Attributes of Joint Leadership Teams

A variety of conditions lead some organizations to delegate jointly to more than one person primary responsibility for a business unit, task force, or project. The idea that more than one person can have "primary" responsibility for something is a bit of a puzzle, but nevertheless, it's a common situation. It can work well. And it can also develop into a potful of trouble. If you find yourself inclined to establish one of these configurations, or you're a co-leader yourself, or you work in or with a unit that has joint leadership, it's advantageous to know the risks. Knowing what kinds of problems can develop, and knowing what limitations these structures have, can be helpful. This post is a high-level view of the kinds of factors that can affect the performance of joint leadership teams (JLTs). I'll be exploring JLTs in more detail in coming posts.

Attributes of joint leadership teams

One way of categorizing JLTs is according to the size of the leadership group. Dyads, triads, tetrads, … all are possible. Probably the most common form of JLT is the pair, in which just two people are designated as having primary responsibility for the effort. Often, the number of co-leaders is determined by political considerations, especially when the group is supposed to "represent" the interests of a set of teams or business units. See "The Politics of Forming Joint Leadership Teams," Point Lookout for January 4, 2023, for more.

Other factors that affect the risk profile facing the leadership group include, as examples, the factors below.

Group longevity

The group Probably the most common form of joint
leadership team is the pair, in which just
two people are designated as having
primary responsibility for a group effortcan be a short-term task force, a project, a long-lived business unit, an entire enterprise, or something else. Groups with longer lifetimes face greater external risks, as the rest of the enterprise has more time to mobilize its political capabilities.

Breadth of knowledge required

The group might be trying to achieve something that requires a broad base of knowledge, best provided by a group of leaders. Settings in which success depends on divergent practices, assumptions, values, beliefs, or rules are likely to find JLTs appealing. [Gibeau 2016] Although a JLT might be appealing at first, it's important to weigh carefully the advantages and disadvantages of the JLT approach.

Sources of funding

In some cases, the organizations that provide funding for the group require specific persons to have leadership positions. This is one way funders can manage risks related to lack of knowledge about some of the leadership candidates. Unfortunately, although the JLT configuration might offer some comfort in that respect, it brings along risks of its own.

Captivity

A captive JLT is one that's embedded in an organization. Examples include the leadership teams of projects, task forces, task teams, or business units. These are likely the most common forms of JLTs. Members of a captive JLT are subject to the performance standards of the host organization, and (usually) supervision by a responsible superior. These mechanisms provide some mitigation of the risk of toxic conflict within the JLT.

Last words

In next week's post, I explore the properties of JLTs that affect their agility. In two weeks, I examine the organizational politics of forming JLTs. And in three weeks, I examine some risks that are specific to JLTs.   Next issue in this series   Top    Next Issue

Occasionally we have the experience of belonging to a great team. Thrilling as it is, the experience is rare. In part, it's rare because we usually strive only for adequacy, not for greatness. We do this because we don't fully appreciate the returns on greatness. Not only does it feel good to be part of great team — it pays off. Check out my Great Teams Workshop to lead your team onto the path toward greatness. More info

Footnotes

Your comments are welcome

About Point Lookout

Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.

This article in its entirety was written by a human being. No machine intelligence was involved in any way.

Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.

Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.

Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.

Related articles

More articles on Virtual and Global Teams:

Outsourcing Each Other's Kids

Outsourcing is now so widespread that it has achieved status as a full-fledged management fad. But many outsourcing decisions lack the justification that a full financial model provides. Here are some of the factors that such a model should include.

Virtual Brainstorming: II

When virtual teams must brainstorm, they try to do so virtually. But brainstorming isn't just another meeting. There's a real risk that virtual brainstorms might produce inadequate results. Here's Part II of some suggestions for reducing the risk.

Toward More Engaging Virtual Meetings: II

Here's Part II of a set of simple techniques to help virtual meeting facilitators enhance attendee engagement.

New Virtual Meetings for Teams

Now that so many members of so many teams are working from home, the virtual meeting has taken on a new form, and new importance. Here are suggestions for making your virtual team meetings more effective.

Cooperations That Need to Be Collaborations

Modern products and services are so complex that many people cooperate and collaborate to produce them. When people are cooperating but the work actually requires collaborating, risks arise that can threaten the success of the effort.

See also Virtual and Global Teams for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming September 3: Contributions in Team Meetings: Advocating

An agenda in the form of an ordered list of topics might not provide an appropriate framework for a given meeting. For example, if A depends on B, and B depends on A, we must find a way to discuss A and B together in some orderly fashion. Here are some alternatives to linear, ordered agendas. Available here and by RSS on September 3.

And on September 10: Contributions in Team Meetings: Scoping

Some meetings focus on solving specific problems. We call them "working sessions." More often, we delegate problem solving to task teams, while meetings wrestle with the difficult task of identifying or "scoping" problems rather than solving them. Scoping discussions can be perilous. Available here and by RSS on September 10.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenaXXxGCwVgbgLZDuRner@ChacDjdMAATPdDNJnrSwoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.

Get the ebook!

Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:

• Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, )
• Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, )
• Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, )
• Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, )
• Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, )
• Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, )

Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500-1000 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info