Joanna Jensen, the award-winning entrepreneur and angel investor, founder of Childs Farm (who then sold it to PZ Cussons in 2022 for nearly £40m), is ruminating over what she regards as a worrying new leadership trend – firms opting to have co-CEOs.
Businesses, it seems, are lining up to go Dutch on their leadership. Oracle and Comcast both announced co-CEO models in 2024, joining Netflix, which has had them since 2020. Salesforce, SAP and Marks & Spencer also all appointed co-CEOs in the early 2020s. But rather than two heads being better than one, the gut reaction of Jensen and others is that it’s too many cooks.
The wrong solution for leadership?
“Having co-CEOs doesn’t feel like the right solution for problems in leadership,” says Kevin Gaskell, former managing director of Porsche, Lamborghini and BMW. “A leader needs to be passionate and determined, and be the only driver,” he adds. “They have a team around them if they really need to discuss things.”
But if co-CEO-ship really is such a bad idea to those who simply can’t see its merits, what are the companies that do choose it seeing that others are not?
Joseph Black and Oliver Jacobs are the co-CEOs of SHOUT, which operates one of the world’s largest nano and micro-creator networks, and they argue there are plenty of reasons to double-up. “Today, the CEO role is too broad,” he explains. “It’s not about us escaping work, or responsibilities, but because the business needs different skill sets that are now too much for one person.”
Companies with two CEOs delivered an average annual shareholder return of 9.5% between 1996 and 2020. These firms outperformed the average 6.9% return achieved by single-leader companies.
Harvard Business Review 2022
Defining each person’s role
Jacobs says the role he has stepped into is one of being the product builder, while Black is more the outward-looking people-person. “It comes down to us realising that neither of us could be a COO, and that each person has their own skills to contribute,” he adds. “I see other single CEOs burning out. With us, someone else is there if we’re having a bad day.”
Back to one at the top
It should be noted that M&S, Salesforce and SAP – all firms who did go co-CEO – reverted back to ‘normal’ structures within two years.
“Call me old-fashioned – and perhaps it’s because I’m a former captain in the Indian Army – but we operated with a firm ‘the buck stops here’ attitude,” says Karan Sonpar, professor and chair in organisational behaviour, and associate dean (global business engagement) on University College Dublin’s College of Business Leadership team.
“To me, leadership means unitary command, and it’s about delegation. So, it’s flawed reasoning – to me – to have more than one top figure.”
He adds: “I hear people defend it by saying that it’s lonely at the top, and leaders have no one else to talk to, but if they’re leading properly, they’re talking to the rest of the board.”
In 2015 there were just 11 businesses with co-CEOs in the Russell 3000 group of the biggest public companies in the US. By 2024, however, this had more than doubled to 24.
MyLogIQ
Two have more value than one
However, co-CEOs are sure about the benefits they feel the arrangement brings to them. “We act as a twosome, where we really do play to our strengths,” argues Natalie Duvall, who, with Alison Burton, co-leads March Muses, which creates inclusive/more diverse Christmas decorations and was featured on BBC TV programme Dragons’ Den. “Obviously, we have occasional disagreements, but nine times out of 10 we work them out. Yes, delays might also happen in decision-making, but, at the same time, we know we don’t always have to have each other’s permission to do what we need to in our own area.”
According to Duvall, the fact that she and Burton do sometimes disagree is one of the beneficial outcomes of their dual-leadership model.
“The CEO role is too broad. It’s not about us escaping work, or responsibilities, but because the business needs different skill sets that are now too much for one person
Team dynamics
Those who watch Dragons’ Den might recall that March Muses won investment from not just one Dragon, but two, Deborah Meaden and Peter Jones – a reinforcement, say the co-CEOs, that even top-level Dragons know the value of two heads rather than one. So, will we see more of the model, or is it just a quirky leadership fad that has momentum now, but could soon run out of steam?
Sara Daw is group CEO of Liberti Group, a global community redefining how businesses and leaders grow. She says: “What I would worry about is the internal messaging to staff – who really is the face of the business? – and where responsibilities lie when things start to not go as planned.”
Despite her scepticism, however, Daw says upsides can also clearly be seen. “I do get that the CEO role has become big, and if it can be split so people operate without stepping on each other’s toes, it’s a model that has legs. Having just one person – at a time of declining CEO tenure because of stress and overload – can be viewed as a business risk in and of itself.”
“If a leader doesn’t want to be the sole leader, my question would be, ‘why; what are they afraid of?’’
Do old-school views need changing?
It looks as if those who are well established, and already have firm views on what leadership is, are the most circumspect about the appeal of co-CEOs, while younger entrants see it as something more normal. So, is what’s really needed a change of mindset among those who are more old-school?
“I would still need convincing,” says Gaskell. “You can have two heads, but not two CEOs. I think where you have co-founders, that’s different, because they have built a business together and both share the spoils.
“To me, though, two heads wouldn’t halve the risk, but multiply it. I’d be worrying about what happens if one person leaves, and whether the other could manage all of a sudden. If a leader doesn’t want to be the sole leader, my question would be, ‘why, what are they afraid of?’”
This view isn’t shared by others, however. Robert Schogger and David Cluer co-founders of MetSpace, firmly believe in the co-CEO model – they have done since the 1980s.
“I still struggle with the logic of having a single CEO,” says Schogger. “In our experience, it’s only ever been a good thing to have a mixture of strengths, weaknesses and experiences.
“We operate more as checks and balances. We both have the same aims, and that’s the underlying agreement we have. While we do things in different ways, it’s all for the future of the business.” “I think we all need to start to redefine who a CEO is and what a CEO does. I just don’t know why anyone would want to do this job on their own!”
Peter Crush is an award-winning HR-specialist journalist, writing about all aspects of leadership and the world of work.
This article is also available in the summer 2026 issue of Edge magazine
