succeed a leader is not picked for the job.

“Perhaps the obvious internal candidate has been your right and left hand as you led the company. Perhaps the company has a history of promoting from within. Yet you know this No. 2  is not the right leader to hold the CEO spot. These are tough decisions,” Josephs says.

“All stakeholders and candidates need to understand this is not personal; it’s business,” she adds. “Those not chosen are not inferior candidates. They’re just not the best choice now.”

Having these difficult conversations upfront can mitigate potential upset later. “Clarity always wins,” Rodriguez says. “The more clear one is about the intention and what is required in order to achieve success (and the desired outcome) the better for everyone involved.”

Photo from NYCKellyWilliams/Shutterstock.com