Thank you, Lisa, for raising such an important and layered topic, and thanks to everyone who has contributed thoughtful insights so far.
Reading through all the comments, I find myself reflecting on what really makes a Co-CEO model work , or fail, especially in a merger context. There's been a lot of great focus on role clarity, which is essential, but I'd like to offer a slightly different angle:
Even when roles are clearly defined, the success of Co-CEOs hinges on trust, relational dynamics, and aligned leadership philosophy.
To illustrate this, I'll share an example from my time at Procter & Gamble, where the company experienced a form of shared leadership between Durk Jager (CEO) and John Pepper (Chairman) during a critical period of transformation. Both were exceptional leaders, but they brought very different leadership styles and paces for change. Jager was driving aggressive transformation, while Pepper was known for his steady, people-focused leadership.
Even though their formal roles were clear on paper, the organization struggled with mixed signals about priorities, pace, and values. Employees didn't know which voice to follow, which created confusion and tension at all levels. Ultimately, this dynamic contributed to significant leadership turnover and challenges in sustaining the transformation.
What this example taught me, and what I see reflected in this conversation, is that shared leadership at the top is less about structure and more about aligned purpose, trust, and consistent messaging.
Here are a few reflections I would offer to deepen this conversation:
1. Role clarity is necessary but not sufficient, shared vision is essential.
Co-CEOs need to speak and act as one, especially in a merger where everyone is looking for signals of stability and direction. Dividing duties may help on paper, but if the vision is not fully shared and modeled jointly, cracks will show quickly.
2. Trust and relational dynamics are non-negotiable.
Co-CEOs must be able to engage in honest, vulnerable conversations and be aligned not just on the "what" but on the "how", how they lead, how they make decisions, and how they manage conflict. Without deep trust, even the best-laid plans will falter.
3. Leadership modeling impacts the entire merger culture.
In a merger, employees often look to the top for cues about how the two organizations will integrate. If Co-CEOs are aligned and collaborative, they set the tone for successful cultural integration. If they are at odds, that tension will cascade downwards, undermining trust and engagement.
So perhaps the more important question is not only "Can Co-CEOs work?" but:
What kind of leadership behaviors and relational practices do we need to cultivate for shared leadership to succeed in a high-stakes environment like a merger?
From a coaching lens, one question I often pose to leadership teams facing this challenge is:
"If your employees' experience was a direct reflection of your partnership, what would that experience be?"
If we want employees to experience alignment, trust, and clarity, the leadership team must model that first.
Thank you again, Lisa, for prompting such a rich conversation. I would love to hear from others:
- Have you seen examples where shared leadership worked well in a merger? What made it successful?
- What leadership behaviors (beyond role clarity) are essential to make Co-CEOs work?
Looking forward to continuing this dialogue with such a thoughtful group.
------------------------------
Didier Huber
Didier Huber Coaching & Consulting
From Personal Mastery to Collective Success
513.307.3307 |
didier@didierhuber.com didierhuber.com
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 2025-03-10 15:53
From: Lisa Jackson
Subject: Co-CEO's in Mergers: Does it Work?
I have worked on mergers where the CEO role was shared in a transition - but have not been part of an organization where there were two equals at the top long-term. Have you seen this work? What makes it work, versus where are red flags or failure points?
Interesting article on the subject from HBR - Is It Time to Consider Co-CEOs?
| Harvard Business Review | remove preview |
| | Is It Time to Consider Co-CEOs? | | "Two heads are better than one." It's a familiar expression-and one that businesses might want to heed. The authors' study of 87 companies led by co-CEOs showed that those firms tended to generate better returns than did peer companies with a sole CEO. | | View this on Harvard Business Review > |
|
|
I lforward to our community's input and experiences on this!
------------------------------
Lisa Jackson
------------------------------