PILnet’s Co-Executive Directors Julia Mayerhofer and Andrej Nosko discuss how PILnet’s adoption of a Co-Executive Director model reflects a broader shift toward shared, collaborative leadership in the nonprofit sector, demonstrating how co-leadership can provide more sustainable, resilient, and equitable governance.
In the traditional nonprofit world, the most commonly portrayed leadership model is that of a single Executive Director or CEO at the helm of the organization. In this model, one person carries the weight of ensuring the mission is fulfilled, partnering with the board to strategically lead the organization, managing the staff, and overseeing funding. Both of us began in a sector where the “single leader” model was the only one known and where it was not questioned. Over the years, we have seen shifts and the benefits of shared power elsewhere, allowing us to tap into the experiences and lessons learned from running co-leadership models. When PILnet faced the latest leadership transition in 2022, we were able to win the trust of the Board and saw an opportunity to move past the traditional model by operating under a Co-Executive Director (Co-ED) model.
The world’s problems are becoming increasingly complex and intersectional. To respond to them, our leadership structures must be equally dynamic. It is time for the sector to consider collective leadership models and see the Co-ED model as providing a strategic advantage. At PILnet, the sheer scale of our global mission means our staff located around the globe literally never sleep. Expecting a single Executive Director to navigate every timezone and programmatic complexity alone is unrealistic; the Co-ED model trades the myth of the ‘superhuman’ for the reality of sustainable and global leadership.
Additionally, Co-Executive leadership models provide strategic solutions for complex leadership issues, including:
- Two brains are better than one. The real magic of co-leadership lies in embracing complementarity. A Co-ED model allows for a broader range of lived experiences, professional backgrounds, and personalities. This isn’t duplication; it’s multiplication, and in PILnet’s case, it allows us to draw on each other’s strengths and complement each other while keeping the organization grounded.
- Leadership can often be a very lonely and isolating experience, with many nonprofit leaders experiencing burnout at some point in their careers. Having a partner to stress-test ideas, share the emotional labor, and provide immediate feedback prevents burnout and ensures sustainability in leadership.
- When leadership is shared, the organization doesn’t come to a halt or slow down if one person is sick, on leave, or travelling. Decision-making power is baked into the structure, ensuring continuity. We can go on annual leave without checking our inbox regularly, knowing that the other Co-ED is there to address any emergencies.
- The Co-ED model enhances multidimensional accountability and governance. While most nonprofit organizations still follow the traditional governance model of boards hiring the ED, who is the sole person answering to the board, the reality is that nonprofits are increasingly accountable not only to their boards, but to an overlapping and complex network of stakeholders. From the communities they serve to their institutional foundations and other donors, organizational leaders must address the needs of myriad entities invested in their missions. The Co-ED model makes it more feasible to reflect on and navigate these accountability structures and expectations.
Over the past years, we have also seen other organizations transition into this model. The previous organization of one of us, the Asia Pacific Refugee Rights Network (APRRN), now has a Co-Secretary General model in order to actively involve individuals with lived experience in leadership and governance. The learnings of their Co-Secretary Generals are available here and highlight how their experience has been both rewarding and challenging. PILnet’s partner, Asylum Access, has taken it a step further and introduced a four-person Executive Leadership Team, as they believe leadership is strongest when it is shared. Just a few weeks ago, Access Now announced that they will embrace a co-leadership model to “bolster the organization’s leadership capacity, better balance strategic and organizational workloads, and further the team’s programmatic and fundraising efforts.”
The Co-ED model isn’t a silver bullet and doesn’t always work; it requires intentionality and a specific framework. Here is what we have learned based on our experience in the past few years, and what we have observed from others who have embarked on this journey:
- Mutually compatible personalities of both Co-EDs. The success of a Co-ED model often hinges on personal compatibility and is an important factor in making the collaboration a reality. When personalities are aligned, it serves as the organization’s internal engine. Conversely, a lack of compatibility can lead to “staff splitting”—where the team receives mixed signals or plays one leader against the other.
- Co-ED models require high levels of trust. Co-EDs must have absolute trust in the other person, but at the same time be transparent and keep their counterpart updated at all times, as transparency builds trust.
- Our model relies on constant dialogue and communication with each other and other senior colleagues. While this aspect is more demanding than leading alone, it’s exactly why it works. In a way, we are each other’s thought partners and accountability mirrors at the same time. It also allows us to reflect on key decisions and stress-test them before they are implemented.
- Roles must be clear to everyone. At PILnet, we have divided responsibilities based on strength and experience, while maintaining shared accountability for the “big picture” as we are managing PILnet together. Some organizations with Co-ED models end up effectively splitting the organizations and running two separate organizations within a single brand. We are lucky that this is not the case at PILnet.
- Conflicts or disagreements need to be handled in a constructive way. We may have disagreements or different personal preferences on how situations should be handled or which path should be taken. We may—and often do—make different choices. It takes maturity to recognize and accept the differences for what they are, making our leadership styles diverse and complementary but not identical. Besides these natural differences in style and form, we also face disagreements on substance. We don’t always agree with each other, but we try to resolve these disagreements and always aim to present a united front towards the team as well as external stakeholders. In the rare event of a true deadlock, we would seek the counsel of a trusted board member or bring the issue to the Board or one of the Board committees to ensure that our disagreement never results in organizational paralysis.
- Egos must stay at the door. As humans, we tend to be in competition with each other. Co-ED models are not about who is the better Co-ED, but rather about working, learning, and growing together to get the best leadership result for the entire organization.
- The board must understand and support the model and ensure that both leaders have equal standing so the model is not undermined.
At its core, the Co-Executive Director model challenges the notion that authority must be concentrated. If we are working to build a more equitable world through the law, our internal structures should reflect those same values of equity and shared agency. By embracing this model, PILnet isn’t just managing an organization; we are demonstrating that collaboration is a more powerful engine for change than competition. It’s time we stop asking if two people can lead together and start asking why we ever expected one person to do it alone. At PILnet, we’ve chosen to lead together—and in doing so, we’re charting a path not just for organizations like ours, but for a future where leadership means we, not me.