If you are a fan of American college football you likely took notice of Saturday's unlikely victory by Purdue University over the highly ranked and heavily favored Ohio State University.
Purdue was a 19 point underdog in the game but still defeated the Ohio State team 26-18. 
In reading some accounts of the game I stumbled across this story, about Purdue's fairly innovative (for major American college sports) succession planning strategy for its sports team head coaches. The Purdue Athletic Director Morgan Burke, hired and named the successors for both the Men's Head Football Coach and the Men's Head Basketball Coach, a full year before the prior holders of these positions both longtime Purdue employees, were expected to retire.
For Men's Football Danny Hope was hired in January 2008 to take over the job in the 2009 season, and in Men's Basketball Matt Painter was hired in 2004, and eventually took over the head coach position in 2005.
Both successors effectively served as understudies for a full year, learning the ins and outs of the University, receiving mentoring from the outgoing, veteran coaches, and gaining valuable experience to position themselves for success.
Morgan Burke's approach to succession of high-profile coaches while being copied by a few other large schools is still fairy unique. Some of his key lessons for an effective succession process are:
Have a hard date for the turnover - Other school's have also followed Purdue's lead and hired successors for long time coaches nearing retirement, but have not set a firm date for the hand off, (most notably Florida State). This can lead to pressure on the incumbent if results on the field start to slip, and frustration and impatience on the part of the next coach.
Tinker not overhaul - Burke feels the 'named successor' strategy really only makes sense of the outgoing coach has a good history of achievement, and that only minor tactical changes, not a major new strategies are needed going forward. Since both programs were in solid shape with the veteran coaches, major house cleaning was not needed. Had major changes been needed, Burke would have likely done more 'traditional' searches for replacements.
Involve the incumbent - Burke made it a point to involve the outgoing coaches in the process, while still supporting them as they completed their contracts. The key for this 'coach in waiting' arrangement to be most effective is to ensure the more experienced coach could pass on as much of the history, culture, and practical knowledge they had accrued in their careers. Both outgoing coaches were extremely motivated to do their part to help leave the programs in sound shape and in good hands.
Challenge the successor - It is important to make sure the coach in waiting is adequately challenged, and not just sitting quietly on the sidelines just waiting. It makes sense to start transitioning some functions to the successor, particularly ones that they may not have had prior experience with, while the veteran coach is still there, so as to better support and 'coach' the new coach. The successor has to really start to feel ownership of the position prior to the 'official' transition date.
One more thing, Morgan Burke does not have the typical background of a major college athletic director, which are usually former coaches or long time college administrators. Burke was a VP of Human Resources for 17 years.
Who would have guessed? HR bringing innovative new ideas to a new field.