RIA Succession Plans Advance, but Advisor Training and Readiness Lag

RIA succession planning is becoming more uneven: more firms have plans in place, while fewer say they intend to create one. The gap matters because many owners also lack confidence that their next generation of leaders is ready to take over, according to DeVoe & Company’s 2026 Talent & Growth Report.

A record 21% of registered investment advisors said they were not considering a formal written succession plan, more than triple the 6% reported a year earlier. At the other end, 46% of firms said a plan was being implemented or was fully in place, up from 42% in 2025. The share planning to draft a plan fell to 16% from 29%.

Those figures point to diverging paths. Firms that have committed to succession are making some progress, but a larger share appears to be putting off the first step. DeVoe’s survey found that 63% had drafted or begun executing a plan, little changed since 2023. That broad measure can obscure whether firms are preparing successors in practice or simply have a document on file.

Plans have not translated into confidence

Finding a potential successor is only part of the transition. Just 5% of firms said they had no next-generation leadership candidates, down from 9% in 2025. Yet 72% lacked confidence that they could hand off leadership smoothly, compared with 57% when DeVoe first asked the question in 2019. Only 28% rated their successors highly or extremely ready to lead.

The distinction is consequential for owners and employees alike. A named candidate does not automatically have the client relationships, operating experience or decision-making authority needed to assume leadership. When preparation lags, a firm may have less flexibility to manage a transition on its preferred timetable. DeVoe founder and chief executive David DeVoe has warned that a prolonged pause could leave owners with less time to prepare and more pressure to decide when circumstances become urgent.

The survey covered 132 RIA founders, owners, partners and employees between March and May this year. Most respondents worked at firms with at least $100 million in assets under management. Its results capture firms’ reported plans and confidence; they do not establish how many transitions will succeed or when they will occur.

Training remains a constraint

Only 10% of firms described their training program for associate and junior advisors as robust and comprehensive. That share has not exceeded 15% in the four years DeVoe has tracked it. Firm size makes a marked difference: 52% of firms with $1 billion or more in assets under management described training as fairly structured or better, compared with 19% of smaller firms. Just 2% of smaller firms reported a robust program.

Career paths showed a modest improvement. The share of firms offering a clearly articulated advisor career path rose to 43% from 38%, ending three years of decline. It remains below the 59% peak recorded in 2022. For next-generation professionals, a defined career path was the leading workplace priority, cited by 45%.

That preference connects talent development to succession planning. Clear progression can help junior advisors understand what experience and responsibilities lead to a senior role; training can give them a way to build those skills. Without both, firms may identify future leaders without giving them a practical route to readiness. Some firms have introduced formal career frameworks, while others are developing internal training programs.

Doug Johnson, a managing director at DeVoe & Company, said firms should invest 90 minutes of training a week. The report’s broader message is that formal systems are more common than they were, but their value depends on whether firms use them to develop people.

Growth systems show a similar split

The same unevenness appears in business development. The share of firms training advisors on every growth skill DeVoe measured, including requesting referrals and closing new clients, increased to 53% from 46%. At the same time, the share providing no formal growth training rose to 30% from 27%.

More than half of firms, 55%, said all advisors share responsibility for organic growth. Another 24% still rely on the founder or chief executive. Only 8% reported employing a dedicated business development professional. Individual annual growth goals also became less common: 51% of firms set them, down from 54%, marking the first decline after three years of improvement.

These measures suggest that assigning responsibility and building a repeatable process are separate challenges. When growth depends heavily on founders, the firm may have fewer people gaining experience in client development. That can limit both current business generation and the bench of leaders who understand how the firm attracts and serves clients.

A shrinking pipeline raises the stakes

DeVoe cited Cerulli estimates that more than a third of advisors by industry headcount will retire over the next decade. The report also pointed to a 72% failure rate for rookie advisors. Those figures place added weight on firms’ ability to recruit, train and retain younger professionals, though they do not predict the outcome for any individual firm.

DeVoe said the industry had spent years building management systems and that many firms now have them. The harder work, the firm argued, is using those systems to develop people. For owners weighing succession, the key measure is therefore not simply whether a plan exists, but whether potential successors are gaining the skills, responsibility and experience to carry it out. For junior advisors, the availability of training and a visible career path may shape whether they can see a future at the firm.