Preparing for Turning Leadership into a True Profession

  • Anders Örtenblad


Since many skeptics argue that leadership cannot be turned into a true profession, there is reason to outline measures on how it would be possible to accomplish such a transformation. In this chapter a few preparatory measures are suggested, which could assist in creating better conditions for the actual professionalization process. These measures generally focus on updating the general understanding of “leadership” and giving leaders and leadership a better reputation. More specifically, the measures being suggested are: (1) a temporary status reduction of leaders and leadership; (2) a thorough exploration of alternative meanings of “leadership”; (3) that bachelor programs in leadership are given by higher education institutions around the world; and (4) the (re-) installment of dual career paths.


Profession Professionalization Leadership as profession Dual career paths Leadership education Bad leadership “Leadership idea” Leadership Leadership ethics 


  1. Allen, Thomas J., and Ralph Katz. 1986. “The Dual Ladder: Motivational Solution or Managerial Delusion?” R&D Management 16(2):185–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alvesson, Mats, Martin Blom, and Stefan Sveningsson. 2017. Reflexive Leadership: Organising in an Imperfect World. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  3. Barker, Richard. 2010a. “Management Can Never Be a Profession.” The Financial Times, September 6. Accessed on September 28, 2017.
  4. Barker, Richard. 2010b. “No, Management Is Not a Profession.” Harvard Business Review 88(7):52–60.Google Scholar
  5. Chen, Ling. 2008. “Leaders or Leadership: Alternative Approaches to Leadership Studies.” Management Communication Quarterly 21(4):547–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Donham, P. 1962. “Is Management a Profession?” Harvard Business Review 40(5):60–8.Google Scholar
  7. Goodall, Amanda H. 2010. “Why We Need Experts Not Managers as Leaders: The Case Against Professionalizing Management Education.” Accessed on 28 September 2017.
  8. Grey, Christopher. 1996. “Towards a Critique of Managerialism: The Contribution of Simone Weil.” Journal of Management Studies 33(5):591–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Grey, Christopher. 1997. “Management as a Technical Practice: Professionalization or Responsibilization?” Systems Practice 10(6):703–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hill, R. Bradley. 1992. “Dual Career Paths: Recognizing the Technical Contributor.” Journal of Compensation and Benefits July–August:10–16.Google Scholar
  11. Kellerman, Barbara. 2012. The End of Leadership. New York: Harper Business.Google Scholar
  12. Khurana, Rakesh, and Nitin Nohria. 2008. “It’s Time to Make Management a True Profession.” Harvard Business Review 86(10):70–7.Google Scholar
  13. Lund, Anne K. 2016. “Leader Legitimacy – A Matter of Education? Leading Highly Specialised People – A Legitimacy Challenge.” Development and Learning in Organizations 30(6):20–3.Google Scholar
  14. Paterson, T.T. 1956. “The New Profession of Management.” The Listener 6, December:921–2.Google Scholar
  15. Quay, J.G. 1966. “Is Management a Profession?” Advanced Management Journal 31:27–32.Google Scholar
  16. Russell, Robert F., and A. Gregory Stone. 2002. “A Review of Servant Leadership Attributes: Developing a Practical Model.” Leadership and Organization Development Journal 23(3):145–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Stone, Glenn, Cynthia Conley, and Yibing Luo. 2014. “Alternative Perspectives on Leadership: Integrating Transformational Leadership with Confucian Philosophy.” Open Journal of Leadership 3:30–8. doi: Accessed on September 28, 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Western, Simon. 2014. “Autonomist Leadership in Leaderless Movements: Anarchists Leading the Way.” Ephemera: Theory & Politics in Organization 14(4):673–98.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anders Örtenblad
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Social SciencesNord UniversityBodøNorway

Personalised recommendations