Founders are, by disposition, planners — five-year growth targets, expansion strategies, capital-raising timelines. The one plan that consistently gets deferred is succession: who actually runs the business, and who owns it, the day the founder is no longer able to.
Ownership succession and management succession are different problems
A founder can pass ownership to children in equal shares while designating a single, capable successor — often not the eldest child — as chief executive. Conflating the two, by assuming ownership equality should automatically translate to equal management authority, is a common and avoidable source of post-succession conflict.
The business a founder spends thirty years building deserves more succession planning than the will they draft in an afternoon.
The cost of deferral
Succession planning deferred until incapacity or death forces a family to make governance, ownership and leadership decisions simultaneously, under grief or crisis, with no time to test whether the chosen successor can actually run the business before they are required to.
A staged approach that works
The founders whose succession actually holds are the ones who begin transferring genuine operating responsibility years before any formal transfer of ownership — testing the successor in real conditions, and giving the founder time to adjust the plan if the first choice does not work.
This note is general commentary on Nigerian legal practice and does not constitute legal advice or create a lawyer–client relationship. Outcomes depend on the specific facts and the applicable law at the time. For advice on a particular matter, speak with the firm.
Keep reading
