Why Dual CTO/CPO Roles Are a Terrible Idea

Yesterday, I had a chat with a recruiter about a hybrid, dual-titled CTO/CPO role. It wasn’t the first time—in the past few months, I’ve spoken with several CEOs and executive recruiters on the hunt for hybrid CMO/CPOs or CTO/CPOs. It’s a growing trend (see here: Leadership Revolution: C-Suites Journey into Hybrid Territory and Combining CTO and CPO Roles).

And it’s a terrible idea.

Why the strong reaction to combining engineering and product or marketing and product into a dual-titled executive seat? I’ve actually worked with and for executives in hybrid roles—a CMO who doubled as CPO, a CTO/CPO, and even a CRO/CMO. None of these setups worked well, and none lasted more than a year before either the executive left or the role devolved back into its original, distinct forms.

Turning that role into a dual-titled mashup

There’s a solid business reason why product, marketing, and engineering need separate leaders—the tension between these roles keeps messaging accurate, roadmaps realistic, and prioritization ruthless. Combine two functions under one leader with a single set of goals, and the balance can easily tip.

You see this in “founder syndrome” when startup CEOs hold onto product ownership for too long. Since the CEO always wins debates, marketing and engineering end up taking a backseat, often to the detriment of the product. Similarly, an engineering leader who also manages product often creates roadmaps that lack ambition and focus too much on technology iteration. A marketing leader who owns product is likely to produce appealing roadmaps that are unachievable or lack a deep understanding of the user.

This isn’t always catastrophic—plenty of healthy organizations have product under engineering or marketing. But the real issue for me is acknowledging the need for a CPO and then turning that role into a dual-titled mashup with another existing role.

What’s the function of a C-level role?

Let’s take a step back. What’s the function of a C-level role? Throughout my career, I’ve seen a common organizational theme: C-level roles are about organizational priorities, giving a function a seat at the table when company strategy and goals are being set. C-level leaders advocate for their function’s needs, commit to goals and metrics, and allocate resources to achieve those goals.

C-level roles are not about promoting a great VP, or indicating membership in an executive staff, or attracting specific talent. Choosing which C-level roles exist in a company is about what priorities are critical to the organization at a given stage of its growth.

And: the typical C-level roles in an organization evolve over time. This can be seen in the rise of the Chief Revenue Officer in the late 2000s (combining new business sales and customer retention), the emergence of the Chief Customer Experience Officer in the early 2010s, and the rise of the Chief Data Officer in the late 2010s (highlighting the critical role of data and intelligence).

When one executive wears two titles, it’s impossible to recreate the healthy tension between two separate roles.

Individual C-level leaders create clear priorities and ownership within the executive team. But when one executive wears two titles, it’s impossible to recreate the healthy tension between two separate roles—one role will always dominate, lacking the balance that discrete leaders provide. It’s like playing solitaire against yourself – and cheating.

Moreover, consider the motivations behind such roles. For a CEO, it might signal the blending of two previously separate positions – although there are better ways to do this. But for the executives advocating for and taking these dual roles, there’s often an undercurrent of resume-building. Scratch the surface, and you’ll find no solid thesis on why the two roles should merge—just a desire to add both titles, like merit badges, to their experience.

In fact, some CEOs have admitted to me that they combined CTO/CPO or CMO/CPO roles because they were struggling to attract top talent. The allure of holding two C-level titles attracts executives eyeing a future CEO role, often from VP-level positions at public companies. The offer of dual titles can be a deciding factor when compensation or company reputation falls short.

There is a natural way to add a healthy product function to marketing or to engineering – that’s what a VP of Product is for.

There’s a legitimate way to merge two functions in the executive team—create a new title and clearly communicate the change in priorities. And there is a natural way to add a healthy product function under marketing or engineering – that’s why you hire a VP of Product under a CMO or CTO. But tacking ‘CPO’ onto an existing role and expecting one person to function effectively in a hybrid capacity is unrealistic.

And – most importantly – it doesn’t work.