Guide · Decisions
In briefDecision rules in a leadership tandem set which decisions are made alone, which together and which with backing – and above all what happens in disagreement. This disagreement rule is the single most important building block of shared leadership.
Why decision rules decide everything
When a tandem fails, it’s almost always on a single unresolved question: who decides when we disagree? As long as that question is open, every substantive question is charged with the power question. Decision rules remove the basis of this dynamic – they are the backbone of any functioning shared leadership.
Three decision types
| Type | Who decides | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Solo decision | the responsible person | day-to-day in one’s own area |
| Joint decision | both together | strategy, budget, people |
| Backing | one, informing the other | borderline cases, urgencies |
The trick is to keep the joint category deliberately small. The more you must decide together, the slower and more conflict-prone you become.
The disagreement mechanism
The most important rule is the one for when you disagree on a joint decision. Possible mechanisms:
- Topic authority: in a tie, whoever’s core area the topic falls into decides.
- Deferral with a deadline: short reflection, then a mandatory decision by a pre-chosen rule.
- External instance: for fundamental questions, an agreed third party (e.g. an advisory board).
Aus meiner Praxis
The most important line in our own tandem document was the disagreement rule. Not because we needed it often – but because its mere existence defused every heated discussion. You argue differently when you know there’s a way out.
Put it in writing
Rules that only exist in your heads are worthless in conflict – then everyone remembers differently. Write your decision rules down while you agree. That’s exactly the document tandems produce in the tandem start workshop.
Frequently asked questions
Isn’t setting a final decision uncollaborative?
On the contrary. The rule protects the partnership because it prevents every disagreement from becoming a power test.
How often do you need the disagreement rule?
Rarely – but its existence works constantly, because it relaxes discussions.
Can we change the rules?
Yes, and you should review them regularly. What matters is that they’re fixed in the crunch.
Sources & further reading
- Pearce, C. L. & Conger, J. A. (2003): Shared Leadership. Reframing the Hows and Whys of Leadership. Sage.
- Carson, J. B., Tesluk, P. E. & Marrone, J. A. (2007): Shared Leadership in Teams. Academy of Management Journal, 50(5), 1217–1234.
- Wang, D., Waldman, D. A. & Zhang, Z. (2014): A meta-analysis of shared leadership and team effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(2), 181–198.
How this article was written
This article is based on my own experience as a leader in a job-sharing model and 15 years of leading in banking, as well as the established research on shared leadership (see sources). Where I speak from practice, it is marked as such.
Amrit Rescheneder
Amrit Rescheneder helps organisations and leadership tandems build shared leadership that works. She led in a job-sharing model herself for years – after 15 years of leadership responsibility in banking. She knows shared leadership from practice, not from textbooks.
Updated: 25 July 2026