One of the most fundamental and important challenges in organizations is the growing need for capable managers in the future. In the future, organizational succession management becomes increasingly important. The future belongs to the organizations that use all their potential and actual opportunities to face new challenges (
1). The principle that has been emphasized in the studies regarding succession management, this culture has been deployed using various scientific models that are not negligible. However, recent studies have mainly overlooked sucssesion management especially in medical universities (
2).
Succession management refers to the process through which the human capacities of organizations are identified for key occupations and positions in the future and are prepared through specialized planning for these occupations (
3). The goal of succession management is to identify talented individuals who are capable of leadership and management responsibilities in organizations, as well as developing leadership and succession management capabilities (
4). One of these organizations is the educational system. Educational organizations are formal organizations where specific goals are achieved, and similar to other organizations, the management of these systems is intertwined with managerial processes such as planning, organization, supervision, control, and evaluation. On the other hand, the philosophies of management and leadership, motivation, communication, and human relations that govern the management activities of these systems could influence their existence and nature (
4,
5). This requirement may stem from the concept of globalization, which has entered the 21st century in the social, political, and economic science fields, remarkably influencing governance frameworks, the geographical boundaries of countries, and cultural norms (
6). The most significant issue in university management compared to other organizations is the presence of a complex and non-standalone campus environment. Furthermore, a foremost problem in the management of universities is the effort to maintain the simplicity of these educational systems as in other organizations (
7).
Several models have been proposed for succession in organizations, which could be mainly categorized as the discipline model, leadership channel model, and seven-point star model. However, there is an urgent need for other models in academic centers; this particularly applies to the academic maturity of university faculty members (
8). From the perspective of faculty, an important component of succession management is talent management and coaching paradigms for succession management (
9). Notably, the alternative models of rearing various industries and non-educational organizations are not applicable to higher education systems (
4,
10). The proposed models of succession management in universities have components such as culture, supporters, communication, competency, and continuity (
11), as well as individual, organizational, and external factors, such as job satisfaction (
12), action plan, and upgrading with preparation (
13).
The results of numerous studies regarding the reasons behind the failure of succession management are indicative of a clear gap between the existing and desirable succession management, which could be attributed to issues such as inappropriate organizational culture, lack of systematic approaches, (
14) and lack of Support from the organization’s senior manager (
15). Furthermore, the unacceptance of the deployment of succession management by the chief organizational management is considered to be a major cause of failure in this regard (
16). The lengthy turnaround of alternate director selection, lack of knowledge, skills, and public acceptance of other faculty members, and lack of standardized search and replacement approaches have also been identified as the challenges against the establishment of successor systems (
2).
According to the literature, specific constraints faced by governmental agencies in the implementation of succession management programs include the political pressure on governmental agencies, bureaucracy and redundant administrative formalities, instability of directors, ineffectiveness of human resource management (HRM), attention to public values, and specific conditions and restrictions against governmental agencies (
17). Among the other important challenges against the deployment of succession management in universities are role ambiguity, inappropriate training of employees, lack of attention to meritocracy, inappropriate performance evaluation and indifference culture, lack of job placement and lack of equal opportunity for promotion are among the most (
18).
Some solutions have also been proposed for the successful deployment of succession management in universities, including the formation of successor reserves, transformational leadership, participatory motivation, design of multidimensional job paths, need assessment, and identification and employment of talented individuals with the highest influence on the deployment and stability of succession management in higher education systems (
19). The consideration of these components makes succession management and talent management an important strategic aspect of higher education programs (
20). The implementation of a strategic plan based on the establishment of succession management in higher education requires using the scientific models of succession management and communication between the model variables. An important variable in this regard is the belief that the senior executives of the organization implement the model and the executive guarantee of the model for its operation (
7). A notable issue to consider in higher education succession management is the impact of extracurricular factors, such as policymaking, extracurricular decision-making in higher education executive affairs, and community culture.
With the introduction of succession management to the strategic plans of universities, the optimal predictive aspects of the deployment of succession management were considered to be organizational commitment and learning, organizational culture, teamwork and team learning, systemic thinking, participatory leadership, systemic thinking, and meritocracy development (
21). For the successful deployment of succession management in universities, other strategies have also been suggested by researchers, including empowerment and talent management (
22), human resource management, and financial management (
23). The strategies resulting from the deployment of succession management may be influenced by various underlying conditions, which have been addressed in the previous studies in this regard. For instance, internal and external resources and familiarity with the culture, laws, and framework of higher education have been introduced by Oppong and Oduro-Asabere as the potential criteria for the identification of senior managers (
24). Furthermore, factors such as accreditation requirements, curriculum development, educational strategies, and educational needs have been addressed by Tucker (
25), while a succession management model has been reported based on the mentoring model (
26,
27). The leader channel model has also been presented in some studies for the succession management of universities (
28).
With the acceptance of this perspective, universities as a complex environment (
29) have come to use four key indicators of human resource output, including staff ethics, organizational climate, job abandonment rate, commitment, and job satisfaction, which have been incorporated into the succession management model in universities. However, the acceptance of these underlying factors in the strategies for the deployment of succession management in public universities should only result in the employment of university principals from efficient human resources through succession management (
11). Among the other consequences of succession management are the minimization of the outcomes of leadership crisis in universities (
30), reduction of the costs of academic organizations through preventing faulty trial-and-errors (
31), avoiding the challenges of leadership weaknesses (
32), higher organizational efficiency (
33), protection of the key expertise and knowledge of the organization (
34), and strengthening the positive organizational culture, and contributing to the survival of the organization (
8).
Succession management should be evaluated based on the goals of each organization without the use of specific programs due to the lack of standard metrics. In the current research, succession management was modeled among the faculty members of the medical universities of Iran using a qualitative method based on the grounded theory.