King Xuan of Qi asked Jiu Liu, “I wish to employ both Gongzhong and Gongshu simultaneously—would that be permissible?” Jiu Liu replied, “It cannot be done. The state of Jin was torn asunder because it employed the six ministers; Duke Jian of Qi was slain because he employed Tian Chengzi and Jian Zhi together; and Wei lost its territories west of the Yellow River because it employed both Xi Shou and Zhang Yi. Should Your Majesty now employ both men at once, the more powerful among them will form factions within the court to seize control, while the less powerful will seek support from without. If some ministers band together at home to monopolize authority, and others ally with foreign states to cede territory, then Your Majesty’s kingdom will surely be imperiled.” The king said, “Well spoken.” Thereupon he refrained from employing both men together.
💡 商战启示录
This dialogue reveals a critical risk in modern corporate governance—the duality of power. When a company simultaneously empowers two equally matched executives, it is prone to internal factional strife, draining organizational resources and even leading to strategic fragmentation. For instance, a well-known technology company once appointed two co-CEOs; divergent strategic visions soon split the company into two camps, decision-making efficiency plummeted, and market share was eroded by competitors. Another internet giant, by contrast, adopted an unequivocal "second-in-command" decision-making mechanism, avoiding the pitfalls of multi-headed management. In the modern arena of business warfare, leaders must ensure clarity of authority and responsibility, and steer clear of a "dual-core" structure. Should collaboration be necessary, the boundaries of duties and decision-making processes must be explicitly defined, or a higher-level coordinator appointed, to prevent internal attrition. At the same time, vigilance is required against the weaker party leveraging external investors or partners to amplify its voice, thereby allowing corporate strategy to be hijacked by outside forces. The admonition preserved here reminds us: organizational stability outweighs individual capability—a single authority or clearly defined hierarchy often proves more efficient than dual leadership, especially in rapidly shifting markets, where resolute and unified decision-making is the key to corporate survival.