LEADERSHIP and succession planning, Cuban style. Simple but effective. You topple the existing leader in a coup and then rule with an iron fist for almost 50 years, surviving more than 600 assassination attempts in the process. You cling on to the job for as long as is physically possible and when, at last, you can barely lift your head from your hospital pillow to breathe fire into the hearts of your fellow comrades, you hand the reigns over to the best man for the job – your loving younger brother.

Yep, this is the leadership and succession planning master class as demonstrated by the ailing, cigar-loving dictator Fidel Castro, who has just announced that he will be stepping down as President. It's definitely the way to handle it, don't you think? Minus the bullets, of course. And the restrictions on freedom. And without all the poverty.

It's clear that Castro, one of the world's longest-serving leaders, has his own inimitable style of leadership. Stormin' Norman Schwarzkopf once said: "Leadership is a potent combination of strategy and character. But if you must be without one, be without the strategy." And you can't argue the fact; Castro is definitely a character, whatever you might think about his political ideals and personal values.

Indeed, 10 US administrations really didn't like either his ideals or his values. All made attempts to topple him, most infamously at the Bay of Pigs in 1961. US agents apparently concocted more than 600 plots to kill Castro including, it is alleged, an exploding cigar and powder designed to make his beard fall out. All 'Acme-like' inventions more suited to a Bugs Bunny versus Daffy Duck cartoon. Even Castro appears to enjoy the comedy; he is reputed to have said that if surviving assassination attempts were an Olympic event, he would win the gold medal.

Castro's legacy will doubtless divide opinion; his people are healthier and better educated than almost anywhere else in the world, but much poorer and without the everyday freedoms enjoyed elsewhere in Latin America. I'm not embarrassed to admit to surprise when I learned that Cubans have a longer life expectancy than Scots. I was even more surprised to learn that with 99.8% literacy in the country, that's better than we have achieved here in the UK or by our neighbours across the pond in America – by a long way.

So what can business learn, if anything, from Castro's leadership experiences? Work hard to get to the top, then work even harder to stay there (boardroom battles over budgets pale into insignificance in comparison with Castro's daily bullet-dodging duties). Rule ruthlessly, avoid death by character assassination and when you think your time is nigh, cast one rheumy eye back over your achievements to date and the other forward towards your successor.

According to car manufacturer Henry Ford, the question 'Who ought to be boss?' is like asking 'Who ought to be the tenor in the quartet?' "Obviously," he said, "the man who can sing tenor." So, if Fidel is reading this from his hospital sick bed, perhaps he should sit up (well, maybe not) and take notice, you're never too old to learn something new. The best man for the job isn't necessarily your brother (in fact, employing family members carries its own hazard warning; it's a veritable can of sibling worms). Nor is it your best friend, and possibly not even your deputy.

And when you say you are going, you do need to go. Although Castro has stepped down as president, he is still clinging to the last remnants of power. He remains a member of parliament and is likely to be elected to the 31-strong council of state. He will also retain his powerful post as the first secretary of Cuba's Communist party.

Hanging on for longer than is necessary, promising to go, then hanging on some more, a la Tony Blair and Gordon Brown scenario, is bad news for all concerned. Any impetus for change, enthusiasm to impress the new leader, and/or excitement about the future, will start to diminish and ultimately vanish.

And even after the handover, lingering like a bad smell, watching over the shoulder of your successor and sticking your neb in where it is no longer welcome is truly lame. At this point, you really should get a life. Or take up golf. (The two are mutually exclusive.)

When it finally comes down to it, there just isn't an age or time limit on brilliance. Nor on leadership or entrepreneurship. You can be 27 or 77 and lead a country admirably, or come up with a money-spinning, world-changing idea. Indeed, most major global corporations are led by fifty-somethings with dodgy comb-overs and shiny suits. But no one can go on indefinitely.

Twenty FTSE100 chief executives announced their departures in 2007, almost double what it was in 2002 when just 11 stepped down. Obviously, the turbulent ups and downs of the market roller-coaster have played a role in the large number of departures, as has the increased pressure to perform from ever hungrier shareholders and, as always, natural churn and retirement. Research by headhunters Russell Reynolds shows that the average tenure of a FTSE100 chief has fallen 20% since 2002, and now stands at 4.6 years, down from around 5.7 years in 2002.

But what is interesting is this: if the length of time these guys spend in office continues to decline at this current rate, by 2017 FTSE100 chief executives will manage just two and a half years at the top before they are replaced. By 2027 the average time in post will be six months. By 2032 they will be extinct. A bad thing? Hmm, I reckon the jury's out .

The best leaders – business or political – will know when the time is right to go. Knowing when to give up, stand down, make way for someone younger, smarter, more energetic, and more in touch with your customers is a true sign of a good leader. He or she will have a great succession process in place to smooth the handover to the right person.

And the very best leaders will have selflessly sought the one person that can do the job better than themselves.