“On Ted’s side, it’s content, marketing, legal, comms, and publicity. On my side, it’s product tech, ads, games, finance. But we always say speaking to one of us is speaking to both of us.”
This approach allows each leader to focus on their expertise while ensuring big-picture decisions are made jointly. Sarandos admitted he initially worried about disagreements but found clarity in a simple question:
“‘What are the things that you know more than I do and you’re more passionate about than I am?’”
The Pros and Cons of Co-CEOs
The co-CEO model is not without risks. Without a single decision-maker, accountability can blur, and conflicts can escalate. However, studies suggest that companies with co-CEOs outperformed solo-led firms, with 9.5% average annual shareholder returns compared to 6.9% between 1996 and 2020.
Experts note that for this model to work, the executives must have chemistry, mutual respect, and clear boundaries. Netflix’s results back this up: in Q2, the company posted record revenue of $11.08 billion and 47% year-over-year earnings growth under Sarandos and Peters.
What’s Next for Spotify
Spotify’s decision to adopt the co-CEO model may be its boldest leadership shift since going public. By looking at Netflix’s success, Ek appears to be betting that shared leadership will help Spotify scale further in the competitive streaming landscape.
