When leaders leave without warning: a relational typology of employee sensemaking under abrupt leadership exits

Purpose This study examines how employees interpret and emotionally respond to abrupt and poorly communicated leadership exits in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). While leadership succession research has focused largely on planned transitions and firm-level outcomes, less is known about how sudden departures shape employee sensemaking and why reactions vary in intensity. We investigate how relational proximity to the departed leader and perceived procedural legitimacy condition employees’ interpretive responses, and under what circumstances abrupt exits escalate from routine organisational change to identity-level disruption. Design/methodology/approach The study employs a qualitative, interpretivist design, based on 24 semi-structured interviews with employees across eight Australian SMEs. Data were analysed using thematic analysis to identify patterned configurations of meaning-making. The analysis yielded a typology of four interpretive responses, structured by relational proximity and perceived threat intensity. Findings The findings identify four patterned responses to abrupt leadership exits: Business as Usual, Job Insecurity, Disaster and Existential Threat. These responses reflect distinct combinations of emotional intensity, relational proximity and legitimacy perceptions. Rather than unfolding as sequential stages, responses represent qualitatively different interpretive positions. High relational proximity and low perceived procedural legitimacy were associated with escalated interpretations, including organisational crisis framing and identity-level disruption. Originality/value This study advances change management research by conceptualising abrupt leadership exits as relationally structured interpretive events. It introduces a typology that specifies boundary conditions under which emotional reactions escalate into organisational crisis or identity rupture. By integrating sensemaking, procedural legitimacy and identity perspectives, the study contributes a relationally contingent model of employee responses to sudden leadership change.