How to develop leadership skills as a doctor

• Leadership is relevant to doctors at every stage of their careers, not only those with formal management responsibilities.
• Strong medical leadership depends on self-awareness, emotional intelligence, communication, influence and the ability to develop others.
• Doctors frequently need to lead people over whom they have little or no formal authority.
• Leadership experience can be developed through everyday clinical work, teaching, quality improvement, supervision and service development.
• Effective leaders adapt their approach to the situation rather than relying on a single fixed leadership style.
• Leadership development should involve practice, feedback and reflection rather than simply learning theories and management terminology.

Leadership in medicine is sometimes associated primarily with formal roles such as clinical director, medical director, educational supervisor or service lead. Those positions certainly require leadership, but they represent only one part of what medical leadership involves. In everyday clinical practice, doctors exercise leadership whenever they influence how a team works, coordinate the care of patients, resolve uncertainty or help colleagues achieve a shared objective.

A registrar coordinating the response to a deteriorating patient is exercising leadership. A consultant helping an MDT reach a difficult decision is exercising leadership. A junior doctor who identifies a patient-safety problem and persuades the team to address it is also demonstrating leadership. The same applies to a doctor who redesigns an inefficient process, mentors a colleague, introduces a new guideline or helps resolve conflict within a team.

Medical leadership can therefore be understood as the ability to influence people and situations in order to achieve an appropriate clinical or organisational outcome. Formal authority may sometimes make this easier, but leadership does not depend upon hierarchy alone. In many healthcare environments, the most effective leader may not be the most senior person in the room.

---

Leadership is different from seniority

Seniority provides authority, experience and often greater responsibility, but it does not automatically create effective leadership. A doctor may hold a senior position while struggling to engage colleagues, manage disagreement or communicate a clear direction. Conversely, a relatively junior doctor may have considerable influence because colleagues trust their judgement, value their communication and know that they will behave fairly and reliably.

This distinction is important because doctors sometimes postpone thinking seriously about leadership until they are preparing for a consultant role. By that stage, however, many of the habits that shape someone's leadership style are already well established. Leadership develops gradually through repeated exposure to situations involving uncertainty, responsibility, competing priorities and other people.

A trainee who learns how to chair a meeting effectively, give constructive feedback, coordinate a team during a busy shift or gain support for a quality-improvement project is already developing leadership skills. These experiences may appear relatively small at the time, but they form the foundation for handling more complex responsibilities later.

---

Leadership and management overlap, but they are not identical

Leadership and management are sometimes presented as completely separate disciplines. Leadership is generally associated with direction, influence, motivation, relationships and change, while management tends to focus more on organisation, resources, processes, performance and delivery. In clinical practice, however, doctors usually need both.

Consider a consultant introducing a new outpatient pathway. They may need to explain why change is necessary, build support among colleagues, respond to resistance and create a shared sense of purpose. These are leadership activities. At the same time, they may need to agree staffing arrangements, clarify responsibilities, monitor activity, evaluate outcomes and ensure that the new system remains financially and operationally viable. These are management activities.

Effective medical leadership therefore involves understanding both people and systems. Inspiring a team without ensuring that processes work is unlikely to produce sustainable results. Equally, designing an efficient process without engaging the people expected to deliver it is unlikely to succeed.

One of the foundations of good leadership is understanding how your own behaviour affects other people. Leaders shape the emotional climate of a team through the way they communicate, respond to pressure, handle uncertainty and react when things go wrong. Much of this influence happens unconsciously.

Doctors work in demanding environments where decisions may need to be made rapidly and where mistakes can have serious consequences. Under pressure, people naturally revert to familiar behaviours. A doctor who is normally collaborative may become highly directive. Someone who dislikes conflict may avoid challenging poor behaviour. A highly analytical colleague may delay decisions while waiting for more information. Another person may become impatient or communicate more abruptly than they realise.

Self-awareness allows you to recognise these patterns before they become fixed leadership habits. It also makes it easier to understand why a particular approach works well in one situation but badly in another.

---

Understand your natural leadership style

Most people have a preferred way of leading. Some naturally seek consensus, while others are comfortable making decisions quickly. Some enjoy coaching and developing others, while some focus strongly on tasks and outcomes. None of these approaches is inherently right or wrong. The problem arises when someone relies on the same style regardless of the situation.

An emergency may require rapid decisions, explicit instructions and clear allocation of responsibility. A service redesign project may require extensive consultation and stakeholder involvement. Supporting a junior doctor after a difficult clinical event may require empathy and coaching rather than direction. Addressing persistent unacceptable behaviour may require a much firmer approach than would be appropriate in a developmental conversation.

The goal is therefore not to identify your leadership style and then apply it everywhere. The more useful question is: what does this situation require from me? Leadership maturity involves expanding your range of responses. The wider your repertoire, the easier it becomes to adapt your behaviour to the needs of the team, the individual and the circumstances.

---

Seek feedback on how other people experience you

Self-perception is not always reliable. Someone who believes they are decisive may be experienced by colleagues as dismissive. A leader who considers themselves supportive may actually be avoiding accountability. A doctor who sees themselves as meticulous may overwhelm colleagues with unnecessary detail. Someone who thinks they are relaxed and approachable may leave the team uncertain about expectations.

For this reason, feedback is an essential part of leadership development. Useful feedback can come from supervisors, peers, trainees and members of the wider multidisciplinary team. Rather than asking only whether you are doing a good job, it is often more helpful to ask focused questions about your behaviour.

You might ask whether you communicate expectations clearly, whether you genuinely listen before reaching conclusions, whether people feel comfortable disagreeing with you or whether you give colleagues sufficient autonomy. You can also ask what you could do differently that would make it easier for others to work effectively with you. The purpose is not to change your personality, but to understand the impact your behaviour has on others and become more deliberate about the choices you make.

Leadership is fundamentally relational. However clinically knowledgeable or technically capable a doctor may be, leadership requires working with people who have different experiences, personalities, priorities and emotional responses. Emotional intelligence therefore plays an important role in effective medical leadership.

Emotional intelligence involves recognising your own emotional reactions, understanding those of other people and regulating your behaviour sufficiently to respond constructively. It is sometimes misunderstood as simply being sympathetic or avoiding confrontation. In reality, emotionally intelligent leadership may involve saying difficult things, setting boundaries and challenging behaviour. The difference lies in how this is done.

A leader who understands their own emotional responses is less likely to become defensive when challenged, react impulsively when frustrated or allow irritation to dominate an important conversation. Similarly, a leader who can recognise what may be driving someone else's behaviour is more likely to respond appropriately.

---

Recognise what happens to you under pressure

One of the most useful forms of self-development is to observe how you behave when things are difficult rather than when everything is going well. Consider how you respond when a colleague challenges your clinical judgement, when a meeting becomes confrontational, when someone repeatedly fails to complete agreed actions or when a proposal you strongly support is rejected.

Some people become more controlling under pressure. Others withdraw or avoid difficult conversations. Some become argumentative, while others try to maintain harmony at almost any cost. None of these reactions is unusual, but they can all become problematic if they happen automatically.

Developing emotional intelligence involves creating a short gap between reaction and response. That pause may be only a few seconds, but it allows you to consider what outcome you are trying to achieve and whether your instinctive response is likely to help.

---

Understand what may be driving other people's behaviour

Leadership also requires curiosity about the behaviour of others. Resistance, defensiveness or frustration often has an underlying cause. A colleague opposing a change may not simply be difficult. They may be worried about workload, patient safety, loss of autonomy, professional identity or the consequences of a previous poorly implemented change.

Understanding these concerns does not mean agreeing with them, nor does it mean that every objection should prevent a decision from being made. It simply means that you are responding to the real issue rather than to the surface behaviour alone. This becomes particularly important when leading change, addressing conflict or managing underperformance.

One of the distinctive challenges of medical leadership is that doctors frequently need to influence people whom they do not directly manage. A consultant may depend on the cooperation of nurses, administrators, pharmacists, therapists, managers and colleagues from other specialties. A registrar may be coordinating professionals who are considerably more senior within their own disciplines. A doctor leading a quality-improvement project may have no formal authority over anyone involved.

This makes leadership based purely on hierarchy relatively ineffective. Saying that something should happen because you are the doctor, consultant or project lead may occasionally produce compliance, but it rarely produces genuine engagement. The ability to influence without relying on authority is therefore one of the most valuable skills a doctor can develop.

---

Build credibility before asking people to follow you

Influence is easier when people consider you credible. In healthcare, credibility usually comes from a combination of clinical competence, reliability, integrity, fairness and understanding of the pressures facing the team.

Colleagues are more likely to support someone who listens to them, follows through on commitments and understands the practical implications of what they are proposing. Conversely, it is difficult to influence people if they believe you have failed to appreciate their workload or designed a solution that works only from your own perspective. This is why relationship-building matters. The time spent understanding how another team works may make a later change far easier to implement.

---

Make the case rather than simply issuing instructions

Effective influence involves helping people understand why something matters. If you are proposing a change, explain the problem you are trying to solve, the evidence supporting the change and the likely consequences of doing nothing. Be equally willing to discuss the disadvantages, practical difficulties and additional workload that the proposal might create.

People are more likely to engage when they feel the case has been made honestly rather than presented as a predetermined decision disguised as consultation. Good leadership involves being able to explain not only what needs to happen, but why it matters and how the change will affect the people involved.

Leadership and communication are inseparable. Many problems that appear to be failures of leadership are, at least partly, failures of communication. Teams struggle when priorities are unclear, responsibilities are assumed rather than agreed, difficult issues are left unspoken or people receive different messages from different leaders.

Good leadership communication does not mean sending more emails or arranging more meetings. It means making communication purposeful, clear and appropriate to the situation.

---

Make expectations explicit

One of the simplest ways to improve team performance is to reduce ambiguity. Do not assume that everyone has interpreted a conversation in the same way. At the end of an important discussion, clarify what has been agreed, who is responsible for each action, when it needs to happen and how progress will be reviewed.

This may sound basic, but unclear expectations are responsible for a large amount of frustration within teams. People are often criticised for failing to do something they did not realise they had agreed to do, or two colleagues independently complete the same task because responsibility was never properly allocated.

---

Adapt your communication to the audience

Different audiences require different forms of communication. A clinical colleague may be persuaded by evidence and patient outcomes. A service manager may need to understand resources, capacity and operational impact. A finance team may require clear information about costs and savings. Patients and service users may focus on accessibility, experience and continuity of care.

The underlying message may be the same, but the way you present it should reflect what matters to the audience. This is not manipulation; it is effective communication. A leader who communicates only in the language that makes sense to them will struggle to influence people with different priorities.

---

Become comfortable with difficult conversations

Leadership inevitably involves conversations that would sometimes be easier to avoid. These may concern repeated lateness, poor communication, missed responsibilities, declining performance, inappropriate behaviour or conflict between colleagues.

Avoiding these conversations rarely solves the underlying problem. More often, it allows resentment to accumulate and may make eventual intervention considerably harder. Effective leaders learn to address concerns early, calmly and specifically. They focus on observable behaviour and its impact rather than making assumptions about personality or motivation.

Being kind and being clear are not opposites. Some of the most respectful leadership conversations involve being explicit about something that needs to change.

Healthcare is delivered by teams, not by professions working in isolation. Effective medical leadership therefore requires respect for the expertise, perspective and contribution of the wider multidisciplinary team.

Doctors who assume that leadership means making the decision and instructing everyone else will struggle in complex healthcare environments. The most effective clinical decisions often depend on information held by several different people.

---

Create space for different perspectives

A nurse, physiotherapist, pharmacist, administrator or service manager may recognise a problem that you have missed because they interact with the patient or system differently. Good leaders deliberately create opportunities for those perspectives to be heard.

This does not mean that every decision must be reached through consensus. Clinical responsibility and time pressures may sometimes require one person to make a clear decision. However, listening to relevant views generally improves the quality of the decision and the likelihood that people will support it.

The key skill is to distinguish between consultation and abdication. Listening widely does not mean avoiding responsibility for the final decision.

---

Build psychological safety

Effective teams need an environment in which people can raise concerns, admit uncertainty and challenge decisions without fear of humiliation or retaliation. In healthcare, this has obvious implications for patient safety.

Leaders contribute to psychological safety through everyday behaviour. If you react defensively whenever someone questions you, colleagues may eventually stop questioning you. If people are criticised publicly for admitting mistakes, they may become less willing to disclose them. Conversely, if concerns are acknowledged and explored respectfully, people are more likely to speak up again.

Psychological safety does not mean an absence of accountability. Teams still need standards and clear expectations. It means creating an environment where people can raise genuine concerns and learn from problems without unnecessary fear.

Doctors can struggle with delegation because medical training places a strong emphasis on personal responsibility and attention to detail. As responsibilities increase, however, trying to do everything yourself becomes inefficient and eventually impossible.

Delegation is not simply the process of transferring unwanted work to someone else. It involves deciding what can safely and appropriately be delegated, choosing the right person, providing clear expectations and ensuring that the individual has the resources and authority needed to succeed.

---

Avoid micromanagement and abandonment

Poor delegation often falls into one of two extremes. The first is micromanagement. The leader delegates a task but continues to control every detail, repeatedly intervening and preventing the other person from developing genuine ownership.

The second is abandonment. Responsibility is allocated without sufficient explanation, support or follow-up. The leader then becomes frustrated when the outcome is not what they expected.

Effective delegation sits between these extremes. Clarify the outcome, explain important boundaries and agree how progress will be reviewed. Once those parameters are established, give the person sufficient autonomy to take genuine responsibility. Delegation should help other people develop while also allowing the leader to focus attention where it is most needed.

As doctors become more senior, part of their responsibility is to help other people grow in confidence, judgement and independence. This requires a shift away from always providing the answer personally.

The quickest way to deal with a problem may be to tell someone what to do. The better leadership response may sometimes be to help that person think through the problem themselves.

---

Use coaching rather than instruction when appropriate

Coaching involves asking questions that help someone develop their own thinking. Instead of immediately explaining what should happen, a leader might ask what the individual thinks is happening, what options they have considered, what they are most concerned about or what they would do if the senior colleague were not available.

There are circumstances where direct instruction is essential, particularly where safety is at risk or immediate action is required. However, when there is time for development, coaching can strengthen confidence and decision-making. If senior doctors always provide the answer, junior colleagues may become dependent upon them. If they are supported to develop their own reasoning, they gradually become more autonomous.

---

Give feedback that people can actually use

Vague feedback rarely changes behaviour. Telling someone that they need to communicate better or demonstrate more leadership gives them very little guidance about what to do differently.

Useful feedback is specific. For example: “During that meeting, you moved on before the nursing team had explained their concern. Next time, pause and explicitly ask for their view before reaching the decision.”

This identifies the behaviour, explains its impact and gives the person something concrete to practise. Effective leaders become skilled at giving feedback in a way that is honest without being unnecessarily personal or demoralising.

Supportive leadership and accountability are sometimes treated as opposites. In reality, effective teams need both. A leader who is supportive but never addresses persistent poor performance can create significant frustration among colleagues who are meeting expectations.

Managing performance begins with understanding why expectations are not being met. The underlying problem may be unclear expectations, inadequate training, lack of confidence, excessive workload, poor systems, personal difficulties, lack of motivation or unacceptable behaviour. Those causes require very different responses.

---

Diagnose the problem before deciding what to do

A capable colleague who has lost confidence may benefit from coaching and support. Someone who has never been trained properly may require education. A process problem may need redesign rather than criticism of individuals. Persistent behavioural issues may require clear boundaries and escalation.

Leaders who jump immediately to judgement risk treating the wrong problem. Good performance management therefore begins with evidence, curiosity and clarity. Once the issue is understood, expectations should be explicit. Agree what needs to improve, what support will be provided and when progress will be reviewed. If the problem persists despite appropriate support, accountability may need to become more formal.

Healthcare is continually changing. Services are redesigned, technology develops, workforce models evolve, patient expectations change and new evidence influences clinical practice. Doctors are therefore frequently expected to lead or support change, even if they do not hold formal management positions.

Technically sensible changes often fail because insufficient attention has been paid to the people affected by them. A good idea is not enough. Leaders need to understand how change will be perceived, what resistance may arise and how colleagues can be involved meaningfully.

---

Understand why people resist change

Resistance is not necessarily irrational or obstructive. Staff may worry about increased workload, patient safety, loss of expertise, reduced autonomy or inadequate resources. They may also have experienced previous changes that were badly implemented and are therefore understandably sceptical.

Simply telling people that change is necessary rarely addresses those concerns. Effective leaders acknowledge legitimate difficulties, involve relevant stakeholders early and explain clearly what problem the change is intended to solve.

This does not mean that every objection should prevent progress. Leadership sometimes requires making a decision despite disagreement. However, people are more likely to support change when they feel their concerns have been understood and considered.

---

Start with the problem rather than your preferred solution

A common mistake in improvement work is becoming attached to a solution before the team has properly defined the problem. A better starting point is to establish what is happening now, why it matters, who is affected, what evidence is available and what outcome you are trying to achieve. Only then should you consider potential solutions.

This prevents teams from investing significant effort in solving the wrong problem and also makes it easier to explain the rationale for change to stakeholders.

Quality improvement provides doctors with one of the best environments in which to develop leadership skills. A meaningful improvement project requires far more than collecting data and completing another audit cycle.

You may need to identify a problem, understand its causes, engage stakeholders, gather evidence, persuade colleagues, manage disagreement, test new approaches and evaluate whether the change has worked. You may also discover that your first solution does not work as expected and need to adapt it. These are all leadership activities.

A strong quality-improvement project therefore has value beyond the final outcome. It gives you an opportunity to understand how people respond to change, how influence works in practice and how difficult it can be to move from a good idea to sustained implementation.

When reflecting on a project, do not focus only on what changed. Consider what you learned about leadership. Which stakeholders were easy to engage? Who resisted and why? What would you do differently if you were starting again? How did your own behaviour influence the outcome?

Doctors sometimes assume that meaningful leadership experience requires a title such as clinical lead or committee chair. Formal positions certainly provide valuable opportunities, but leadership can be developed in many other ways.

Everyday clinical work contains numerous opportunities to practise leadership. You might lead a quality-improvement project, organise teaching, introduce a departmental process, chair a meeting, coordinate a rota improvement or supervise a junior colleague. You could contribute to governance work, develop a guideline, represent colleagues on a committee or organise a service evaluation.

The important issue is not simply whether you were “the leader”. What matters is what you actually did. When reviewing your experience, ask yourself what outcome you were trying to achieve, who you needed to involve, what difficulties arose, how you influenced others and what you learned. These questions help transform routine work into deliberate leadership development.

Experience alone does not guarantee improvement. Doctors can repeatedly encounter the same leadership problem without changing the way they respond to it. Reflection is what converts experience into development.

After an important leadership situation, consider what you were trying to achieve and how effectively your behaviour supported that goal. Think about how other people responded, what assumptions you made and whether your communication was sufficiently clear. Ask yourself whether your leadership style suited the situation and what you might do differently next time.

This is particularly useful after difficult meetings, conflicts, unsuccessful projects or situations where your initial approach did not work. These uncomfortable experiences often provide more useful leadership learning than situations that went smoothly. The aim is not to criticise yourself retrospectively, but to recognise patterns and improve your range of responses.

Doctors cannot lead effectively if they understand only their immediate clinical environment. As responsibilities increase, decisions increasingly involve competing priorities across teams, departments and organisations.

A proposed improvement may have implications for workforce, finance, patient flow, governance, safety, estates or digital systems. A clinically attractive solution may prove impractical if it creates unsustainable demand elsewhere. Understanding the wider healthcare system therefore strengthens leadership decision-making.

---

Think beyond your own department

A change that improves efficiency in one service may transfer work elsewhere. Moving activity from secondary care into the community may appear beneficial from a hospital perspective, but its success depends on whether community services have sufficient capacity and expertise.

Similarly, extending clinic hours may improve access but create problems for staffing, diagnostics, pharmacy or administrative support. Strong leaders learn to think across systems rather than optimising only their own part of the organisation. They ask not only, “Would this improve our service?” but also, “What impact would this have on everybody else involved?”

As doctors become more senior, they may feel increasing pressure to appear confident and knowledgeable. That can create the mistaken belief that a leader should always know the answer.

In reality, strong leaders are often comfortable acknowledging uncertainty. They know when to ask for expertise, when to involve others and when to say that more information is required before a decision can be made. Pretending to know something you do not understand is rarely a sign of strong leadership. It can reduce trust and encourage poor decisions.

Good leaders are able to say, “I don't know yet, but this is how we are going to work it out.” They also recognise that the best solution may come from someone else in the team. Leadership is not about proving that you are the cleverest person in the room. It is about helping the group reach the best possible outcome.

Doctors make decisions constantly, but leadership decisions differ from purely clinical decisions because they often involve uncertainty, competing interests and incomplete information.

A decision about redesigning a service, changing a rota or allocating resources may not have one objectively correct answer. Different stakeholders may value different outcomes. Effective leaders therefore develop a structured approach to decision-making. They clarify the problem, gather proportionate information, consider relevant perspectives and assess the consequences of different options.

The word proportionate is important. One leadership failure is making important decisions too quickly. Another is delaying action indefinitely while searching for perfect information that will never exist. Strong leaders recognise when enough information is available to make a reasonable decision and move forward.

Disagreement is unavoidable in healthcare. Different professions, specialties and individuals may legitimately have different priorities, experiences and interpretations of the same problem. Conflict is therefore not necessarily evidence that a team is dysfunctional. In some circumstances, constructive disagreement can improve decision-making by exposing assumptions and encouraging alternative perspectives.

The leadership challenge is to prevent disagreement from becoming personal, entrenched or destructive. When conflict arises, focus first on the underlying issue rather than on personalities. Clarify where the disagreement actually lies, because people who appear to be arguing about a solution may in fact be trying to solve different problems.

Listen to the concerns on both sides, identify areas of agreement and separate facts from assumptions. Consider whether there is an underlying issue involving communication, roles, resources or expectations. If a decision ultimately needs to be made, explain clearly how it has been reached and what will happen next.

Avoiding disagreement entirely is not a realistic leadership goal. The aim is to create an environment in which disagreement can be expressed, explored and resolved without damaging the team's ability to work together.

Medical leaders frequently need to present proposals to colleagues, committees or senior management. The quality of an idea does not guarantee that it will be understood or supported. If the rationale is unclear or the concerns of key stakeholders have not been anticipated, even a sensible proposal may fail to gain traction.

When presenting a proposal, begin with the problem rather than immediately describing your preferred solution. Explain why the issue matters, provide relevant evidence and describe the impact on patients, staff or the organisation. Then set out the proposed solution and explain why it is preferable to realistic alternatives.

Anticipate objections rather than hoping nobody raises them. If your proposal has disadvantages, acknowledge them and explain how you would mitigate them. This creates credibility because people are generally more persuaded by a balanced case than by an argument that presents every proposal as having only benefits.

Leadership is not always about taking control. Sometimes the most effective leadership behaviour is to create space for somebody else. If a colleague has greater expertise in a particular area, let them lead that part of the work. If a junior member of the team is capable of taking responsibility for a project, give them the opportunity. If someone else has built stronger relationships with key stakeholders, involve them.

The leader's role is to help the team succeed, not to be central to every success. This becomes increasingly important as doctors move into senior positions. A leader who remains involved in every detail can become a bottleneck, prevent colleagues from developing and inadvertently create a team that cannot function without them.

Developing others and sharing responsibility therefore strengthens both the team and the service. Good leaders know when their direct involvement is necessary and when the better decision is to allow someone else to take the lead.

Leadership development is more effective when it is deliberate. Rather than trying vaguely to “become a better leader”, identify specific areas you want to improve.

For example, you might decide that over the next six months you want to become better at handling difficult conversations, delegating work, influencing senior stakeholders or chairing meetings. You can then look deliberately for situations in which to practise that skill, ask someone you trust to observe or provide feedback and reflect afterwards on what worked.

A simple leadership development plan might include one or two specific skills to improve, practical opportunities to practise them, someone who can provide feedback, relevant reading or formal training and regular reflection on progress.

This turns leadership development from an abstract ambition into something practical and measurable.

Many leadership skills can be developed through experience, but experience alone has limitations. Doctors can become very experienced at repeating the same habits without ever examining whether there might be a better approach.

Structured leadership and management training creates an opportunity to step away from day-to-day clinical pressures and examine how you lead. It can help you make sense of situations you have already experienced, understand why certain approaches worked or failed and expand the range of strategies available to you.

A useful medical leadership course should not simply provide a list of models and theories. It should help you understand when different approaches are useful, explore how leadership applies specifically within healthcare and give you opportunities to practise difficult situations.

Doctors often benefit particularly from exploring leadership styles, emotional intelligence, influencing, team dynamics, delegation, performance management, coaching and leading change. These are areas where theoretical understanding is useful, but practical application matters far more.

There is no point at which a doctor becomes a finished leader. Different stages of a career create different challenges.

A junior doctor may initially focus on speaking up, organising tasks and contributing effectively to teams. A registrar may need to develop supervision, delegation and decision-making. A new consultant may suddenly need to influence services, manage colleagues, supervise trainees and contribute to organisational decisions. More senior doctors may find themselves leading departments, negotiating across organisational boundaries or managing complex change.

The specific responsibilities change, but the underlying process of development remains similar: gain experience, seek feedback, reflect honestly and deliberately practise the skills that need strengthening.

Medical leadership is ultimately less about titles than behaviour. The strongest leaders are not necessarily those who dominate a room or have the highest position in the hierarchy. They are the people who can create clarity when situations are uncertain, help colleagues work effectively together, make difficult decisions when necessary and maintain trust while doing so.