Hedge fund succession

Hedge fund succession: Don’t sell it short

www.kornferryinstitute.com

1

Introduction Hedge funds are largely a cottage industry with fragmented businesses. They still don’t know what they want to be when they grow up.

Much like people, companies and industries have life cycles. To stretch the analogy, many hedge funds—like those who have founded and run them—have reached or are approaching a new phase in their life cycle, representing the time to consider new leadership. Hedge funds are a relatively new industry, originating during the mid-1960s when the oldest of the baby boomer founders were first active. A new model of leadership is now emerging, something to keep in mind during discussions of succession. While the lone entrepreneur/founder, who focuses little on management development and succession, may not die out completely, larger firms where these and other common practices are institutionalized will be better positioned to thrive and compete.

The hedge fund industry has matured and evolved over the past 20 years and quite significantly in the last 6 years. Institutional investors have a deeper understanding of funds’ investment strategies, risk management, operational infrastructure, issues within the regulatory environment, fee structures, and how to position hedge fund investments within their overall portfolios. Investors have demanded and generally received increased transparency into the underlying positions, unique and flexible fee arrangements and liquidity terms, and an ability to customize their allocations.

“Is the leader today and going forward a tenured investment professional or a business builder who can identify and attract true talent and leaders?”

–John Rohal, chairman, Man Investments USA

Despite the growing sophistication of hedge funds and their investors, the industry is still in its infancy when it comes to adopting successionplanning practices. The reasons for this slow adoption chiefly have to do with the nature of individuals who founded and built these firms as well as the prevailing culture and the nature of the business itself. But as founders consider diverting their time and leadership away from their day-to-day responsibilities inside the firm, addressing the issue of succession becomes unavoidable. Specific approaches may borrow from best practices that are now entrenched in other businesses, although in many cases those practices must be carefully tailored to the differences that make hedge funds unique.

Based on our experience working with hedge funds and the perspectives of industry insiders we tapped for this piece, we present a view of the challenges of succession planning for hedge funds as well as solutions to what is becoming an issue of increasing urgency emerging from a confluence of three factors: the life stage of founders, increased regulation, and the accelerating institutionalization of the industry.

HEDGE FUND SUCCESSION: DON’T SELL IT SHORT

2

Why succession planning?

Why now?

Until recently, hedge funds have been fairly opaque to outsiders, operating in a largely unregulated environment. Individual firms have continued to evolve, as has the entire industry. Hedge funds have grown to approximately $2.7 trillion in assets under management today, with continued inflows likely from both institutional and retail investors despite the recent exit of the asset class by CalPERS. Some recent developments—and repercussions—have had a significant impact on the future direction and shape the industry is likely to take. The revelations of Madoff underscored the need for greater scrutiny of both operational infrastructure and funds overall.

Moreover, the global financial crisis of 2008 was a wake-up call to many institutional investors on how they position their aggregate portfolios. According to a recent survey by KPMG and AIMA, institutional investors now represent 57% of the industry’s assets under management, with larger institutional investors gravitating toward larger hedge fund firms. In addition, since the global financial crisis, hedge funds have had to comply with increased regulation and deeper levels of due diligence, with consultants and allocators demanding increased liquidity and often lower fees.

Perhaps not surprisingly, as the largest funds get larger with more product diversification, they are starting to look and operate less like the insular hedge funds of the past and more like the alternative asset managers they now are. Along with this exponential growth, greater institutionalization, and demand for transparency comes a focus on the future stability of these organizations, which naturally links to ongoing scrutiny of leadership and succession.

Asset flows into hedge funds, both institutional and retail, continue to increase. While many rely on larger and tenured funds (which are increasingly multi-strategy), others are finding returns in smaller emerging managers with specific investment expertise. Regardless of size, however, the vast majority of hedge funds are still run by the original founders. Increasingly these founders—with the titles of chief investment officer, chief executive officer, and chairman—would like to spend more time on philanthropic and other personal pursuits.

Many are currently confronted with the issue of succession, and if they are not addressing it directly themselves, the institutional investor is raising it for them.

“The degree of criticalness in succession planning correlates to the duration of the trade or the liquidity lockup provisions. You want that person there for the duration of the trade.”

–James C. McKee, senior vice president and director, Callan Hedge Fund Research Group

3

“Some of those who run hedge funds say ‘all we need is raw talent; just leave us alone,’ and some allocators and investors are okay with this approach.”

–Jane Buchan, CEO and managing director of Pacific Alternative Asset Management Company (PAAMCO)

Unlike publicly traded or more traditional investment management firms that have boards of directors and shareholders, most hedge funds have run their businesses more privately. How do they approach the question of succession? Thoughtfully. Handled skillfully, organizations can have multiple lives, reinventing themselves with successive generations and adapting to shifting business priorities and regulatory environments.

Succession at hedge funds has recently been highlighted by the media as a significant number of founders’ retirement scenarios have unfolded in various ways, from planned succession to simply closing shop.

Attention-getting headlines, such as the Financial Times’s “Hedge Funds Should Invest In Smoother Handovers” and Bloomberg’s “Hedge Funds Facing Succession Challenges,” have highlighted the issues but have not necessarily suggested practical solutions.

What makes succession such a challenge?

What’s in a name? A great deal when it comes to hedge funds.

When the success of an individual’s track record and that of a firm are inextricably intertwined, investors may be understandably skittish about change, especially one that occurs too quickly. Have investors had enough time, exposure, and information to be convinced that the investment success of the firm does not merely reside in one person but is rather institutionalized across a firm and can be replicated by successors? When this has not or cannot be done, founders and their often-eponymous firms have sometimes closed their doors rather than attempt to plan for new leadership.

The actual personality behind the name on the door is as important as the firm’s identification with an individual name. Hedge fund founders have not necessarily succeeded because of their skill as large

HEDGE FUND SUCCESSION: DON’T SELL IT SHORT

institutional team players. They’re accustomed to being in charge, and asking them to plan to cede control of the enterprise is anathema.

In other words, the very traits that made these individuals industry leaders—driving success in a non-institutionalized environment and operating independently in a world where thinking and planning 5–10 years out is a lifetime—may be at odds with traditional succession planning.

Conventional succession planning may prove difficult at founder-run firms for other reasons. When the founder holds most of the equity, no one has sufficient ownership or the power to steer the firm in another direction. And while there is often “shadow equity,” no real control or voting rights are attached to it; for all intents and purposes, these firms are still run by the founders.

Another barrier to implementing succession practices at hedge funds is that while general awareness of its importance exists, there are rarely external boards keeping it top of mind and ensuring the ongoing “care and feeding” integral to the process, not to mention the “long runway.” At both public and private companies, succession planning is primarily a board responsibility discussed regularly throughout the year; it is directly linked to strategy discussions and often to the CEO’s incentive compensation. This is in contrast to earlier approaches, before the adoption of governance practices linked to the interests of shareholders, when succession planning lay squarely with the CEO and was often neglected. Generally speaking, unless a hedge fund has gone public, the existing boards are not the independent force they have become in public companies. By contrast, governance is much looser at hedge funds; boards have less real power.

There is also the possibility that hedge funds may not possess the right leadership bench internally to succeed a founder. A deep understanding of the investment strategy is the sine qua non of any successors, whether they act in an investment capacity or not. Homegrown talent is ideal, but whether the strategy is to develop internal successors or look outside for capable candidates, allowing sufficient time to determine a successor and hand over the reins is crucial.

4

“Hedge funds are guys who got ahead because they didn’t want to sit in asset management firms; they wanted to run the business their way. Now they have to delegate authority when they’ve been successful because they haven’t delegated authority.”

–Jane Buchan, CEO and managing director of Pacific Alternative Asset Management Company (PAAMCO)

“Advisory boards may help a firm’s marketing image, but they don’t do much more than that, except when a firm goes public the often newly constituted public board is charged with critical responsibilities.”

–John Rohal, chairman, Man Investments USA

5

Viewing talent as an asset… really.

Founders have different views of their firm’s raison d’être, as reflected in their outlooks on the future of their firm. Many have not planned beyond their own leadership because they don’t believe they have yet achieved a meaningful valuation for the firm and are focused on maximizing their returns. Some plan to step aside quietly, selling or transitioning to a successor, to focus on personal interests.

A founder’s view of the relative priority of key constituencies— investor, employee, founder/management team/partners, and, if public, shareholders/debt-holders—will also determine whether succession is part of a longer-range plan.

“The amount of autonomy and leeway that teams are given is important in retaining highperforming talent.”

–John Rohal, chairman, Man Investments USA

Firms poised for longer-term success view management and investment talent as their key assets and treat them as such. A systematic approach to hiring, developing, and maintaining key talent will not only help firms retain potential successors but also can serve as an important differentiator in the marketplace, signaling stability, a solid investment strategy, and long-term staying power. Lack of attention to succession planning demonstrates to the rest of the organization that leadership isn’t thinking about their future. That can lead to turnover, although some employees may be comfortable with this approach if they can continue to do the work they enjoy and be paid well for it. Ultimately, however, the strongest performers, if they see no ownership potential for themselves, will likely leave for other firms or launch their own funds.

Viewing talent as an asset to be valued and developed requires more than mere lip service. It is readily apparent, both internally and externally, how seriously a firm takes broadening leadership beyond a single individual.

HEDGE FUND SUCCESSION: DON’T SELL IT SHORT

6

The art of the handover.

Timing is always a critical aspect of succession, but nowhere is it more important than at a hedge fund where the founder’s name is on the door. Particularly when success and performance are synonymous with an individual, investors and allocators require exposure to successors to acquire needed confidence in their ability, before succession actually takes place.

That is a process, not merely an announcement, and requires time— ideally three to five years—and thoughtful positioning.

Assuming a founder settles on a succession choice, the earlier the decision is announced and the more exposure investors have to this individual, the greater their comfort level is likely to be. The perception of stability—that little will change if the fund is doing well—is key. Once the succession is made public, that individual, if not already a known entity, should have the opportunity to closely interact with investors—the more frequent the contact, the greater the degree of trust. The actual transition should be gradual: from joint involvement, with the founder remaining involved as an active investor/decision maker, to little by little becoming less active in the day-to-day activities of the fund. Finally, in the course of a subtle transition, while the founder may maintain an office at the fund and remain available to talk with investors, the successor is really running the show.

Those on the outside should be less aware of a transition in leadership—and when it actually occurs—and more aware that their investment is still in good hands and that little has changed.

“When the founder is a key person, the generator of investment ideas, and decides to leave, investors will need to be reassured: Will the fund suffer without the founder?”

–Frank Meyer, founder, Glenwood Capital Investments

7

Succession practices worth considering and tailoring.

CEO succession planning: Adapting corporate best practices to hedge funds.

Established best practices for other industries have to be thoughtfully adapted to work at hedge funds, which often have very different governance and operating models.

The 3 “Rs” of hedge fund succession planning.

The rule

The rub

The remedy

1. Plan in advance – CEO succession is neither short-term nor event triggered, but an ongoing discussion with the board to address short-, mid-, and long-term company needs.

Hedge funds operate in current and shorter-term (market) environments, which often are at odds with longerterm leadership requirements.

Hedge funds focus on the strategy and longer-term leadership needs in addition to current, shorter-term investment expertise.

2. Engage the board – The board should own and drive the CEO succession-planning process by having it on the agenda regularly, scanning inside and out for potential successors, and ensuring talent development at all levels.

The majority of hedge funds remain private, largely owned and run by original founders.

While some have boards and/ or advisory committees, they are not tasked with driving succession.

Fund founders/CEOs should seek objective guidance from expert advisors in the succession-planning process.

3. Set up a formal assessment process – Facilitated by the CEO, this ensures standards for sustained leadership and provides the board with additional opportunities to evaluate priorities and needs.

While formal assessment processes have become more of a priority, CEO assessments are not the norm. The need to identify internal succession candidates is just starting to take hold.

Founders/CEOs should recognize that they may lack objectivity to properly assess the capabilities of future leaders and should rely on a rigorous, proven assessment process.

4. Create a “future CEO” profile – The board should create CEO profiles that align with the company’s business strategy and represent required short-, mid and long-term competencies for future generations of CEOs.

Hedge funds have historically focused on driving performance versus anticipating future leadership needs.

Focus on creating bench strength by developing insiders who align with future needs of the firm.

5. Expand the pipeline – The wider and deeper the pipeline of candidates the better. Companies should develop talent internally and also have knowledge of top talent in the external market to maximize options and minimize risk.

Due to their generally lean composition, hedge funds do not have the depth of leadership of major corporations.

Focus on both near-term leadership and development at an earlier stage. Bring in outsiders, as necessary, long before a successor is required so they can be developed and steeped in the culture.

HEDGE FUND SUCCESSION: DON’T SELL IT SHORT

8

The 3 “Rs” of hedge fund succession planning. (cont’d.)

The rule

The rub

The remedy

6. Expose the board to the bench– Board members should gain valuable insight into the leadership pipeline by interacting with the company’s highest potential leaders in a variety of settings.

Lack of a credible board to advise potential future leaders.

In the absence of a formal board, assemble a roster of experts and advisors to assess and advise on those being groomed for leadership.

7. Address succession dynamics head on – Succession is a sensitive topic for boards and CEOs, but there are processes for aligning roles and responsibilities.

Without a board to keep a fire lit under CEOs, they may keep their heads firmly planted in the present.

Take the bull by the horns and recognize why succession planning has been avoided and resolve to address it regularly and systematically.

8. Talk succession regularly – At a minimum boards should have an annual, formal discussion with the CEO on succession planning and a mid-year update to maintain succession as an ongoing board priority.

If succession is planned for, at all, it may only be discussed on an ad hoc or immediate needs basis. This has recently become more of a priority for some firms.

Raise the profile and rigor of the succession planning process by tying it directly to regular strategy discussions.

9. Manage the transition – The handoff between incumbent and successor and related communications should be planned well in advance, and roles of all key parties carefully delineated.

Even if a successor has been planned for, a poorly planned transition can rock the boat, send the wrong message internally and externally, and destroy value.

Plan for a gradual transition so that the successor, the organization, and external constituencies can adapt to and buy into the change in leadership.

10. Plan for sudden loss of leadership– In parallel with the long-term approach, companies must have an emergency CEO succession plan in place at all times. This plan should be reviewed at least once annually, and should include multiple options for leadership.

Funds may face significant redemptions, be in greater jeopardy, or even be forced to close, with no emergency successor lined up.

As a first step in succession planning, designate a successor to maintain the confidence of all stakeholders should the “hit-by-a-bus” scenario occur. Ideally, this should be in place for all “key man” professionals.

9

The first principle of succession planning, regardless of the industry, is that even a planned succession may quickly take an emergency course; it’s important to plan for various scenarios. Planned succession is the route assuming all goes as anticipated, but unforeseen events can intercede and necessitate implementing an alternative plan. Emergency succession is a contingency plan that can be kicked into gear to deal with an unexpected event forcing a sudden succession (e.g., health crisis, scandal, CEO departure to another company). This plan would include immediately naming an acting CEO, previously identified, who could be an internal candidate or an interim leader, whether that individual is an internal executive or a board member (assuming there is a board).

Effective succession planning is always rooted in a firm’s strategy. Large public companies focusing on best practices should share a common understanding of the corporate strategy with the board and CEO able to articulate those priorities and plans in the same way. Even in the case of a founder without the input of a board, delineating the strategy is the first crucial step in helping define the specifications for the next CEO, who will help execute that strategy.

Some other commonly accepted best practices are trickier to adapt because they assume the board is leading the process, which is unlikely to be the case at most hedge funds. Properly executed, succession is generally now viewed as a crucial, ongoing board responsibility closely tied to management development.

Succession planning is both a top-down and bottom-up approach to developing management talent throughout an organization, not geared toward just finding a new CEO but rather successors for all key positions. Even in the absence of a board—or where the founder clearly is in charge of succession—it is important to plan beyond just the CEO to successors for all critical contributors in the firm.

When boards serve as a counterbalance to the founder or chief investment officer, it is possible, indeed critical, to maintain clarity between the CEO’s role in succession planning and the role of the board. The CEO’s role is closely tied to developing and assessing internal candidates and then letting the designated committee do its job. Many leading companies also now maintain an ongoing, measurable role for the CEO in the succession process and results, according to specified agreed-upon metrics, are reflected in the CEO’s incentive compensation. With the understanding that CEOs want to do a good job when it comes to succession planning, specific objectives keep everyone on track.

HEDGE FUND SUCCESSION: DON’T SELL IT SHORT

10

Adapting to a shifting landscape.

The model for the hedge fund that was successful 10 years ago or even today will likely be far different from the one that will be successful 10 years from now.

Increased regulatory requirements will continue to shape hedge funds of the future. Compliance costs, including increased headcount, will favor the economies of scale of larger funds. The price of entry into the business is already presenting a higher hurdle for start-ups, preventing the creation of firms in the first place, and may also cause them to collapse faster. Proven investment expertise alone is no longer sufficient to maintain a successful enterprise; also essential is proven leadership and the ability to identify talent and develop successive generations of leadership.

The skills, experience, and personal characteristics—and their relative importance—required in a firm’s future leader are most accurately defined by the strategy, which will be unique to each firm. Firms should strive for a rigorous process to create a profile of the type of leader they seek and use that in the succession-planning blueprint against which to assess any possible contenders, internal and external. When focusing on what the strategy calls for in a leader, firms should be careful about giving anyone with a personal connection to the current leadership the inside track—although, depending on the degree of fit with the profile, such candidates may certainly be in the running.

Without a board checking on them, founders managing the succession process can easily fall prey to a biased view of insiders’ capabilities, so they must be hyper-aware of this potential pitfall.

Many founder-run firms have yet to focus on succession planning, but as the hedge fund industry continues to mature, we are beginning to see this change. This should prove to be a good thing for those who built these firms, to witness continued life and growth beyond their personal leadership, an enduring legacy. Effective succession planning calls for deeper leadership insight and management development, and is also an effective competitive weapon in the war for talent. Those who seek to build careers at hedge funds will naturally be drawn to those who demonstrate their commitment to those funds showcasing the strongest talent and a process that ensures a continued steady hand at the wheel. This will create value for these firms well into the future.

“Issues that are most likely to affect the entrepreneurial nature of the hedge fund business are the regulatory ones.

If anything they are getting more stringent.”

–John Rohal, chairman, Man Investments USA

“Succession planning can include nepotism.

That’s the 800-pound gorilla in the room.”

–James C. McKee, senior vice president and director, Callan Hedge Fund Research Group

CEO succession planning

HEDGE FUND SUCCESSION: DON’T SELL IT SHORT

12

Near-term CEO Succession Overview.

Process steps, summary actions, and timeline.

Help Board align on plan, strategic context and CEO success profile ©

©

Board alignment interview process regarding shortand long-term strategic context.

©

©

Link strategic content to CEO challenges, and the experiences and competencies will ensure their success.

Ensure appropriate communications to potential successors.

Determine readiness via a two-day, intensive process including interviews, testing, 360 feedback, and participation in a business simulation of the CEO job.

Build associated specs that the board approves and then use to evaluate potential CEOs.

Gain deep insights into candidates’ experiences, motivations, “hard wiring,” and CEO competencies relative to the success profile and successful CEOs.

24–28 months

18–12 months

© ©

Create and implement development plans

Assess candidate readiness ©

©

Outline development gaps and project when readiness might occur.

©

Create development plans for candidates using 70/20/10 model. ©

©

©

Provide coaching, CEI/ELI, and/or regular progress support to close gaps.

Review finalists and identify the successor

Benchmark external talent Includes full background profile and assessment evaluation of top 10 external candidates against client CEO profile.

Discretely developed without direct contact, using existing relationships and blind references.

Create interface between each candidate and board members through project initiatives/ presentations/ mentoring opportunities.

©

©

©

12 months

TBD

Review progress on development objectives and readiness of internal candidates against potential external talent.

Determine interest in external candidates and assess readiness and fit assessments of the most promising.

Ensure a smooth transition ©

©

©

Provide coaching to address any remaining issues.

Develop an effective transition plan with the outgoing CEO and successor.

Assist the successor in transitioning successfully into the new job.

Conduct in-depth comparison of internal and external finalists.

6–3 months

3–0 months

Korn Ferry’s four dimensions of leadership and talent.

What you do Skills and behaviors required for success that can be observed.

For example: Decision quality, strategic mindset, global perspective, and business insight.

Inclinations, aptitudes, and natural tendencies a person leans toward, including personality and intellectual capacity.

Assignments or roles that prepare a person for future opportunities.

Competencies

Experiences

Traits

Drivers

For example: Functional experiences, international assignments, turnarounds and fix-its.

Values and interests that influence a person’s career path, motivation, and engagement.

For example: Power, status, autonomy, and challenge.

For example: Assertiveness, risk taking, confidence, and aptitude for logic and reasoning.

Who you are

13

Benchmarking CEO candidates: best-in-class profiles profiles.(cont’d.)

Leadership styles Task-focused

Clear and consise communication; seats expectations succinctly; focuses on immediate tasks; expresses views candidly

Social

Approachable; informal, interactive and inclusive; solicits input of others; responds with interest to their views

Intellectual

Sets high standards; relies on knowledge and expertise; communicates detailed expectations and information; inclined to stand firm and assert views

Participative

Collaborative and patient; open to alternate viewpoints; appreciates idea exchange; encourages consensus and involvement

Thinking styles Action-focused

Completes tasks quickly; keeps things on track; persists and follows through; meets commitments consistently

Flexible

Intuitive; generates ideas and alternatives easily; adapts quickly to new circumstances; can shift directions easily

Complex

Focuses on quality; thorough and accurate; designs detailed strategic plans; concerned about the long-term; works according to a plan

Creative

Creative and innovative; looks at issues from multiple angles; appreciates diverse perspectives; very tolerant of complexity

Emotional competencies Ambiguity tolerance

Tolerates or enjoys uncertainty; comfortable with diversity; handles change easily; thrives on variety

Composure

Cool and calm under pressure; emotionally steady; not frustrated easily

Empathy

Sizes up self and others accurately; anticipates the reactions of others; appreciates people’s feelings and preferences

Energy

Mental energy and stamina; capacity to sustain analytic thinking; tenacity in the face of difficult tasks; overall intensity of behavior

Humility

Adaptable to situations; able to accommodate others’ methods; at ease in dealing with diverse styles

Confidence

Willing to tackle risks and challenges; self-assured in dealing with conflicts and tensions; eager to stretch capabilities

HEDGE FUND SUCCESSION: DON’T SELL IT SHORT

CEOs: Mission-critical leadership characteristics.

Evaluating and deploying people accurately

Good judge of others’ talent; recognizes potential; can size up others’ strengths and weaknesses; willing to change his/her mind about people; quickly and accurately gauges person/job/culture fit; balances short and long-term talent needs

Caring about others

Interested in the things other people care about; shows concern/empathy for other people; available and willing to listen; quick to help others; lets people know they matter; relates well to others’ needs

Making complex decisions

Gets specific; digs below the surface; conducts thorough and detailed analysis; handles long-term issues without losing focus; uses multiple problem-solving tools and techniques; defines issues/problems clearly; sought out for advice by others

Relating skills

Warm, friendly, relaxed, and interpersonally agile; makes a pleasant first impression and builds solid relationships; conscious effort to be diplomatic and tactful; builds rapport well; is easy to approach and talk to; displays a variety of tactics for relationship building; adept at dealing with complex interpersonal issues.

Managing up

Knows how to relate effectively with top management; knows how to market self; anticipates top management’s questions/concerns/perspectives; sees issues from an organizational perspective; can sell ideas and solutions to top management; has presence and gravitas

Inspiring others

Skilled at getting individuals, teams, and an entire organization to perform at a higher level and to embrace change; understands what motivates different people; builds motivated, high-performing teams, self-assured, skillful negotiator; communicates a compelling and inspired vision of core purpose

Managing diverse relationships

Relates well to a variety of diverse styles, types, and classes; open to differences; builds effective relationships up, down, sideways, inside and outside; treats others with respect; understands groups, their positions, perspectives, intentions and needs

14

15

KF4D: Assessing near-term CEO readiness.

Time frame to transition: within 24 months or less. Is the CEO candidate ready now?

There is no perfect CEO candidate—everyone has some gaps to fill to be ready to take on the job and be successful.

©

Motivation and hard-wired dispositions need to be sufficiently strong so the executive can perform well in the job.

©

Readiness for the CEO role suggests that the leader has a sufficient set of strengths and solid areas, with a manageable set of development areas.

©

Even if “ready now,” will need time in the CEO role for “fine-tuning.”

©

KF4D: Assessing longer-term CEO potential.

Time frame to transition: 2–5 years out.

Who has the natural dispositions and motivation, as well as the sufficient experience and competence to suggest potential for the CEO role in the future?

Motivation and dispositional hard-wiring must be a good fit for the CEO role. These attributes are fixed and do not change over time (e.g., personality, motivation, cognitive capacity.)

©

High-potential senoir execs need broadening experiences and more competency development to increase their readiness for the CEO role.

©

Through accelerated development support and ensuring progress on goals, can close critical gaps in competencies and experiences.

©

The review of progress will determine which candidates should have their readiness assessed when the time comes.

©

HEDGE FUND SUCCESSION: DON’T SELL IT SHORT

About the authors.

Allison Walker Global sector leader, Hedge Funds and Alternatives ali.walker@kornferry.com

Jane Stevenson Vice chairman, Board and CEO Services, and leader, Succession Planning jane.stevenson@kornferry.com

16

About Korn Ferry At Korn Ferry, we design, build, attract, and ignite talent. Since our inception, clients have trusted us to help recruit world-class leadership.

Today, we are a single source for leadership and talent consulting services to empower businesses and leaders to reach their goals. Our solutions range from executive recruitment and leadership development programs, to enterprise learning, succession planning and recruitment process outsourcing (RPO).

About The Korn Ferry Institute The Korn Ferry Institute, our research and analytics arm, was established to share intelligence and expert points of view on talent and leadership.

Through studies, books and a quarterly magazine, Briefings, we aim to increase understanding of how strategic talent decisions contribute to competitive advantage, growth and success.

Visit www.kornferry.com for more information on Korn Ferry, and www.kornferryinstitute.com for articles, research and insights.

www.kornferry.com

Š Korn Ferry 2014. All rights reserved.

HFSL2014