What Boards Need to Consider When Recruiting for a Co-CEO Model
The traditional single-CEO model has been the default in both commercial and not-for-profit sectors for decades. Yet in today’s climate of complexity, resource pressure, and demand for more inclusive leadership, an increasing number of organisations — particularly in the charity and purpose-led business world — are exploring the Co-CEO model.
Done well, it can bring complementary skills, broaden perspectives, and provide resilience at the top. Done badly, it can create confusion, blurred accountability, and tension that ripples throughout the organisation.
For Boards considering Co-Leadership, it requires an examination of not only the recruitment and appointment process, but also the Board dynamics and governance framework that underpin the relationship between trustees and executives. Crucially, Boards must hold the mirror up to themselves: does the Board have the governance maturity to oversee a more complex leadership model?
1. Defining the Model
Before advertising or briefing a search firm to recruit a Co-CEO, the Board should step back and ask fundamental questions:
Why Co-CEO? Is this a way to retain existing talent, secure essential new functional or leadership skills, build resilience into your leadership model or a strategic decision to embrace the principle of collaboration? Clarity of purpose is critical.
What leadership and skills gaps are you trying to close and how are these linked to current and future strategy? For example, one Co-CEO may bring external presence and stakeholder influence, while the other provides operational depth. Boards should identify these needs upfront.
How will responsibilities be divided? Even in a collaborative model, clear delineation is helpful. Will responsibilities split by function (e.g. one leading external affairs, one leading delivery)? Or by theme (e.g. one focusing on impact, one on sustainability)?
How will accountability be managed? Regulators, funders, and stakeholders will expect clarity. Boards must decide how performance reviews, reporting lines, and decision rights will work when power is shared. For example, will decision making default to one CEO if the other is away, etc.
Strength of good governance? This stage is as much about Board alignment as it is about the role and candidate specification. Trustees may have different levels of comfort with shared authority. A Chair can support the Board to reach a consensus that this model can work and what a successful appointment will look like. Without this alignment, the search process can quickly become muddled.
At this stage, it’s also wise to engage a search partner differently. Rather than a single candidate brief, the search can focus on identifying pairs who complement each other — or on finding one leader and then building a second around them. The process you choose may influence practicalities like timelines and interview process, which should be planned for at the start.
2. The Recruitment and Headhunt Stage: Building the Candidate Pool
The Co-CEO model is still unusual. This means Boards need to prepare for new considerations in the candidate attraction process:
Be explicit in your ambitions: Some candidates may initially be sceptical about the real appetite for shared authority. The appointment brief and advert should make the ambition to recruit Co-CEOs explicit and emphasise the advantages — such as reduced burnout, greater work-life balance, and the ability to focus on strengths. Be clear on the functional skills and insights you seek.
Pairing considerations: Will you recruit a pair together, or match two individuals? Recruiting as a pair can accelerate alignment and reduce risk, especially if they have worked together previously. Recruiting individuals new to each other can provide an opportunity to specifically shape the skills and expertise you seek but may influence a longer on-boarding process, as the Co-CEO’s get to know each other in role. Both can work well if planned, explored and supported well from the start.
Diversity of thought and background: One of the strengths of co-leadership is the ability to bring in different perspectives. Boards should deliberately seek out candidates with complementary experiences, not mirror images.
Communication with the wider organisation: Rumours about “two bosses” can destabilise teams. Boards must be transparent about the rationale for this approach, framing it as strength, not compromise.
3. The Interview Stage: Testing for Collaboration
Traditional CEO interviews often focus on vision, strategic competence, and leadership style. In a Co-CEO process, Boards must probe further:
Chemistry and alignment: Do the candidates demonstrate genuine respect and trust in each other? This can’t be faked. Create opportunities for candidates to engage in problem-solving together, not just in individual interviews.
Conflict management: Even the best partnerships will disagree. Boards can ask directly: “How will you handle it when you fundamentally disagree?” Look for evidence of constructive conflict resolution.
Shared purpose but distinct strengths: Effective Co-CEOs are united in vision but distinct in expertise. Test if candidates can clearly articulate both their joint mission and their individual contributions.
Governance literacy: Candidates should demonstrate an understanding of the Board/Executive interface and boundaries. In a Co-CEO model, this boundary could easily become blurred due to lack of communication between Co-CEOs. Probe how candidates expect to handle trustee engagement and reporting.
Stakeholder reassurance: Trustees, donors, regulators, and staff will all want reassurance that leadership won’t become fragmented. Test candidates’ ability to explain the co-leadership model simply and convincingly. This may include practical elements, such as hours they will work; communication, delegation and handover processes; tools they may use to support fluid working etc. Pairs or individuals should come to the interview stage with a clear idea of how to make co-working a success, so test this.
Boards may also wish to interview pairs together and separately. Together, to test dynamic and alignment. Separately, to ensure each is strong in their own right.
4. The Appointment Stage: Governance, Contracts, and Offers
This is where the Co-CEO model can succeed or fail. A well-run search can unravel if the offer and contract is not structured carefully. Much of the below should be considered and set out from the start of the search process, however Boards must be ready to address candidate questions and be explicit about the following:
Decision protocols: Boards should agree protocols: which decisions require consensus, which can be delegated, and what escalation routes exist when agreement isn’t possible.
Performance management: Decide whether to review performance jointly (focusing on partnership outcomes) or individually (based on role-specific goals). A hybrid approach often works best. Clarify how performance reviews will be carried out, in writing.
Chair’s role: The Chair’s leadership is pivotal. They must hold both Co-CEOs equally, maintain balance, and model collaborative oversight. Ensure the Chair’s role is clearly defined as the arbiter if disputes arise.
Good governance: Update the Board’s Scheme of Delegation to reflect dual leadership. Agree on joint communication protocols (e.g. public statements, donor engagement) to prevent mixed messaging.
Contracts and Role Clarity
Explicit responsibilities: Contracts and job descriptions must set out specific responsibilities, areas of accountability, and decision-making rights. Avoid vague “joint responsibility for everything” — that creates risk of overlap or paralysis. Both contracts should confirm that each Co-CEO holds equal status and is directly accountable to the Board/Chair. Avoid language or behaviour that suggests one individual is ”first among equals”.
Working Patterns & Flexibility: Agree expectations on availability (e.g. both present at Board meetings, one covering while the other is away etc.).
Exit scenarios: What happens if one Co-CEO leaves, or employment is terminated? Contracts should clarify whether the model continues with a replacement, or reverts to a single-CEO structure. Be explicit to avoid uncertainty and have these conversations early so there are no surprises or misalignment in expectation at the 11th hour of offer negotiations.
Probation & Review: You may wish to agree a longer probation or review period than usual (e.g. 9 or 12 months). This allows time to test the partnership dynamic. Make sure to build in regular check-ins with the Board to explore progress and success during the first year.
Non-compete and confidentiality clauses: Ensure both contracts protect the organisation equally.
Remuneration and Offers
Parity vs proportionality: Equal pay is usually essential to avoid hierarchy. Where there are differences (e.g. one candidate works less hours), transparency is critical.
Pay dynamics: Ask candidates to consider how remuneration may impact on current salary. For example, one candidate may be taking a pay cut and the other receiving an uplift in accepting the job. How might this affect the dynamic and personal affordability in the longer term?
Salary benchmarking: Benchmark against CEO packages. Splitting leadership doesn’t halve its value.
Budgeting for total cost: Boards must plan for the combined cost of two leaders and avoid squeezing other critical functions. Will this include joint-working time e.g. both candidates work 3 days a week to allow for 1 day together? You will need to consider salaries, NI, pension and wider benefits, plus all on-costs for licences, IT, travel, accommodation etc. You may wish to also consider if there could be additional costs associated with professional development, such as coaching or mentoring for new pairs?
Final Reflections
The Co-CEO model is an intentional choice to lead differently — to embrace partnership, balance, and collaboration in the leadership of the organisation.
For Boards, the decision to recruit Co-CEOs requires more than just changing the search process. It requires:
Clarity of purpose
Alignment among trustees
Rigorous governance design
Willingness to invest in supporting the partnership over time
Clarity on pre-agreed principles like budgeting/affordability, performance/accountability, reporting and succession/exit.
When these elements are in place, Co-CEOs can bring enormous strength to purpose-led organisations: resilience under pressure, diversity of perspective, retained knowledge and expertise and a leadership style that mirrors the collaborative values of the sector itself.
As executive search and governance advisory partners, our role is to guide Boards through these complexities — from the first conversation about governance to the final offer letter.
The message is clear: if you are considering Co-CEOs, design for success. The leadership model you choose today will define not only who leads your organisation, but how leadership itself is experienced by everyone who comes into contact with it.
For further Reading on the subject, please click on the following links:
Civil Society.