CEO-Succession Simulation Board Adviser

The mandate

The incumbent chief executive will retire within a year, and three internal candidates have led large businesses successfully. Existing assessments emphasise career history and interviews but provide little evidence of judgment when safety, licence, community, commodity and capital pressures collide. Directors disagree about readiness gaps and whether a short external search is necessary. They want consequential simulations tied to the actual enterprise.

The adviser will help the board shape and interpret evidence from scenarios, references, observed decision sessions and development history without selecting the chief executive. Simulations must test value trade-offs, learning speed, stakeholder truthfulness, team use and recovery after an imperfect choice, not theatrical presentation. Candidate dignity, equal information and confidentiality are essential to a legitimate process.

The appointment reserves three days monthly for evidence review, scenario observation and chair counsel, plus six nomination or full-board meetings over nine months. Six in-person sessions cover candidate work and operating context. Written observations will reach the chair within three working days of each simulation, separating observed behaviour, inference, missing evidence and development possibility.

The adviser has no line or executive authority, cannot appoint or eliminate candidates, run the company, promise roles, set remuneration, direct the search firm, issue psychological diagnosis or vote. The board owns selection and management owns current performance. The adviser may challenge inconsistent standards and request comparable evidence, but candidate decisions remain solely with directors.

The nine-month mandate ends when the board appoints a successor and approves transition oversight. A single three-month extension may be authorised for a deferred appointment following refreshed conflicts. Prior work with any candidate, director, major investor, government, community organisation, search firm or competing miner must be declared. Conflicted scenario content requires recusal or independent replacement as the chair directs.

Why the board wants this voice

Familiar internal candidates create confidence but also relationship bias and uneven exposure across directors. Conventional interviews rarely reveal how leaders integrate safety, licence and capital under pressure. The board wants an experienced, independent observer who can improve evidence quality and calibration without taking the appointment decision away from directors.

What you will own

• Press directors to define future CEO outcomes, enterprise risks, non-negotiable values and disqualifying judgment patterns.
• Shape realistic simulations combining fatality response, licence challenge, community trust, capital rationing and investor pressure.
• Observe how candidates frame ambiguity, use teams, test evidence, communicate bad news and revise an initial decision.
• Challenge inconsistent scoring, confirmation bias, relationship preference and post-hoc reinterpretation across candidate reviews.
• Integrate simulation, track record, reference, mobility, development and transition evidence without producing a mechanical rank.
• Frame readiness risks, support needs, emergency succession and external-search triggers for explicit board determination.
• Maintain a confidential evidence ledger showing comparable observations, limitations, dissent and directors’ decision rationale.

Candidate qualifications

• Advised listed-company boards through CEO succession involving several credible internal candidates and consequential enterprise risk.
• Designed executive simulations grounded in mining, safety, stakeholder, licence and capital-allocation decisions.
• Distinguished observable leadership behaviour from inference, presentation style, psychometric claim, relationship bias and historical reputation.
• Challenged influential directors while preserving candidate dignity, confidentiality and comparable assessment conditions.
• Integrated simulation evidence with references, operating track record, development needs and transition requirements without selecting the appointee.
• Remained independent from candidates, search firms, investors, governments and potential post-appointment consulting work.

Non-negotiables

• Can attend six Toronto, Vancouver, Santiago or Johannesburg sessions during the nine-month appointment.
• Will disclose every candidate, director, investor, government, community, search-firm and competitor relationship.
• Brings board-level CEO succession simulation in high-consequence industry; executive coaching alone is insufficient.
• Accepts no authority over appointment, candidate elimination, remuneration, psychological diagnosis or search execution.

1. 49 words maximum. Describe a succession simulation that revealed judgment not visible in a candidate’s track record.
2. 49 words maximum. Which current candidate, search or mining relationship could constrain your independence?
3. 49 words maximum. How would you stop a polished simulation performance from outweighing contradictory operating evidence?