Why would any company choose to have co-CEOs? The co-CEO model is highly unusual and unpopular with shareholders and governance specialists — both because of the expenses incurred (hefty pay packages are doubled), and the potential it brings for clashes at the top. So why would anyone use it?

A calculated risk: This brief FT profile of Martin Gilbert and Keith Skeoch, formerly heads of Aberdeen Asset Management and Standard Life, respectively, and now the co-CEOs of Standard Life Aberdeen, goes some way towards answering that question. They emphasize the importance of complementarity and the need for shared responsibility in their positions, arguing that the complexity of integrating their two businesses following the GBP 11 bn merger that took place 18 months ago made this unorthodox power-sharing mechanism not only desirable, but necessary.

Teamwork makes the dream work: Gilbert and Skeoch note that they made it a point to divvy up their respective areas of responsibility, but both run point on top-tier matters including strategy and monitoring the company’s performance. “Both deny that there is a dominant partner and say all decisions are made jointly. When rare disagreements occur, they say, the executive who has responsibility for that area of the business has the final call.” Their unusual management structure opens up interesting questions about the efficacy of other models and the need to examine alternative approaches to internal governance — particularly as part of conversations around M&As.