The case for co-leadership is often made around flexibility. Creating part-time roles, particularly in senior positions, is good for diversity, especially for the advancement of women who are parents or people who have other caregiving responsibilities. This is a real and important benefit, but it wasn’t the top reason that we introduced a Co-Chair model on the Board of Year Here… so, why did we?

Sneh: When I was approached by Jack, the founder, to take on the Chair role, I was keen. As a Year Here alum and venture founder, I had a lot of institutional knowledge and passion for the mission but felt strongly that the organisation should de-risk the fact that I hadn’t led a Board of this scale before. So I only agreed on the condition that we create a Co-Chair model, requiring previous Chair and governance experience from the other person.

It also allowed me to take on a new Chair role, knowing I’d be going on maternity leave in a few months’ time. I didn’t have to worry about whether it was going to be manageable or if there would be a Board member who would be willing and able to step up as interim. My leave was already covered. I was able to take advantage of the opportunity and didn’t need to press pause on my professional growth because I was pregnant.

Zoë: The reality is that no single person has all the skills and experience, and talents to do any senior role (and if they think they do, you probably don’t want to work for them…) This idea isn’t new, of course, we can all think of CEOs we’ve worked for that are really strong on, say, product vision and fundraising, but not very operational; strong on finance, but not comms; can develop a great culture, but not sure what good governance looks like. Even the best generalists have their comfort zones.

The advice is usually that great leaders build a great team around them to shore up their weaker areas. It makes sense. But it has a limit. The buck stills stops at one person, so personal strengths and preferences can still exert the greatest influence on decisions and direction, and traditional hierarchies and power structures remain.

In making a co-leadership model a reality for the Year Here Board, Sneh put the organisation first in a very honest and low-ego way.

So, we had a new Co-Chair model and two people who hadn’t met before both sitting in the Chair seat. How did it go?

Better decisions

Zoë: We found ourselves in a really productive, safe space very quickly. It’s hard to put your finger on how that happens — it’s partly personality and chemistry, but I think it was also really helped along by knowing very clearly the role we were both there to play — the experience we were supposed to be bringing to bear. We were there to compliment, not compete. There was no posturing or politics, so it was really enjoyable to have frank debates, bounce ideas around, and play out different scenarios with a peer in this role who has different experiences and perspectives. Less pressure, better thinking.

Sneh: When making decisions about the timeline and mechanics of closing down the organisation, Zoë’s natural starting place was raising risks about partners and funders, whilst I would have programme delivery and fellow perspectives front of mind. Considering the multitude of angles between us — particularly important given the complexity of Year Here’s delivery model — gave us confidence that we were providing well-rounded advice to the Exec team.

Being nimble

Being clear about what each Chair could offer the team meant that our CEO and COO knew who their port of call would be in certain situations and enabled the co-chairs and leadership team to work nimbly. For the co-chairs, it meant sharing the workload — chairing every other meeting, enjoying time off knowing that the other was on hand. Having co-chairs meant that the CEO and COO could always speak to one of the Chairs at short notice. As a lot of the high-level decisions in the past year have been time sensitive, this mattered.

Accelerate learning

Governance roles can often feel daunting, and there is a reason why. It is a big responsibility. How do we break the cycle of needing the experience to get the position? How do we close the ‘confidence gap’, which sees men apply for roles even if they can’t tick every box, whereas women don’t? How do we short-circuit the long and difficult journey to getting better representation in senior positions across all sectors? How do people learn best? Through doing…

Sneh: The co-chair model has enabled me to learn more about governance, finance and HR than I ever would have through a course or degree — having real responsibility while being supported was a game changer.

Less stress

Sneh: There can be a lot of pressure, particularly when things don’t go as you’d expect. There will always be daunting moments, but sharing that pressure can make it exciting and stimulating rather than just stressful, which is a huge plus for personal wellbeing.

Increase diversity

Zoë: I feel sure that more co-leadership will broaden access to opportunities for people currently under-represented in leadership and governance positions. Shared responsibility will help people overcome imposter syndrome, concerns about not ticking all the boxes, and the career stagnation that can result from having caring responsibilities. Co-leadership roles can be a way to open up leadership roles to more people from different backgrounds. For me, this experience has changed how I think about what really excellent governance and leadership can look like.

What was the experience like for the Executive team and fellow Board members? We asked for their views and their take on any downsides.

CEO, Zoë Stanton…

I’m such a fan of collaborative leadership models and really struggle to find a downside. There are, of course, risks that need to be mitigated. For example, a risk that neither co-chair has a full view of what’s happening because of twin-track conversations or that additional work is required from the leadership team to keep both informed. To mitigate this, the co-chairs took responsibility to check in between themselves. Also, we did all have to contribute additional time. But rather than a downside, I see this as a valuable and worthwhile investment for the benefits gained. In the long run, much time and energy is saved through better decision-making and additional overall capacity.

COO, Shady Bajelvand…

At its core, the co-leadership model calls not only for making space for each other but for trusting and valuing the distinctive skill sets, approaches and experiences each of you brings. I have no doubt that the co-chair model had a significant and hugely positive impact on my time at Year Here. It not only implicitly inspired a more collaborative and trusting way of working with the Board, it also impacted our organisational culture and mindset. The active role-modelling of co-leadership from our co-chairs continuously inspired Zoë (CEO) and me to challenge the outdated structures of individualistic leadership and to share the responsibilities and ownership of every stage of our decision-making.

Views from around the Board…

I’m a fairly strong sceptic of co-leadership models, but Zoë and Sneh have almost won me around! I now have a sense that it’s possible to make this model work really well in quite specific circumstances. I think it requires a very high degree of alignment, flexibility, and coordination. I know they both put in a lot of time, so I wonder if the model does require a greater time commitment…

I think that the model has worked very well. The organisation has hugely benefited from 2 chairs with varied skills and experience. I know that the co-chairs have provided a useful sounding board and support for each other in the role (something that a sole Chair would not have). My experience of this model with Year Here has been very positive, and I do think it could work in other contexts — but ONLY if you have two capable individuals working well together…

Final thoughts…

Perhaps no surprise that the qualities that led to us embracing this model — self-awareness, low ego, and putting the organisation first — were the very qualities that made the model actually work in practice.

Clearly, there are other considerations to think through — not least the extra cost when these positions are paid — but we really think it’s worth making that maths work. Why? Because there’ll be a huge payoff…

Co-leadership:

1. is a way to live the value of collaboration;
2. generates better thinking and decisions;
3. creates more leadership positions overall;
4. creates supported learning environments for high-pressure roles;
5. and can move the needle on widening representation in leadership and governance positions

Wouldn’t it be great if, instead of feeling that you don’t tick all the boxes or are factored out of career progression due to other commitments, you could instead tick the ‘open to co-leadership’ box…