| Course | BMB 670 Music Business Leadership and Ethics |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 3 |
| Paper type | graduate milestone analyzing leadership and succession in a music company |
| Length | About 1,080 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Southern New Hampshire University |
| Program | MBA in Music Business |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for BMB 670 Module 3
Leadership Analysis and Succession Plan
[Student Name]
Southern New Hampshire University
BMB 670: Music Business Leadership and Ethics
Milestone One
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The organization, setting and figures below are a composite written as a model document. No real employer, client, colleague or patient is described.
Leadership Analysis and Succession Plan
Introduction
The company has been led by its founder since 2004. Today its calendar holds roughly 300 club and theater dates, and its farm festival draws around 22,000 people on each of three days, with eighteen full-time staff, about sixty seasonal production staff and 900 volunteers behind it. The founder has told the staff and the company's lender that she will step back from day-to-day leadership by the end of 2027 and remain as majority owner and board chair. This milestone analyzes how the company is led today, identifies the risks of the transition and proposes a plan for it.
How the Company Is Led
Three features define the company's leadership. First, decisions are centralized. A review of the past year's decisions found that the founder personally approved all offers to headline artists, all ticket prices above $40, the festival lineup, every sponsorship and every hire, and that staff routinely waited for her answer on matters within their own areas. Second, relationships with partners are personal. Most of the agents who send tours to the company deal with the founder directly, and several have told staff they book with the company because of her. Third, the operations director has built a separate culture in production, in which shift leads make decisions on site and volunteers return year after year.
The Culture She Built
Schein (2010) argues that culture forms around the things a leader watches closely, the way the leader behaves in a crisis and the conduct the leader rewards. The founder pays attention to everything, reacts to crises by taking charge and rewards loyalty and hard work. The result is a committed staff that has learned to wait for her. In interviews for this analysis, staff said they rarely disagree with her in meetings, not because she punishes disagreement but because decisions seem already made. Edmondson (1999) linked team learning to a shared sense that it is safe to raise a concern or own up to an error, and the absence of disagreement in meetings suggests that the company's office culture, unlike its production culture, does not encourage it.
Risks in the Transition
Three risks stand out. The first is losing agent relationships: if agents book with the company because of the founder, some may move tours to the national promoter's theater once she steps back. The second is a leadership vacuum: with decisions centralized, no one has experience making the founder's decisions, and a sudden handover would leave staff unsure who decides. The third is culture: staff used to waiting may not adapt to a leader who expects them to decide. Giambatista et al. (2005), reviewing research on leader succession, found that succession can disrupt performance, especially when the departing leader was strongly identified with the organization and when the handover is abrupt.
Succession Options
Succession options
| Option | Strengths | Risks |
|---|---|---|
| Promote the operations director | Trusted by crews, knows the business | Little booking or agent experience; production would lose its leader |
| Hire an outside chief executive | Fresh view, could bring industry relationships | Disruption; agents and staff may not trust a newcomer |
| Shared model: chief executive plus head of talent | Splits business and booking leadership; develops internal talent | Requires clear division of authority |
Research suggests that inside successors offer continuity while outsiders are more likely to bring change, with greater disruption in the short run. The company needs continuity in its relationships and culture but change in how decisions are made. The shared model meets both needs. The senior talent buyer, who has worked alongside the founder for nine years and knows many of the agents, would become head of talent with authority over booking, while a chief executive, preferably an internal candidate developed over two years with an outside search as a fallback, would lead finance, operations and staff.
The 24-Month Plan
The plan moves decisions, relationships and authority in three stages. In the first eight months, the founder delegates decisions within clear limits: club and theater offers up to $25,000, ticket prices within a set range and hires below director level. The talent buyer joins every agent call. In the second eight months, the talent buyer leads agent relationships with the founder in support, the chief executive candidate takes over budgets and staff, and the founder attends weekly meetings rather than daily ones. In the last eight months, the founder steps back to the board, approving only the festival headliners and annual budget.
The handover will be judged on three numbers. The first is the portion of decisions taken without the founder, which should rise from under 20 percent today to over 80 percent; by agent retention, tracked as the number of tours routed through the company each year; and by a short staff survey on whether people feel able to disagree and decide. If agent bookings fall more than 15 percent in the second stage, the founder will rejoin key relationships for another six months.
The Founder's Role After the Handover
How the founder behaves after stepping back will matter as much as the plan itself. Research on succession notes that departing leaders who stay close to the organization can either support successors or undermine them by remaining the real center of authority. The founder has agreed to three rules: she will not attend staff meetings after the second stage, she will refer agents and staff who call her directly to the head of talent or chief executive, and she will raise disagreements with the new leaders privately rather than in front of staff. As board chair she will review results quarterly and approve the annual budget and festival headliners, which keeps her involved in the decisions that most affect the company's value without reaching into daily operations.
The plan also protects the founder's legacy in ways she cares about. The commitment to pay artists fairly during cancellations, which built the company's reputation, will be written into the booking policy rather than left to one person's judgment, and the festival's founding principles will be included in the onboarding of every new staff member and volunteer lead.
Conclusion
The company's success rests on a founder who decides almost everything and holds its key relationships. Its production culture shows that people there can lead when trusted. A shared model with a head of talent and a chief executive, developed over two years and measured stage by stage, gives the company continuity in its relationships and a culture in which more people decide.
References
Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350-383. https://doi.org/10.2307/2666999
Giambatista, R. C., Rowe, W. G., & Riaz, S. (2005). Nothing succeeds like succession: A critical review of leader succession literature since 1994. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(6), 963-991. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.09.005
Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
What the BMB 670 Module 3 instructions ask for
Milestone One in BMB 670 usually asks you to analyze leadership in a music industry organization: who leads, how decisions are made, what culture the leaders have shaped and what challenges the organization faces. Many versions ask you to identify a leadership problem and propose how to address it, which in a founder-led company is often succession. Strong submissions use evidence about how the organization actually works, such as who makes which decisions, how staff behave in meetings and where relationships with partners sit. They draw on leadership research to explain risks and compare options before recommending one, and they set out the steps in time order with an owner for each.
How this BMB 670 Module 3 milestone one example is built
The paper describes a company where the founder makes most decisions, agents' loyalty is personal to her and staff rarely challenge her in meetings, though the operations director has built a strong crew culture. It identifies three risks in the handover: losing agent relationships, a leadership vacuum and staff unused to deciding. It compares an internal promotion of the operations director, an outside chief executive and a shared model with a chief executive and a head of talent, drawing on research that inside successors bring continuity while outsiders bring change but more disruption. It recommends the shared model and a 24-month plan moving decisions, relationships and authority in stages.
Where the BMB 670 Module 3 rubric puts the points
For the first milestone, instructors generally weigh the analysis of current leadership and culture, use of evidence, identification of leadership challenges, use of research, comparison of options and the quality of the recommendation and plan. The best papers show how leadership actually works in the organization, explain the risks with reference to research, compare realistic options fairly and produce a plan with stages, owners and signs of progress. Papers lose credit for ignoring what the departing leader will do afterward, for describing leadership traits without organizational evidence, for recommending a single option without considering others, and for plans with no timeline or way to tell whether they are working.
BMB 670 Module 3 help: the mistakes that cost points
Leadership analyses often describe the leader and stop. Look at the organization around the leader: who decides what, how information flows, how people behave when the leader is absent and where outside relationships sit. For a succession problem, compare at least two options using research on what happens when leaders change, including the risk of losing what made the organization work. Lay out the plan in stages with clear handoffs and measures, such as the share of decisions made without the founder. Remember the people who are not leaders; staff and partners will judge the transition by how it affects them, so say how they will be told and when.
Get BMB 670 Module 3 written to your instructions
Send the BMB 670 Milestone One guidelines and your organization. The paper will analyze its leadership and culture, compare succession or change options with research and propose a staged plan. About two days; your first milestone is free. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Southern New Hampshire University document.
More BMB 670 papers and related MBA in Music Business samples
- BMB 670 Module 1 Discussion: What Makes a Music Business Leader Effective
- BMB 670 Module 2 Leadership Approaches Assignment: Three Ways to Lead the Same Company
- BMB 670 Module 4 Discussion: Booking a Fair Lineup
- BMB 630 Module 8 Marketing Tools Assignment: Email and Text Automation That Sells Tickets
- ACC 691 Module 9 Milestone Three: Quantifying the Restatement
- BMB 515 Module 3 Milestone One: The Label's Business Model
- MBA 540 Module 6 Project Milestone Three Buy Build Ally
BMB 670 Module 3 questions, answered
Where can I find a free BMB 670 Module 3 Milestone One sample?
This page includes the complete BMB 670 Milestone One leadership and succession analysis for a Columbus concert promoter.
Why is founder succession difficult in music companies?
Because founders often hold personal relationships with artists and agents, make most decisions and shape a culture that depends on them, all of which must be transferred deliberately.
Should a company promote from within or hire an outside successor?
Inside successors usually bring continuity and knowledge while outsiders bring new perspectives and change; the right choice depends on whether the organization needs stability or a new direction.
What is psychological safety?
A shared belief in a team that it is safe to speak up, disagree and admit mistakes, which research links to learning and better decisions.
How long should a leadership transition take?
Often a year or more, with responsibilities transferred in stages so the successor builds relationships and authority while the departing leader is still available.