In the introduction we presented some examples of duos, trios, and other constellations at the governance level of corporations. These examples reveal combinations of role separation, role-sharing, and role integration that differ from the standard solo occupancy of corporate governance positions. They also challenge the common assumption held in corporate governance regulations and codes of best practices that affective and trust-based interpersonal relationships among top executives are to be viewed with suspicion. How then we do account for the abundance of small numbers at the top?

If a structure is not congruent with the main contingencies in its internal and external environments, performance results will be less than optimal or unsatisfactory, and will, perhaps, even lead to failure. This is a fundamental tenet of the contingency theory of organizational design. A second fundamental assumption of contingency theory, based on the principle of equifinality (Katz and Kahn, 1978; Gresov and Drazin, 1997), is that any organization can reach the same final state (e.g. a sufficient or satisfactory level of adaptation to the environment) by a variety of paths or, in this case, by different structures.