Dear SaaStr: My Co-Founder and I Can’t Agree Who Should be CEO. Would Co-CEOs Work? And What Will VCs Think?
Co-CEOs can work, but they’re tricky, and investors are generally skeptical. It’s not a dealbreaker, but it raises questions:
- Who’s really in charge?
- Who do they bet on?
- Who makes the final call when there’s a disagreement?
- These are the kinds of things that can confuse the team and to some extent, spook VCs, especially at Series A when you’re scaling and need clear leadership.
That said, there are exceptions. Atlassian, Monday.com, and Salesforce have all made co-CEOs work at different points in their journeys.
But in those cases, the co-founders had deep trust, complementary skill sets, and clearly defined roles. Or in the case of Salesforce, it was later and realistically about a potential generational transition path. It wasn’t about ego or avoiding tough conversations—it was about leveraging their partnership to accelerate growth.
If you’re considering co-CEOs, ask yourself:
- Is this truly about what’s best for the company, or is it about avoiding a power struggle? If it’s the latter, it’s a bad idea.
- Can you divide responsibilities clearly? For example, one of you owns GTM and revenue, the other owns product and vision. No overlap, no confusion.
- Do you both trust each other completely? If either of you feels the need to overrule the other, it won’t work.
If you can’t answer “yes” to all three, don’t do it.
Instead, focus on clarifying roles and responsibilities. Maybe you take on a COO or President title with full ownership of GTM, hiring, and revenue strategy. Titles matter less than the actual power and respect behind them.
For Series A, what investors want to see is alignment and execution. If co-CEOs help you execute better and there’s no friction, fine. But if it’s just a band-aid for deeper issues, it’ll show—and that’s what investors will hate. So, be brutally honest about why you’re considering this. Is it a superpower, or a way to avoid a tough conversation?
