In conversations about family office strategy one subject comes up strikingly rarely: the question of what happens to the assets and the structures when the generation changes. Not out of indifference — but because engaging with it is uncomfortable. It touches on questions of authority, trust and control. Families that nevertheless take it up early create clarity before it is forced upon them by outside events.
Succession planning does not begin with legal instruments — it begins with an honest assessment of what is to be handed over and who is prepared to take it on.
What succession planning in the family office covers
Succession in the family office is broader than legal estate planning. It includes the continuity of governance structures, the transfer of decision-making authority, the preparation of the next generation for an active or a passive role — and the question of which external advisers, mandates and relationships are to remain in place.
Many families concentrate first on tax and inheritance law. That is necessary, but not sufficient. Anyone who plans in purely legal terms risks a situation in which the assets do pass on, but the structures that administer them do not remain functional. Legal provisions create a framework — they are no substitute for institutional clarity.
Governance models for the handover between generations
A viable governance model answers three questions before the handover: who takes which decisions? How are conflicts between family members resolved? And which decisions are to remain externally delegated?
Proven instruments are family charters — written agreements on values, structures of decision-making and rules of participation — as well as family councils, which function as a formal framework for communication between family members and the operational management of the family office. These structures are not bureaucratic formalities: they are the institutional memory that endures across generations when individual people are no longer available.
For families wishing to address this in a structured way, it is worth asking in addition to what extent the existing family office model still suits the next generation — or whether adjusting the support structure should be part of the succession planning.
Preparing the next generation
One of the most common errors in succession planning: the next generation is brought into the relevant decision-making processes too late. Family members who are one day to administer or make use of the assets often know little about their structure, the ongoing mandates or the relationships with external service providers.
Preparation does not mean transferring decision-making authority prematurely. It means increasing transparency step by step — in the form of observer roles, documented decision-making processes and the deliberate building of an understanding of existing structures. Anyone who defers this preparation to the final years before the handover has little time for corrections.
External service providers and their role in the handover
Long-standing relationships with advisers, lawyers, asset managers and service providers are an underestimated part of a family office’s institutional capital. They are tied to individuals — and therefore vulnerable when a change of generation takes place without a structured handover.
Sound succession planning documents which relationships are strategic, who carries responsibility on the service provider’s side, and how a new principal is to be introduced to existing structures. The structured vetting of external service providers should be reviewed afresh in this context: what made sense for one generation need not do so for the next.
Discretion in succession planning
Succession planning involves information that is among the most sensitive a family office administers: lines of inheritance, distributions of wealth, internal family dynamics. The requirements placed on all external advisers drawn into this process are correspondingly high.
Families should examine whether their service providers’ existing standards of discretion and data protection meet the requirements of a succession process — and whether the channels of communication for sensitive coordination are sufficiently secure. What was adequate in day-to-day mandate work can prove inadequate in a process of transition.
Choosing the right moment
Succession planning succeeds best when it can be conducted without outside pressure. That means: not in the context of an illness, a conflict or a crisis — but as a structured process in a quiet phase. Families that take it up early have the choice between several models and the time to test them. Families that begin too late often have only one option left.
Anyone wishing to enter this process alongside an independent, discreet network — for the selection of suitable advisers or a structured assessment of existing service providers — is welcome to request an invitation. Access is not public, but it is possible discreetly.