Recommended Free Tools
A CIO and CEO work well together when they share a strategic agenda, understand how each other sees the business and technology trade-offs, and talk often enough that changing priorities get surfaced early. The relationship is undermined by short-term pressure that repeatedly disrupts long-term technology work, by unchecked assumptions about what the other executive believes, by technology presented apart from business outcomes, and by one-way communication. The sections below separate what the evidence supports from what it does not.
Why mutual understanding matters more than good intentions
The most direct evidence on this relationship comes from a 2016 study in the Journal of Strategic Information Systems, titled “Does mutuality matter? Examining the bilateral nature and effects of CEO–CIO mutual understanding.” Its authors analysed 102 matched CEO-CIO survey responses, meaning both executives in each pair answered questions about important business and IT topics. The study is observational and describes that sample; it is not a census of executives and it does not prove cause and effect. Its main findings are worth reading closely.
First, the two executives’ actual views were more similar than either one believed. Each side’s perception of the other was biased away from the other’s real position. In practical terms, a CEO and CIO can sit in the same meeting, agree on the outline of a plan, and still each assume the other wants something different.
Second, the study found that the CIO’s understanding of the CEO’s views was more closely tied to collaboration quality than the CEO’s understanding of the CIO’s views. This is a finding from that dataset, not a universal rule for every executive pair. It does, however, give CIOs a concrete reason to invest in learning what the CEO is trying to achieve and what constraints the CEO faces.
The Tool Desk
Outbyte PC Repair FREEClear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Outbyte Driver Updater FREEScan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →#1 Best Overall
Why the CIO’s role has moved toward strategy
A 2024 feature in CIO documents a shift that practitioners describe in their own words. Onam Pereyra, global head of IT at Unode50, put it this way: “It’s no longer based on receiving guidelines from the CEO,” he says. “The CIO is involved in the formulation of strategies and identifying areas where technology can add value to improve competitiveness and customer experience. The key is to have a shared vision and ensure technology is integrated into every aspect of strategic planning.”
Íñigo Fernández, director of technology at PageGroup, pointed to two forces behind the change: “The change comes from two sides,” says Fernández. “One, because the CIO has evolved and wants to be in the strategy. And two, the company needs it. If it’s not there, no one will understand what we’re doing with artificial intelligence, for example.”
The same feature cites Gartner’s 2024 CEO survey as ranking technology-related change as the second most important business priority for CEOs, behind growth. This is a secondary report of that survey; the original Gartner methodology and question wording were not reviewed for this article, so treat the ranking as reported rather than as a precise benchmark.
Pereyra also framed the expectation placed on the role: “IT leaders are expected to not only understand technology, but be able to translate that understanding into business opportunities,” he says.
What underscores a CIO-CEO partnership
The factors below are the ones that recur across the practitioner interviews and the 2016 findings. None of them guarantees results on its own; they work together.
A shared strategic agenda
Technology, data and digital change belong in strategy formulation from the start, not as a downstream service that receives a budget after the strategy is set. The practical test is whether the CIO is in the room when the business plan’s priorities are drafted, and whether technology appears as a lever in those priorities rather than as a separate appendix.
Business-value translation
Technology choices are easier to fund, prioritise and defend when they are described in terms the CEO already uses: growth, competitiveness, customer experience, efficiency, risk and, for public or mission-driven organisations, mission outcomes. A proposal that lists features and infrastructure components tends to leave the CEO asking what the investment changes. A proposal that names the outcome and how it will be measured gives the CEO something to decide.
Perspective-taking in both directions
CEOs benefit from understanding how the CIO assesses technology risk, dependency and delivery capacity. CIOs benefit from understanding the CEO’s priorities, time horizon and constraints. Because the 2016 study points to the CIO’s grasp of the CEO’s views as especially important for collaboration quality, the CIO carries more of the burden of starting that conversation, though the CEO’s engagement still matters.
Rank #3
- Effective People
- Personal Success
- Keys to
- Communication
- Business
Frequent, open dialogue
Expectations drift, and a plan agreed in January may rest on assumptions that no longer hold by June. A recurring conversation, with a standing agenda item on technology priorities and open questions, gives both executives a place to test assumptions rather than infer them. Testing is the direct remedy for the perception gap described above.
A roadmap with honest timing
Yolima Cossio, CIO of Vall d’Hebron Hospital, described the planning expectation this way: “You have to have a clear roadmap, with short-, medium-, and long-term objectives, and be aware there will be times when progress won’t be as fast as desired,” she says. A roadmap that shows near-term wins alongside longer infrastructure or capability work lets the CEO see where patience is required and where results should appear.
Customer and mission focus
Technology decisions land better when they are anchored in the people the organisation serves. The CIO’s job includes adapting those decisions as customer or mission needs change, which gives the CEO a reason to keep the relationship active beyond annual budget cycles.
Trust built through visible behaviour
Gartner’s July 2025 research abstract, available on the Gartner site, describes a C.A.R.E. Trust Compass covering outcome-focused competence, authenticity, reliability and empathy. The full paid report was not accessible for this article, so the public summary supports the framework and its high-level claim only. Read in a CEO-CIO context, the four elements translate into everyday habits: delivering what was promised, being candid about risk, meeting commitments on schedule, and understanding the human cost of change for the people on the other side of the table.
Rank #4
- Author: Bungay Stanier, Michael.
- Publisher: Page Two
- Pages: 244
- Publication Date: 2016-02-29
- Edition: 1
What undermines a CIO-CEO partnership
Short-term pressure that disrupts long-term IT work
A CIO feature from 2024 reports that two-thirds of CEOs admitted disturbing long-term IT projects to achieve short-term goals, citing the IBM Institute for Business Value. The feature does not give the survey year, and the original report was not reviewed for this article, so the figure should be treated as a secondhand attribution. It illustrates a recurring tension: pressure for quick results can cut into the sustained investment that technology programmes need. The statistic does not, by itself, show that such disruption causes weaker innovation.
Perceptual errors left unchecked
The 2016 study’s most important warning is that both executives can misread each other while believing they understand the other well. Unchecked assumptions distort priorities and erode trust, because each side acts on a picture of the other that is partly wrong.
Technology detached from business outcomes
A CIO who presents only technical features can leave the CEO without a reason to prioritise the work. A CEO who treats technology as a support function, to be requested and delivered rather than planned with, can miss strategic opportunities that technology creates. Both failures keep technology out of the business conversation.
Unrealistic speed expectations
The practitioners interviewed in the 2024 feature stressed balancing faster gains against patient long-term planning, particularly because technologies change quickly. Pressure for speed is not inherently wrong, but when every initiative is expected to pay back in a quarter, long-term capability work is the first to be cut.
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
One-way or episodic communication
Instructions without dialogue make expectations harder to align. A CEO who issues a directive and moves on, or a CIO who reports only at scheduled reviews, leaves changes in concern invisible until they become problems. Regular conversation is the mechanism that catches them early.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.How to compare partnership practices
When you are evaluating your own relationship or comparing approaches across organisations, these five axes give a usable frame. The evidence does not establish that a particular reporting line or organisation chart is universally best, so the questions matter more than the box on the chart.
| Axis | Question to ask each executive separately |
|---|---|
| Shared priorities | What are the three most important business and technology priorities for the next 12 months? |
| Mutual understanding | What do you think the other executive’s top priority is, and how confident are you in that answer? |
| Decision ownership | Who decides on technology investments, who is consulted, and how is a disagreement escalated? |
| Communication rhythm | How often do you discuss technology strategy outside formal budget or board cycles? |
| Time horizon | How much of the technology plan is expected to show results this year, and how much is multi-year capability building? |
Comparing the two executives’ answers is the useful step. Where they match, the relationship has a foundation. Where they differ, you have found the assumptions to test first.
What the evidence can and cannot support
The strongest direct evidence is the 2016 study of 102 matched CEO-CIO responses, which supports findings about that sample and design. The 2024 CIO feature adds current practitioner perspectives and reports figures from Gartner, IBM Institute for Business Value and State of the CIO 2024. Those figures are secondhand in this article. For example, the report that 79% of CIOs claimed a strong educational relationship with their CEOs comes from State of the CIO 2024 as relayed by CIO. The feature links that claim to a need to delve deeper into new technologies, but the original sample and wording should be checked before the percentage is used as a headline figure. Gartner’s 2025 material is an abstract of paid research, so only its framework is described here.
The available evidence supports a clear conclusion about direction: strategic alignment, accurate mutual understanding and sustained dialogue are associated with better CIO-CEO collaboration. It does not support a fixed formula, a single ideal reporting structure, or a claim that any one behaviour guarantees a good outcome.
Quick Recap
“
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
