Companies need to find creative ways to meet budget while hiring the talent required to succeed. I’m observing a lot of ways of doing this (hello boom of fractional talent!), but one that I’m interested in understanding more about is the 2-for-1 hire.

What do I mean?

I mean a new hire (often an executive) is hired to lead more than one function.  Sometimes it’s explicit in the title (ie, Chief Product and Technology Officer) and sometimes it’s buried in the language of a job function (ie, a COO job description outlining that the existing accounting function will report to them). I recognize this simply makes sense at early stage companies - there isn’t really a need for that much executive firepower yet. But I’m also seeing this at later stages (or teams not evolving these structures as they grow).

Reflecting on this, I can see a few advantages:

• Cost Containment: Obvious.  You might have to hire someone a bit more expensive, but you should see savings overall. There may be additional contract or software costs to help cover the skill gap - but if you aren’t saving some cash with this decision, you’ve likely missed the mark along the way.
• Better Alignment: In theory, having multiple functions run into a single leader should make those functions communicate more often and effectively.  Again, in theory - I can certainly think of some moments in my professional life where this didn’t happen and it made things worse. A lot of this coming to fruition will be in the leader’s communication skills.
• Growth Opportunities: For both the executive and their teams, the ability to take on stretch projects, learn new skills, etc is more readily available. This can be a career multiplier for many folks across the team.

And, yet, I also see challenges:

• Lack of Expertise: Seems simple, but it’s hard for someone to be an expert in a multitude of topics. You will need to choose the priority you are hiring for, and also look for the ability to learn/grow on the job as well to round out skills.
• Unsupported Team: The 2-for-1’s calendar is often stretched thin, resulting in less oversight and more hands-off management.  While this can be empowering for some team members, it often comes with lack of feedback, ineffective cascading communications, and the ability for the team to focus on the wrong thing.
• Lopsided Execution: You run the risk of this executive having a preference for executing in the part of the role they are most comfortable with.  When someone has a long to-do list and many competing priorities, they often default to the thing they know best. If the hierarchy in the role aligns to someone’s strengths, this could be a bit of a moot point, but I would generally argue this is an issue to think through.
• Less Rigorous Decision Making: When I talk to a founder about adding a new executive to their leadership team, one of the things that is universally hoped for is that another smart mind in the room will improve decision making. The 2-for-1 hiring with execs keeps the leadership team smaller for longer, thus less ability for the type of multi-faceted decision making most companies need.  (Although, arguably, one could argue here that a smaller leadership team leads to quicker decision making - but I think this is more cultural than anything.)
• Missing Representation: With a smaller executive team, you are less likely for this team to represent the diverse populations in both your customer and employee populations.

I have discussed this with a few leaders-in-transition, and one statement has come up more often than others: How do I position myself to take advantage of this trend?

A few thoughts:

• Position Yourself Correctly: I often find myself reflecting on the fact that much of the job search is more like an advertising campaign than anything.  You need to present the version of yourself that makes the reader say, “I want to talk to this person.”  Now, don’t misunderstand this as advice to lie or deceive.  Rather, this is a reminder that you have the power to position yourself to have the greatest chance of success. Start to highlight the multiple strengths you have relevant to a role instead of the same version to everyone.
• Leverage Technology to Fill the Gaps: In our current moment of AI tools being used everywhere, you are uniquely positioned to harness technology to help you increase knowledge and improve skillset. Teams are looking for individuals who can leverage emerging tech to make them better and more productive in their work - this seems like an ideal use case.
• Be Self Aware: Generally, I want to hire someone who can do the job well as it stands today AND have room for growth. If you come across a 2-for-1 opportunity, I would hope it presents well to highlight where you can execute immediately and where you are excited to grow while in the role.

So, what are you seeing and hearing on this topic?  Would you be excited for an opportunity like this, or are businesses and teams disadvantaging themselves by employing this model?  Curious to hear from you!

‍