There’s the old saying that two heads are better than one.  Many times I agree that is true.  Each person can bring a different viewpoint that the other would have missed.  Together they are stronger than being solo.

Yet there can be a time when two heads are worse than one!  If one tugs left and the other tugs right with equal force, you get an organization that goes nowhere.

                                               

I walked into such a situation when I was CFO at a pharmaceutical manufacturer.  The company was founded the year before, by two individuals who arranged the acquisition of three plants. 

A year later, when I started, the company was stuck:

• One partner wanted to do contract manufacturing for other larger pharmaceutical manufacturers.
• The other partner wanted to develop our own branded line of generic pharmaceutical products.

Each strategy could work.  However there was neither the capital nor the bandwidth to pull both off.  As a result we were mediocre in both and not growing at all.  Opportunities were being missed in each area.

Eventually we decided to pursue the branded line direction, and not grow the contract manufacturing side.  To do this, it required much more capital and management talent in areas we didn’t have at the time.

It also meant having to put an end to the two headed hydra.  The private equity firm let the two founders go and brought in a new head to run the company.

The focus paid off handsomely.  Although we were way behind other firms in our industry, we were able to catch up by taking a longer term view.  We let short term products opportunities pass and instead tackled projects a couple years out where we could be first.

It is good to have two different opinions, but eventually you have to pick one and run with it so the team can be on the same page.