Maybe you’ve heard of co-CEOing, two people sharing the same role at the top of an organization. Sure, some founding entrepreneurs are choosing to run their companies as co-CEOs, but so are others. It’s a small trend that some people are hoping will catch on. If you are searching for a stable governance model and persuasive arguments to a board of directors, there are good reasons to consider this approach.
Two former executive coaching clients of mine, Jocelyn and Karlee, lead an organization as co-CEOs. I worked with them after coaching the CEO and founder who wanted them to grow and develop in their senior roles.
If you want to share the CEO role, the following persuasive arguments might just work in your favor:
1. Good decisions come from divergent thinking. I’ve seen how more deliberate thinking happens when two equal voices work together to create better decisions. Bringing two heads together is even more vital now with the increased pressure to have a broader outlook and creative approach to solve problems.
2. Responsibilities are clearly defined. Jocelyn leads the operations, finance, communications and legal teams, and Karlee leads the investment, programs, knowledge management and innovation marketplace teams. Each works to her areas of experience and strength. There’s joint decision making on strategic items of top importance to the organization, which include strategy, board and primary funder relationships, and shaping organizational culture.
3. Shared and equal accountability. I believe no co-CEO model could work without both individuals sharing accountability for the organization’s successes and failures.
4. Greater reach. You can be in two places at once because there are two of you. This may please stakeholders who expect engagement with the top executive.
5. A track record of collaborative decision making. Working together for years has groomed Jocelyn and Karlee to be receptive to one another’s ideas and willing to adjust their thinking so that they are reliably able to reach an agreement.
6. Sustainable working lives. In my experience, newly promoted leaders often seek to have work-life balance. Sharing the role means one unplugs over their vacation and family emergencies that come up, while the other takes charge. It’s seamless. I believe the future of work is shifting toward alternative schedules to include life’s priorities, such as a healthy lifestyle and more time for family and friends.
7. It’s less stressful at the top. Having someone to share the burdens of strategy and fiscal responsibility could be less stressful on you.
8. Different backgrounds mean more expertise. My clients have different backgrounds: law and business for one and science and programs for the other, which is beneficial for their organization. It’s a great advantage to have two CEOs with different backgrounds, because it’s a challenge for one person to go broad and sufficiently deep in so much that is demanded from a single CEO in this age of complexity and churn.
Because the co-CEO model hasn’t yet achieved widespread acceptance, people may contest that it can’t possibly work. That’s why it’s worth developing your positioning to address these challenges, too. Here are a number of objections and useful things to consider:
Objection: There will be confusion and chaos if there is no tie-breaker.
Consider: How will you make decisions when both of you have a different view?
Objection: Only someone who will do it all should assume the role.
Consider: Can you demonstrate confidence that you can do the role in its entirety, but benefit the organization by having the two of you?
Objection: Collaboration is a nice idea, but only one person can fill the vital role of CEO.
Consider: Find other examples of where it’s worked, and prepare success stories of times when collaboration won the day.
Objection: A CEO is always the leader out in front.
Consider: Leadership is multidimensional. Leaders operate not just in front, but in tandem with other leaders where the interplay of leading and following happens organically (and authentically).
Objection: It will be twice as expensive to have two people in the role.
Consider: What smart economics can you identify to have two people occupy the role? Where are the efficiencies you can propose in the organizational design?
You might want to consider the advantages of sharing the top role with someone else. For CEOs everywhere, the leader role is a lonely one. Two isn’t just far less lonely; it can also provide for more agility to have two senior leaders with distinct backgrounds able to get the best strategic thinking for your organization.
