Ok, that was a harsh title. But it is an important subject and something we should explore. Do co-CEO’s lead to a better company? Does it fuck everything up? The quick answer is yes and no. The co-CEO role has shown to work, AND it has shown to be a giant bust, but it all depends on the relationship of those two people that are steering the ship.
Do you remember when they tried this on The Office? Jim and Michael try to be co-managers where Jim handles day to day, and Michael takes over the “bigger picture” items. At first it seems logical until Oscar says the perfect rationalizing statement:
“Look, it doesn't take a genius to know that every organization thrives when it has two leaders. Go ahead, name a country that doesn't have two presidents. A boat that sets sail without two captains. Where would Catholicism be without the popes?”
Go fucking OFF KING! No truer words have been spoken about the co-leadership roles and this quote came from the fucking Office. Incredible.
The reason I say this is because Netflix recently offered the co-CEO position to their chief content officer, and now working alongside Reed Hastings who has knocked it out of the park with Netflix when he founded it waaaaaaay back when. The co-CEO position just seems weird, awkward if you will. It’s like a relationship? But not like a working one? Not sure if that makes sense, but this is how it feels.
As I said earlier, although BizBites is skeptical of the new partnership at Netflix, that doesn’t mean it can’t work. To be honest it looks like the early grooming of putting the new co-CEO as the sole CEO when Reed decides to leave Netflix. In this case, where the roles are more of mentor and mentee, it makes sense. Let two guys run the helm for a little and when the older one decides to drop off, there will be no friction in the company during the transition. The once newer co-CEO will take over, having learned quite a bit from the previous sole CEO. Jesus fucking Christ was that hard to follow? It was hard to type. What I am saying is if you build co-CEO positions you should do it with the intention of keeping power on one side. On paper they are co-CEO’s but, in the relationship, it is teacher and student. Does that make more sense? I think it should.
Look the bottom line is that in the past, two heads of leadership usually collide. The reason for the collision is nothing more than when they set up the partnership, the relationship was not carefully thought out by either party. You can’t just bang anyone on the street and expect a great family. Relationships, especially this high up, need to be groomed, meticulously planned out, and executed according to the blue print. Not saying Netflix won’t continue to thrive, but this news could potentially skew the price of the shares temporarily and force their stock down.
You need to have great leadership in any company. And if the way you get that leadership is through a joint partnership, then so be it. But you should also be a student of business history, and notice for every time this has worked, it has also failed a lot more. Be conscientious when picking leaders, and for the love of fucking God be even more conscientious when picking 2 of those mafuckas.
Anyway, that’s my take on it. Until next time. -GS
Comments