The primus inter pares approach creates resilient, collaborative companies. Shared leadership is deeply rooted in Swiss culture.
Since the incorporation of our Republic in 1291, Switzerland deeply detests central power and ruling classes.
In contrast to most other countries, we don’t have a real head of state. Instead, we have a Federal Council of seven persons elected indirectly through parliament. The chair of the Federal Council is rotated every year, with the chair taking over the “presidency” — which is much better described as primus inter pares: The first amongst equals.
Believe it or not, our Armed Forces were also led under that system for a long time. The defense minister chaired the National Defense Commission, consisting of all seven three-star generals plus the armaments director. One of the three-star generals was the Chief of the General Staff. And because Switzerland only elects a General in wartime, the Chief of the General Staff was the commander-in-chief of all troops in service under our unique active reserve system. He was also the primus inter pares within the National Defense Commission.
What does this unique leadership model mean for entrepreneurs? Let’s look at some aspects in more detail.
Disadvantages
For many readers, I’m sure it is the first time they hear of the primus inter pares leadership model. The initial reaction to new things is often repulsive, which is why I’m starting to discuss the disadvantages of this leadership model first.
One core leadership principle is that responsibility cannot be delegated. So you might ask who is responsible in the primus inter pares leadership model — is it the primus inter pares or the entire leadership team?
A second disadvantage is the speed of decision. If the primus inter pares cannot make a decision without consulting with the entire leadership team first, decisions might come too late.
Leadership is still heavily personified — a leadership team and its primus inter pares are not as visible as a strong, charismatic leader.
Advantages
In a world in turmoil, the disadvantages of the primus inter pares leadership system are advantages: Who wants erratic, egomaniac leaders who constantly insult and mistreat people? Who wants unreflected decisions that affect entire economies by a single post on social media?
In my view, the biggest advantage of the primus inter pares leadership system is that decisions are made jointly: Discussions can be contradictory and hefty behind closed doors before a decision is made, but once the decision is made, the leadership team represents the group’s opinion. One for all, all for one.
Decisions are not just better when they are made by a group of individuals with different perspectives, it’s also much easier to implement those decisions when the entire leadership supports the decisions.
It also keeps leaders humble — no single individual can make good decisions in our complex, messy world. No single individual is competent in all aspects relevant to an organization.
Application to Entrepreneurship
At Yonder, we recently changed our leadership team and used this as an opportunity to move towards the primus inter pares leadership system: The CEO of a company is just the primus inter pares of the leadership team.
Of course, each member of our leadership team still has their area of expertise and leads a team: Sales, customer success, product, development. But there are many cross-functional leadership aspects in a company — finance, partner management, human resources. These are the topics we jointly discuss and make decisions on — with everyone’s opinion being weighted equally.
The best thing about the primus inter pares leadership system for a 25-person company? If not everything depends on a single leader, you have more leadership redundancy in a resource-constrained setup.
