Sherlock Holmes had Dr. Watson and Michael Jordan had Scottie Pippen. The rest was history, of course. And while many mammoth corporate success stories are often the vision of a single captain of industry—a Henry Ford, a J.P.Morgan, or a Larry Ellison—in a few instances they are the work of a tagteam of individuals who complement each other’s strengths and may, just as importantly, sharpen each other’s instincts for distinguishing opportunities.
Such is the case with the iconic business duos presented here. These eight famous pairings—one of them infamous for its failure in the final act—present a spectrum of the unique qualities and dynamic teamwork necessary for the effective management of extremely innovative, complex organizations. A variety of top-tier combinations reveal several variations on the theme that two heads are better than one: some, like Richard Sears and Julius Rosenwald, were marriages of necessity; others, such as Sanjay Jha and Greg Brown, co-CEOs of Motorola, were partnered in hopes of salvaging an ailing organization; still others, like Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger, seemed fated to cohabitate in the same corporate host.
The delicate balance required for a successful top-level tandem power structure is no easy achievement, as evidenced by a string of dissolutions; keeping two big personalities in harmony requires a set of unique personality traits on both sides. “It all depends on how they behave and if they can keep their egos in check,” says Harvard Business School Professor Joseph Bower, author of The CEO Within. “It works remarkably well if you also have strong board members who are able to make it work.” The challenge, as Bower sees it, is living up to the age-old adage of “diversity in counsel, unity in command”: however many leaders a company has, it has to move forward decisively. But while having a single visionary at the helm is often just what a company requires, the breadth of experience and wisdom offered by a pair of equally guided leaders can also have its advantages. “As long as there is cooperation, a pair will bring greater assets than can come from one person’s intellect,” adds Bower.
“Whether we’re talking about socks or stocks, I like buying quality merchandise when it is marked down.” – Warren Buffett, chairman and CEO, Berkshire Hathaway
Today’s activist shareholders urge boards and CEOs to seek a second opinion or appoint a devil’s advocate that can result in what some believe is a bifurcated structure, as evidenced by the recent push for splitting the roles of CEO and chairman. One of the common arguments for not splitting the roles is that it creates confusion about exactly who is in charge. Another is that it hinders the company’s leadership to communicate with one, clear voice. Yet another is that the two get in each other’s way, one reining in the other, forcing a compromised and dulled strategy. However, great business duos learn to sidestep these traps and work together for the greater good of the organization. They improve each other’s ideas without watering them down. They move in concert without stepping on each other’s toes.
The question of what is the optimal executive leadership structure is one the board must answer and be answerable for (though many of the following examples took place before the boardroom had the significance it has today); a director could not find a better starting place from which to view the issue than by looking at the following examples of tandem business success.
“Communication is the cornerstone,” says Belmont University Prof. Jeff Cornwall, who studies business organizational structure. “Successful partners are able to feel comfortable tackling difficult issues without being afraid of hurting each other’s feelings.” Certainly, when addressing high-impact challenges on a day-to-day basis, the best pairings have had a tendency to avoid sugarcoating the issues at hand, and a no-nonsense approach is also required. Says Cornwall, “Partners must have a similar work ethic, and they should have similar values, but not necessarily similar personalities.” Such advice, along with the examples offered below, affirms John Rockefeller’s maxim that friendship founded on business is preferable to business based on friendship. With such an appropriately sober attitude in mind—and with the implicit advice offered by history’s great duos—one should move confidently in building a capable leadership team.
Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger: Berkshire Hathaway
The partnership between Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger has been well documented throughout the pair’s 50-year professional relationship, but for traders, investors, and general profit-seekers at large, their formula for success remains elusive. In their leading roles at Berkshire Hathaway, the two have led investors (and themselves) to steady returns virtually unparalleled in the investment community. Their methods, as the two attest, are deceptively simple, yet their successes have been without peer.
Buffett and Munger are unified in their ability to generate profit for investors in their funds, and the two men share similar investing values that revolve around the simple tactic of targeting undervalued assets and obtaining them. As Chairman and CEO Buffett put it in last year’s letter to shareholders, “Whether we’re talking about socks or stocks, I like buying quality merchandise when it is marked down.” However, the individuals behind Berkshire’s success have demonstrated their unique characters, even as they have waged a common investment crusade. Buffett, with his tireless, common-sense approach to investing, his emphasis on wise governance, and his seemingly infinite humor and wisdom, is the prototype for would-be fund kings. His annual shareholder letters offer up world-class insight into the methods by which steady returns are generated, all tinged with the folksy warmth that is no small part of the man’s appeal.
Co-CEOs is another form of shared leadership, which is increasingly necessary in organizations with complex, changing environments, technologies and competitors. Indeed, in chaotic settings it is extraordinarily unlikely that one person will have all the answers, be able to control everything, and can sustain the old heroic idea of leadership. It is certainly convenient to have one person “in charge,” and leaders who are so insecure that they have to appear to be the one and only in order to protect their egos are unlikely to make a shared role work. In my view, leaders with truly large egos are strong enough to share decision-making, high-stakes and credit with a partner or team.
Allan R Cohen
Edward A Madden Distinguished Professor of Global Leadership
Babson College
A well studied post. Considering what makes normal people a great CEO is pertinent as co-CEO’s try to endeavor a common goal with the elegance of perseverance by holding each other from slipping, joining spheres of experience and exposure showing the world what good intentions and great brains could mould together as success path laying foundations that foster relationships both internal and external, marching ahead in pride showing future generation a tint of team work, come what the position be.
Coming to think about few unified success as a resultant of well thought strategies that dominate the CEO’s were combination of gathering information (Gather information about products, companies, consumers, markets, people, services, politics any thing, just anything and everything and disbursing it to right people),ability to convert information into a profit making opportunity, ability to jump from one orbit to next mastering each while on the go are just few to name.
It is indeed convincing now than ever that in such hard times that a duo relationship in the CEO position is a mandatory element than a matter of choice. As we understand that one brain can certainly have its limitations and having another brain to balance, inspire, redeem, aspire, advocate and share is imminent order for many still successfully surviving companies of this era.
I am sure there will be many such success stories of co-CEOs to be said in years to come as we go through most memorable period in history of world economics! Wishing all the co-CEOs much greater success than what history has offered us so far!
Further to Allan’s comment — it takes less courage to defer to one person who is “in charge” and heave a sigh that you are “just following orders” than it does to step up, facilitate debate and champion your ideas to co-CEOs (or co-sponsors) who will sharpen your thinking with very different perspectives. No one ever said that throwing off the chains of groupthink or of placating the boss would be easy. Just as leaders who truly large egos are strong enough to share decision-making, those who report to them also need strong egos to live and prosper in the shadow of their dynamic tension.
Merom Klein, PhD
Director, The Courage Institute International