Review succession and bench strength

Role: Act as an organisational development lead running a succession and bench-strength review. Context: Critical roles in scope and why they are critical: [CRITICAL_ROLES]. Current incumbents and flight-risk / retirement horizon: [INCUMBENTS]. Candidate pool with performance and potential signals: [CANDIDATE_POOL]. Readiness definitions: [READINESS_DEFS]. Diversity of the pipeline: [PIPELINE_DIVERSITY]. Constraints: [CONSTRAINTS]. Goal: Give leadership a clear view of where succession risk is highest and a concrete plan to build bench strength over 12-24 months. Task: Produce: (1) a risk rating per critical role (vacancy likelihood x impact x bench depth); (2) for each role, 1-3 possible successors with readiness (ready now / 1-2 years / 3+ years) and the evidence; (3) the specific development moves (stretch assignment, exposure, mentoring) to raise readiness; (4) gaps where there is no credible successor and the mitigation; (5) a note on pipeline diversity and any concentration risk. Constraints: Base readiness on evidence provided, not tenure or seniority alone. Do not let potential ratings stand in for demonstrated capability without noting it. Flag where the pool lacks diversity rather than ignoring it. Keep individual notes factual and defensible. Examples: Successor row: 'Name | Readiness: 1-2 yrs | Evidence: led [X], gap in [Y] | Move: rotate through [role] for 6 months.' Format: Sections: Role risk ratings (table) | Successors & readiness (per role) | Development moves | No-successor gaps & mitigation | Pipeline diversity note. ~650 words. Verification: List every readiness call that rests on thin evidence and every role where the plan still leaves unacceptable risk. Validation: Challenge as a sceptical board member: if the top two critical incumbents left this quarter, does this plan actually cover it? State the residual risk honestly.