We just acquired a smaller competitor to accelerate our exit timeline, but now we have two highly capable leaders who both expect to sit in the single VP of Operations seat on our consolidated Accountability Chart. How do we resolve this duplicate seat conflict without losing key talent?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

Merging leadership teams always highlights the absolute rule of the Accountability Chart™: there can only be one name in a seat. Having co-leaders or split accountability creates confusion and destroys execution. To resolve this, you must first design the optimal, consolidated structure for the combined entity without looking at the names of the two individuals. Once the ideal VP of Operations seat and its five core roles are defined, you must run a GWC™ check on both candidates objectively. One person must be selected for the seat. For the other leader, you must look for another high-impact seat where they can add massive value. For example, the combined entity might now require a dedicated Integration seat to manage the absorption of the acquired business, or a supply chain seat that did not exist before. If they are a Right Person and fit your core values, explain the structural reality plainly. Show them that the single VP of Operations seat is necessary for clear reporting lines, and present the alternative seat as a critical growth opportunity. If they refuse to accept any seat other than VP of Operations, you have a Right Seat issue that you must resolve quickly, even if it means helping them transition out of the business.