Planning: Strategy, Risk Management, and Succession — The Leadership Tools That Build Resilient Institutions

Most of us understand the value of planning in theory, but we approach it the way many people handle car maintenance. We wait for a warning light, a strange noise, or the realization that something essential has worn down. Maybe we even ignore it for a few weeks, hoping it will go away. But there is no “Fonz from Happy Days” solution; by the time we finally address the problem, we’re already reacting rather than preventing. Nonprofits often fall into the same pattern. Strategy, risk management, and leadership continuity matter every day, not just when the metaphorical steam starts coming out of the hood.

The Persistent Challenges

The nonprofit sector, and also many small-to-midsize businesses, would benefit from linking strategic planning, leadership development, and risk management into one coherent practice. While many leaders grasp this conceptually, they often aren’t sure how to operationalize it. Strategic planning is still treated as a discrete project with a beginning and an end instead of as a management tool that guides decisions throughout the year. Enterprise risk management (ERM), which includes scenario planning, crisis management, and business continuity, is a formal discipline, but many nonprofits aren’t aware that well-established templates and methods exist. Succession planning—for staff at all levels and for board members—is even more neglected, often activated only when someone resigns or a crisis forces the issue. Even when succession planning exists, it’s often only for senior management. From experience, it is often far harder to replace a seasoned plumbing, carpentry, housekeeping, or landscape employee than someone in the C-suite.

Both succession planning and risk management are forms of strategic planning. They are central to institutional stability and mission delivery. They are not peripheral tasks to be postponed until a “perfect” day arrives.

Capacity constraints make this even harder. Smaller nonprofits struggle to maintain the discipline required for continuous planning. Larger organizations may have sophisticated tools but lack the leadership follow-through to keep them active and aligned. In both cases, the result is predictable: leaders are pushed into short-term decisions because long-term thinking wasn’t maintained.

There is also a persistent belief that planning must be frustrating, painful, expensive, and tied to a static document. Many assume that nonprofit leaders cannot manage planning themselves, so a consultant becomes the automatic solution. And there remains a misconception that no simple, structured method or online platform can serve as a reliable long-term planning partner. That mindset is both outdated and limiting.

A sector example helps clarify this challenge:
A midsize human-services nonprofit recently lost its longtime CFO with little notice. There was no succession plan, no cross-training, and no clear allocation of who owned which financial processes. The board shifted immediately into crisis mode, yet no one on the board had a CPA or any operational accounting experience. Vendors were paid late, local government contract audits stalled, program decisions were delayed, and the nascent capital campaign for a new clinic stalled. Nothing about this was surprising in retrospect. It was the predictable outcome of treating succession as an emergency response rather than a core element of risk management.

Listening to Stakeholders

Planning also depends on understanding what the organization’s stakeholders actually need. For a school, that may mean speaking with families in their home languages or checking in with alumni who have a long view of what worked and what didn’t. A clinic might learn more from a few conversations in the waiting room than from a dozen internal reports. A cultural organization often gets its clearest feedback by asking visitors why they come, what keeps them away, or what would make the experience feel welcoming. Often, the answer yields some surprisingly easy-to-implement solutions, for example, more benches, more bathrooms, or a place to eat a pre-packed lunch.

None of this is complicated, but it requires intention. When leaders take the time to listen directly—formally or informally—the information they gather becomes essential input for strategic decisions, risk assessments, and staffing choices.

What’s Changing in an Industry Under Stress

Technology has changed what’s possible for nonprofits. Many organizations can now plan in ways that would have been out of reach even a few years ago. They can update goals more easily, track progress, and keep plans active rather than producing a document that goes stale. In practice, this lets them bypass older planning habits that were slow, expensive, or too labor-intensive to sustain.

Boards are also beginning to recognize that leadership continuity is not an isolated human resources or nominating committee matter but rather a central component of enterprise risk management and strategic planning. The long-term strength of an organization depends on deliberate thought about board and staff refreshment, professional development, exposure to other organizations and conferences, and the inclusion of a diversity of perspectives—especially the voices of those served—in both elected and ex officio roles. Term limits or a clear board culture of rotation can support that. The same rigor many organizations apply to branding decisions, gala themes and hosts, or social media strategies—decisions that feel urgent in the moment—should be applied to leadership continuity and strategic priorities.

Board chairs and audit committees have an essential role in asking whether the organization is prepared for predictable transitions at every level, not just at the top. Leadership risk deserves the same seriousness as financial risk.

At the same time, more nonprofits are learning about the concept of “living plans”—strategy documents designed to evolve rather than sit on a shelf. These plans integrate goals, risk monitoring, scenario planning, and leadership development into a single framework. They bridge long-term strategy with annual operating plans and are reviewed at least monthly, supported by tracking tools and dashboards that give board members and donors the visibility they expect. New technologies have made this level of integrated oversight far more feasible than it was a decade ago.

A simple example of this shift:
A botanic garden conducts a visitor- and staff scenario-planning review every quarter, tied to the seasons. The vice president of operations runs drills, coordinating with emergency-management agencies to ensure that in the event of a visitor incident, natural disaster, or security threat, communication and response plans are in place. When a county-wide power outage occurred, the garden adjusted operations within hours. With advance planning—and a few rented porta-potties—they stay open, serving visitors, and avoiding what could have been a significant disruption.

For smaller organizations, the shift to a living plan and increased communications and reporting can be even more existential. A three-person arts nonprofit conducts a monthly operating and risk review with its board. In a regularly scheduled hour call, staff and board review strategic goals, cash flow, vulnerabilities, and achievements. Because goals and risks are transparent year-round, and wins are acknowledged in real time, the executive director can delegate effectively, and the board can govern and fundraise with confidence. Their scale is small, but their impact is large.

Opportunities and Practical Steps

The opportunity ahead is straightforward: treat planning as a continuous, organization-wide discipline. Strategic goals, risk assessments, stakeholder input, and leadership pipelines should inform one another rather than operate in silos. Planning of all kinds belongs in the same rhythm as financial reviews. When boards evaluate risk exposure, they should examine planning and leadership risk with the same seriousness as operational or financial risk.

Organizations that build this connection into their culture will be steadier during transitions and better prepared for uncertainty. With regular attention, the “warning lights” never need to be a surprise. Leaders can adjust early, stay aligned, and keep the institution moving forward with confidence. And by planning today for the future they want, organizations not only ensure a smoother ride but also strengthen their ability to stay calm, deliberate, and adaptable through the inevitable twists and turns ahead.