Some CEOs deliberately run without an operational shock absorber

The most extreme examples appear in government. Organizations like the U.S. Agency for International Development, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the Department of Homeland Security are structured so the top leader directly oversees a dense constellation of mission-critical functions. Without a COO layer, coordination, trade-offs, and political alignment stay firmly at the top — a reflection of accountability rather than efficiency.

What’s striking is how often this pattern carries into the private sector. Companies such as GE Aerospace, Honeywell, and Bank of America operate with broad CEO spans and no operational buffer, suggesting confidence in mature operating systems and empowered functional leaders. Rather than centralizing execution under a COO, these firms push responsibility down while keeping strategic integration with the CEO.

Technology and healthcare leaders like Salesforce, Microsoft, Eli Lilly, and CVS Health show a similar logic. The CEO becomes the primary integrator across product, technology, and regulated functions. In these models, adding a COO could actually blur ownership — the wide span is the point, not the problem.