Perils of succession

"From shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves in three generations” — that’s the adage about family-run businesses. Business succession has plagued successful Canadian families and often the plan of choice was for founders to live as long as possible. During the ‘70s and ‘80s, thoughtful planning and hiring outside help led to notable successes, but more recently succession again appears closer to regression. Today, it seems those who built or guided family firms to fortunes are again thinking that immortality is a family firm’s best bet.

“In my earlier life as a corporate lawyer…I was involved in at least a dozen family shareholder disputes. I’m drawing on 20 years of experience watching family businesses break up.”
IZZY ASPER, CanWest Global Communications Corp. founder, says in 1994 that he is training his children to be owners, rather than managers

“I don’t think that because a person has the same last name that that means they ... must be CEO. I expect there will be a period of professional management.”
TED ROGERS, Rogers Communications Inc. CEO, comments on his succession plans in 2002

“There must be some disappointment for Monsieur Coutu to return, after having previously handed the company over to the second generation.”
PATRICIA BAKER, Merrill Lynch analyst, commentson Jean Coutu coming out of retirement in 2005 to head the pharmacy chain he had handed over to his son François three years earlier

“I don’t believe in leaving hundreds of millions of dollars to your children. That doesn’t achieve the objective of having kids stand on their own two feet.”
PETER MUNK, Barrick Gold Corp. chair, says last year, shortly after selling Trizec Properties Inc., his commercial real estate firm, for US$4.8 billion. At 78, Munk has no intention of retiring and forbade his children from working for his firms

Steve Brearton