Hiding in plain sight: co-leadership in the military

Purpose Co-leadership theory has largely been developed in civilian contexts where partners are voluntarily selected, relatively stable and operate within negotiable authority structures. This article uses military command teams as a critical case to refine these assumptions. In the military, officer–non-commissioned member dyads are structurally embedded, imposed, frequently rotated and operate under singular command authority. Yet leadership is enacted jointly. These conditions provide an opportunity to revisit core ideas underlying co-leadership theory. Design/methodology/approach This article develops co-leadership using military command teams as a generative case to refine its definition, boundary conditions and mechanisms. It consolidates existing co-leadership dimensions, surfaces contextual assumptions, draws on military doctrine and theorizes additional dimensions and mechanisms. Findings Military command teams foreground a hierarchical dyad as a distinct unit of analysis: the hinge where singular authority and shared leadership coexist. This article identifies seven dimensions that refine co-leadership theory: interchangeability, professional development and career-path asymmetries, jurisdictions, informal leadership, culture, hierarchical level and extremity level. These dimensions illuminate mechanisms central to dyadic work in this context, including role-based trust across rotation, indirect influence that preserves legitimacy and jurisdictional overlap that can be functional or contested. The findings challenge four foundational assumptions in co-leadership theory – stability, voluntarism, authority equality and visibility – by demonstrating that co-leadership can operate in their absence. Originality/value By theorizing co-leadership in a setting marked by frequent rotation, mandated pairing and formal authority asymmetry, this article reframes co-leadership as a context-dependent complement to hierarchy and clarifies when, where and how dyadic leadership persists under constraint.