More companies are adopting a co-CEO structure as global operations grow increasingly complex. This approach distributes responsibilities at the highest level of leadership, allowing executives to combine specialized expertise and provide broader oversight.
Comcast is the latest to embrace this model, appointing Michael Cavanagh to serve alongside long-time CEO Brian Roberts beginning in January 2026. The move puts Comcast in the company of major firms like Netflix, Oracle, and KKR, all of which rely on dual leadership to guide their diverse operations.
At Netflix, Ted Sarandos and Greg Peters split responsibilities between creative direction, marketing, and legal affairs on one side, and technology, product development, and operations on the other. Oracle recently named Clay Magouyrk and Mike Sicilia as co-CEOs, citing their combined experience in cloud infrastructure, AI training, and industry application suites. Private equity giant KKR has Joseph Bae focusing on private markets and Asian expansion, while Scott Nuttall handles credit, capital markets, and balance sheet management.
Other companies using the model include Lennar, Gensler, Seres Therapeutics, SharpLink Gaming, IREN, and Monster Beverage. Each has structured responsibilities so that one executive complements the other, often balancing technical knowledge with commercial strategy.
Why Some Partnerships Succeed
Proponents argue that today’s business environment demands more than a single executive can realistically manage. Modern CEOs are tasked with handling digital transformation, investor expectations, operational efficiency, and global expansion—all at once. Splitting leadership can reduce overload and allow sharper focus in specific areas.
Evidence suggests this approach can work. A study covering nearly 25 years found that companies led by co-CEOs delivered higher shareholder returns than their peers. The average tenure for these leaders was about five years, comparable to solo chief executives. Netflix is often cited as a success story, with Reed Hastings and Sarandos balancing strategy and content during the company’s growth phase.
When effective, co-leadership offers three main advantages:
- Complementary skills: One leader may bring technical depth while the other excels at business development.
- Resilience in crises: Divided leadership allows for quicker responses, as one executive manages external stakeholders while the other focuses on internal operations.
- Better decision quality: Two executives at the same level can challenge each other’s assumptions, refining strategy before it reaches the broader organization.
Why Others Fail
The model is not risk-free. Some firms, such as SAP, have abandoned it after only months, citing confusion during critical periods. Failures usually stem from unclear division of duties, misalignment in communication, or power struggles that fragment the organization. Stakeholders also prefer clarity from leadership; conflicting messages can erode trust among investors, regulators, and employees.
Keys to Success
Experts recommend that co-CEOs establish clear boundaries, communicate as a unified front, and adopt agreed-upon conflict resolution mechanisms. Regular private meetings, a documented leadership charter, and shared communication practices help ensure cohesion. Importantly, organizations should plan for succession and define exit strategies, acknowledging that structures may need to evolve as circumstances change.
Looking Ahead
As companies expand into more technologically demanding and globally interconnected markets, shared leadership is likely to become more common. When designed carefully, the co-CEO approach can provide balance, agility, and depth that a single leader may struggle to deliver. For firms considering the model, success depends less on the concept itself and more on the discipline and cooperation of those who share the role.
