Leadership Is Not a Title. It Is a practice.
I want to start with an honest admission.
For a significant part of my career, I confused having a leadership title with actually leading. I had the position. I had the authority. I had the meetings in the calendar and the team reporting to me. And for a while, that felt like enough.
It was not enough.
There is a version of leadership that is almost entirely performative. It is the kind that concerns itself with visibility, with being the most senior person in the room, with protecting its own position in the hierarchy. It manages rather than develops. It directs rather than listens. It mistakes activity for impact. I have met that version of leadership in others. And if I am honest, I have met it in myself. That recognition is what shaped the work I now do as an inclusive leadership coach, helping leaders close the gap between their title and their actual influence.
What is the difference between managing and leading?
The Edelman Trust Barometer 2025 found that only 49% of employees globally trust their employer, down from 61% in 2020. That is a precipitous drop. And the CIPD's Health and Wellbeing at Work report 2024 consistently identifies line manager behaviour as one of the top causes of workplace stress in the UK. Not strategy. Not restructuring. Not the macroeconomic environment. The quality of the manager. The person showing up daily in the ordinary moments.
That data sits differently depending on which side of it you are on. If you manage people, it is a significant responsibility. It means that the quality of someone else's working life, their sense of purpose, their confidence, their willingness to bring their best, is substantially shaped by how you show up.
Most leaders, in my experience, do not fully reckon with that. They are too busy managing upwards to manage meaningfully downwards.
A title gives you authority. Only your character gives you influence. And influence is the only currency that actually moves people.
What do the leaders who create real impact actually do differently?
Over years of working with executives and senior leaders, I have noticed that the ones who create genuine impact share something that has nothing to do with their job grade or their years of experience.
They are radically self-aware. They know their blind spots not because they are perfect, but because they have done the uncomfortable work of asking for honest feedback and sitting with what they heard. They do not perform confidence. They have built it through repeated acts of courage. For a deeper look at what self-awareness in leadership actually requires, see our piece on developing self-awareness as a leader.
They communicate with intent. Not just clearly, but with the understanding that every interaction either builds or erodes trust. They adapt. They listen in a way that is genuinely interested rather than strategically patient. They invest in the people around them as though their own success depends on it. Because it does.
The leader whose team is not growing is a leader whose influence is quietly shrinking, whether they can see it or not. And they never stop learning. Not as a performance of humility, but because they are genuinely curious about the world and about themselves. This is the kind of psychological safety that drives the highest-performing teams, one that starts with the leader's own willingness to be seen as a work in progress.
Why does leadership still look different for women?
I cannot write about leadership without naming the specific terrain that women, particularly women of colour, continue to navigate. McKinsey and LeanIn.Org's 2024 Women in the Workplace report found that for every 100 men promoted to manager, only 81 women are promoted. That gap compounds at every subsequent level.
Women are not lacking in leadership capability. The research consistently shows the opposite. What they are often lacking is access to the sponsorship, the visibility, and the psychological safety that allows leadership potential to translate into leadership opportunity.
This is one of the reasons reverse mentoring programmes are so powerful in this context. When junior women mentors share their experience directly with senior leaders, including the invisible barriers, the code-switching, the energy cost of navigating cultures not designed for them, something shifts. Leaders who genuinely listen in that context make different decisions. They advocate differently. They sponsor rather than simply mentor.
That is a systemic failure that every leader, regardless of gender, has a responsibility to address.
How do you know if you are leading with impact or just with authority?
The leaders I most respect are not defined by their titles. They are defined by what happens in the rooms they walk out of. Whether people feel seen. Whether ideas have been genuinely considered. Whether someone left the conversation feeling more capable than when they walked in.
In executive coaching, one of the most clarifying questions I ask is this: when someone leaves a meeting you led, what do they carry with them? The honest answer to that question is usually more revealing than any 360-degree feedback process.
For you to sit with: When someone leaves a meeting you led, what do they carry with them? What would they say if you asked them directly? Is your current leadership being driven by purpose or by the need to protect your position?
-
A manager operates through authority — the power conferred by a title, a hierarchy, and formal accountability structures. A leader operates through influence — the capacity to shape how people think, feel, and act, regardless of formal position. The two can coexist, but they are not the same thing and one does not automatically produce the other. The CIPD’s 2024 research identifies line manager behaviour as a top cause of workplace stress in the UK — which tells us that having a management title is not sufficient. What matters is the quality of how that authority is exercised daily, in ordinary moments.
-
Inclusive leadership in practice means creating the conditions where everyone in a team can contribute fully — not just those whose communication style, background, or identity aligns with the dominant culture. It looks like a leader who actively seeks out perspectives that challenge their own, who redistributes airtime in meetings rather than defaulting to the loudest voices, who uses tools like reverse mentoring to access unfiltered ground-level insight, and who has done the self-awareness work to understand how their own behaviour shapes the psychological safety of the room. Inclusive leadership is not a personality type. It is a set of practised behaviours, developed deliberately over time.
-
Executive coaching develops leadership impact by creating the structured space for a leader to examine the patterns shaping how they show up — often for the first time without the filter of organisational hierarchy. It surfaces blind spots that feedback rarely reaches, challenges the assumptions driving habitual behaviour, and builds the self-awareness and emotional intelligence that genuine influence requires. The Edelman Trust Barometer 2025 found that only 49% of employees trust their employer. Rebuilding that trust happens at the level of individual leadership behaviour — which is precisely what executive coaching is designed to develop.
-
McKinsey’s 2024 Women in the Workplace report found that for every 100 men promoted to manager, only 81 women are — and this gap widens at each subsequent level. The barriers are structural rather than personal: women are more likely to lack access to sponsorship (senior advocates who actively open doors, not just mentors who give advice), to have their authority questioned in mixed environments, and to bear a disproportionate share of the cultural and emotional labour that sustains teams. Addressing these barriers requires both organisational structural change and individual strategies for navigating them — which is where leadership coaching for women and well-designed reverse mentoring programmes are most effective.