A succession plan can assign future ownership and authority. But developing the judgment to exercise that authority requires more than a plan. The formal transfer of authority or ownership is an event. The development of judgment is a process.
A family can have experienced principals and capable advisers while its future owners have little practice in judgment. For example, the experienced principal explains why earlier decisions were made. Professionals assess the options and resolve technical questions. Next-generation family members receive a clear explanation of the conclusion. Everyone may be doing useful work. Yet the explanation can arrive after the choice has been settled. That leaves next-generation family members informed about the decision, but without having evaluated the alternatives themselves. Forming a recommendation before the decision is made reveals what future owners understand and what they have missed.
How consistently that preparation happens is a separate question.
For its 2026 report, UBS surveyed 307 of its own family-office clients. Of these, only 27% reported a structured process to educate and prepare heirs for future roles. However, that percentage should not be treated as representative of all family offices. Nor does the lack of a structured process mean that families are not preparing heirs informally. [1]
Separately, Deloitte’s 2026 research surveyed senior executives at large family businesses. It found that only 37% were highly confident in the next generation’s preparedness for succession. This records their confidence; it does not independently establish whether successors are ready. [2]
KIRKBI, the Danish holding company of the Kirk Kristiansen family behind LEGO, illustrates how support for current owners can sit alongside preparation for future ones. It reports that the gradual ownership handover from the third to the fourth generation was completed in 2023. Its family office supports family members in their individual ownership roles and helps prepare the fifth generation for future ownership through a dedicated family learning initiative. These published arrangements show a deliberate approach to preparation. [3, 4]
Preparation should fit the person’s age, maturity and responsibilities ahead. Structured learning can prepare family members for a first role and also help those already involved meet the demands of greater responsibility. A carefully chosen case requires participants to explain a choice, examine how assumptions, emotions or pressure may affect their judgment, and consider how to respond. Participation in actual decisions, when appropriate, can deepen that learning through the family’s own circumstances and constraints.
For a future owner, participation also requires understanding the reasoning behind existing arrangements. For example, the reasons for a family’s distribution rules may already be well documented. Preparation involves using that history to assess a current choice: which needs the rules were designed to balance and what has changed.
In a family decision that is chosen as a learning opportunity, the roles can remain clear: professionals provide analysis and advice; the experienced principal contributes family context; the next-generation principal develops a recommendation; and the authorised decision-makers, who may include the experienced principal, retain authority. The learning lies in considering how the decision would affect the business and other family members whose interests may differ from the next-generation principal’s own.
How the decision-makers respond to the recommendation matters. If only their preferred answer is acceptable, the exercise may teach the next-generation principal to say what secures approval. A fair hearing for reasoned disagreement allows both generations to examine their assumptions. Reviewing the decision together afterwards—with relevant professionals—can reveal what was overlooked and which assumptions held.
As understanding develops, participation can expand from observation to recommendations or responsibility for a specific decision. These are possible forms of preparation, not compulsory stages. Confidentiality, professional responsibilities and the consequences of error help determine appropriate boundaries. There is no need to manufacture a costly mistake to make the learning real.
Within the family, involvement can carry meanings beyond preparation. An invitation to participate can be interpreted as a promise of a future role, or as a preference for one sibling over another. Yet different prospective responsibilities may justify different preparation. Family members pursuing careers outside the family enterprise still need to prepare for their responsibilities as owners. Making the basis for those differences clear can reduce misunderstanding.
Whatever the role, no process can prepare someone for every future decision. Some learning will occur only after responsibility expands, and an unexpected event may shorten the time available for preparation.
The opportunity before succession is to combine structured learning with practice in family decisions while experienced principals and advisers are still available to guide and correct. Together, these can give future owners a firmer foundation for judgment. As those future owners take on greater responsibility, they will have more than explanations of the family’s past decisions to help them weigh the choices ahead. They can then draw on judgments they have made, explained and learned from themselves.