The company weighs a co-CEO model to succeed Bob Iger, but history suggests potential pitfalls.

Date:

Disney Explores Leadership Change

October 15, 2025:Disney is reportedly considering a co-CEO structure as it plans for a leadership transition following Bob Iger’s tenure. The idea has sparked debate among executives and industry watchers, with some praising the potential for shared responsibility, while others c aution that Disney’s history may make such a model risky.

Lessons From the Past

Historically, co-CEO arrangements have faced challenges in major corporations, including issues with decision-making, accountability, and conflicting visions. For Disney, which oversees diverse divisions spanning film, theme parks, streaming, and merchandise, a dual-leadership approach could complicate strategic planning and day-to-day operations. Analysts point to previous attempts at joint leadership in large media companies, many of which struggled to maintain cohesion and clear direction.

Balancing Creative and Business Priorities

Disney’s unique blend of creative and corporate priorities adds another layer of complexity. A co-CEO system could, in theory, allow one executive to focus on creative ventures while the other manages financial and operational concerns. However, without strong alignment, such a division of labor risks miscommunication and slowed decision-making — critical issues in a fast-paced entertainment landscape.

Stakeholder Concerns

Investors and board members have reportedly expressed mixed opinions about the plan. Some see the co-CEO model as a way to retain top talent while leveraging complementary skills. Others worry it could create confusion internally and externally, particularly during a period of major transitions in Disney’s streaming strategy and theme park expansions.

Looking Ahead

As Disney contemplates the next chapter of leadership, the company must weigh the potential benefits of a co-CEO structure against the lessons of history. While shared leadership may offer flexibility, the risks of divided authority and strategic misalignment are significant — making the decision one of the most consequential in Disney’s storied corporate history.