Prepare Before the Pressure Hits: Succession Planning in Food Manufacturing

By Julie Curtis, President, Curtis Food Recruiters

Key takeaways:

• Succession planning fails when it’s reactive, something companies scramble to do only after someone quits or retires. Pressure-test readiness now: how exposed is the business, who could realistically step in, and what will the role actually require next.
• Naming a likely successor isn’t the same as developing one. Real succession planning closes specific skill gaps and confirms the person actually wants the job, long before there’s an opening.
• The next leader should match where the business is headed, not who’s currently in the seat. Growth, automation, acquisitions, or new ownership can all demand skills the incumbent never needed.

Most food manufacturers understand the importance of succession planning. The real challenge is prioritizing it before a key departure forces the company into reactive decisions.

Leadership transitions often expose more than a vacant seat. Long-tenured leaders carry years of operational knowledge, customer and supplier relationships, historical context, and cultural influence. Without enough preparation, their absence can create disruption across the business.

And now the company is not simply filling a role. It is trying to replace years of context, judgment, and relationships that keep the business moving.

That is why succession planning should be treated as a critical part of business strategy, not simply as a response to retirement or turnover.

Consider what would happen if someone left tomorrow. How prepared would your organization be?

A useful way to pressure-test that readiness is to ask three questions: 

1. How exposed would the business be? 
2. Who could realistically step into that role? 
3. What capabilities will the company need from that position going forward?

Identify where the business is most at risk

The most significant succession risks are not always tied to the highest titles.

Food manufacturers depend on experienced leaders across operations, food safety and quality, supply chain, procurement, engineering, R&D, sales, and other specialized functions. Their knowledge and decision-making responsibility can be difficult to replace quickly.

The first step is to determine which roles would have the greatest impact on the business if they were unexpectedly vacant. Consider whether the position:

• directly affects operating results or business continuity
• requires specialized industry or technical knowledge
• carries significant food safety, regulatory, or customer responsibility
• is difficult or time-consuming to recruit because of location or limited talent availability
• holds knowledge or relationships concentrated with one individual

If a critical function depends too heavily on one person, the company has a succession risk regardless of whether that individual is expected to leave anytime soon.

Having a successor in mind is not the same as having one ready

Many companies can quickly name the person they assume would move into a critical role. That is not the same as having a prepared successor.

Strong performance in a current role is important, but the next level often requires a different mix of skills. A technically strong leader may need more experience developing teams, influencing across functions, or leading through change.

Companies also need to understand whether the person actually wants the role. Not every high performer is motivated by a larger title, bigger team, or executive responsibility. Those conversations should happen long before an opening exists.

Once a potential successor is identified, define the gaps between where that person is today and what the future role will require. Development might include leading a major initiative, taking on a cross-functional project, or gaining exposure to another area of the business.

The goal is not to create a list of names. It is to create real options.

Protect institutional knowledge before it becomes a vulnerability

Long-tenured leaders often carry institutional knowledge that is never written down: why a process changed, how a customer relationship evolved, which supplier can solve a problem quickly, and what happened the last time the business faced a similar challenge. Waiting until someone announces a retirement to transfer that knowledge is too late.

Companies should identify where critical knowledge is concentrated and begin sharing it well before a transition is on the horizon. Bring emerging leaders into important relationships and decisions, and document critical processes, intelligence, and contacts that should not live only in one person’s inbox or memory.

Documentation will never replace experience, but it can prevent a company from having to rebuild critical knowledge it spent years acquiring.

Build the internal bench but do not assume it will solve every need

Developing talent from within should remain a major part of succession planning. Internal leaders understand the culture, people, and business, which can make future transitions smoother.

But succession planning becomes too narrow when companies assume every future opening should be filled from within. Sometimes there is no internal candidate who is ready. In other cases, the business is changing faster than the internal bench.

Food manufacturers are navigating automation, margin pressure, supply chain volatility, regulatory complexity, acquisitions, ownership transitions, new channels, and changing customer expectations. The capabilities that helped a company succeed in the past may not be the same ones it needs for the next stage.

A strong succession plan should make clear where the company can build talent internally and where outside experience may be the better answer. Staying close to the external talent market can provide awareness of talent availability, compensation, hard-to-find skill sets, and realistic hiring timelines before an urgent need arises.

Plan for the business you are becoming

One of the easiest succession mistakes is defining the next leader by the person currently in the role.

If someone has been successful in a role for a decade or more, it is natural to look for a similar background, leadership style, or career path.

But succession planning should begin with where the company is going, not with recreating where it has been.

Future leadership needs may look very different depending on what is ahead for the business. For example:

• A manufacturer preparing for significant growth may need a leader who has scaled a larger operation.
• A company investing heavily in automation may need stronger transformation and change-management experience.
• A business planning a greenfield operation may need someone who has built teams, systems, and processes from the ground up.
• A company facing challenges may need turnaround experience rather than a leader whose career has primarily been spent in stable environments.
• A family-owned business moving to outside leadership may need someone who can respect the company’s history while bringing greater structure and a new perspective.
• An organization under private equity or new ownership may place greater emphasis on growth, accountability, or transformation.

Those future needs should also be weighed against the capabilities of likely internal successors.

A current finance leader may seem like the natural choice to step into the CFO role, but if acquisitions are expected to be part of the company’s growth strategy, does that person have the M&A experience the role will require? If not, is that experience that can be developed, or will the company ultimately need to look outside?

The same question can arise in commercial leadership. A potential successor may have strong customer relationships and know the existing business well, but if the next stage of growth requires entering new channels, expanding into new markets, or building national accounts, does that person have the skills to lead that work?

So, before identifying a successor, define what success in the role should look like three to five years from now.

What will this leader be expected to accomplish? What challenges will they inherit? What capabilities will matter most? Which already exist internally, and which still need to be developed or brought in from outside?

Ultimately, succession planning is not about replacing a person. It is about preparing for what the business will need next.

Make succession planning part of the business rhythm

The strongest succession plans are not static documents that get reviewed when someone approaches retirement.

They are living parts of talent strategy and should be revisited regularly.

Leadership teams should consistently assess critical roles, bench strength, talent gaps, and whether likely internal successors remain the right choice.

Regular succession discussions should include conversations with leaders about their short- and long-term plans. Companies can be hesitant to raise questions about retirement or future transitions, but avoiding them can leave little time to prepare. The goal is not to assume when someone plans to leave, but to create space for leaders to share how they see the next few years of their career and role.

Those conversations can also reveal changes that fall short of a full departure. A senior leader or founder may wish to reduce their day-to-day involvement while significant strategic initiatives are still ahead. In that situation, the company needs to know who will carry that work forward and whether the team has the experience and capacity to do it. If not, the answer could be developing someone internally, bringing in a new leader, or using fractional expertise for a specific phase of the work.

Planned transitions give companies time to prepare. Unexpected departures do not.

If a critical leader left tomorrow, who could step in temporarily? What knowledge, relationships, or responsibilities would be most vulnerable? Is there a credible internal option? If an external search became necessary, how difficult would the role be to fill, and how long would it realistically take?

An unexpected vacancy is an expensive time to discover those answers are unclear.

Succession planning cannot prevent a retirement, resignation, or unexpected departure. It can, however, determine whether a company is prepared or left scrambling when one occurs.

Julie Curtis is President of Curtis Food Recruiters, an executive search firm specializing in the food and beverage industry. She partners with organizations on leadership hires that support long-term business goals, culture, and evolving talent needs.