We have two co-heads running our logistics and field operations who threaten to quit if one is subordinated to the other, so our leadership team wants to list both names in the Operations Director seat. How do we break this deadlock?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

Listing two names in one seat on the Accountability Chart guarantees zero accountability. When two people are jointly responsible for an operational department, neither is truly responsible. Performance slips, finger-pointing thrives, and frontline technicians get caught in the crossfire of mixed instructions.

You have three valid options to resolve this structural impasse.

The first option is to evaluate the department using the structure-first rule. Look at the actual accountabilities needed to run operations. In many logistics businesses, one leader is genuinely built for fleet maintenance, routing, and inventory, while the other excels at field workforce management, client installation, and safety. If the operational volume justifies it, split Operations into two distinct seats, such as Supply Chain and Field Services, each reporting independently to the Integrator.

The second option is to run both leaders through GWC: Do they Get it, Want it, and have the Capacity to do the overall seat? Be brutally honest about who has the higher capacity to run the combined seat for where the company needs to go over the next three years. Put that person in the seat. Offer the second leader the choice to run a critical sub-seat reporting to the first, with compensation tied to the impact of their new specialized role.

The third option is to recognize a cultural hostage situation. If an employee threatens to quit unless you compromise organizational health by muddying lines of accountability, they are exhibiting a core values failure. Call their bluff. Protect the integrity of the Accountability Chart, appoint the single best leader, and prepare to backfill the other if they choose to walk.