By Leslie Rohonczy, IMC™, PCC
Executive Coach | Leadership Development Expert | Author | Speaker | ©2026 | www.leslierohonczy.com
Imagine realizing that the management role you worked so hard to earn isn’t the work you want to keep doing. You miss being closer to operations, solving difficult problems, and applying the expertise that helped you get promoted. Another role could put those strengths to better use, but one question keeps getting in the way: “Will everyone think I couldn’t handle leadership?”
That's a vulnerable question, isn't it? When choosing work that suits you better feels like a reputational risk, I get curious about what career progression has come to mean. If people leadership and expert leadership are genuinely parallel paths, why would moving between them feel like going backward?
TWO PATHS WITH SOMEWHERE TO GO
People leadership offers the opportunity to build something beyond your individual contribution. You help others develop, create the conditions for a team to succeed, and take responsibility for decisions that affect people’s work. There can be enormous satisfaction in seeing a team accomplish something its members couldn’t have achieved individually.
Progression along this path involves changing responsibilities. Managing individual contributors differs from leading other managers, and leading a function requires a broader perspective again. Success depends increasingly on what you enable others to do.
The guru path develops a different form of leadership, rooted in deep expertise and judgment. Think of the person whose understanding helps others see what they’ve missed, who can untangle a difficult problem and ask the powerful question that changes the whole discussion. Think Yoda, with better sentence structure.
When I say “guru,” I mean an expert whose contribution grows beyond their own technical output. Their knowledge informs consequential decisions. They help others develop sound judgment and recognize when established approaches need to be challenged, including approaches they developed themselves.
A guru might progress from resolving complex operational problems to shaping standards across the organization. Later, their expertise might influence their profession or industry. Their scope expands through the significance of the problems they help solve and the capability they build in others.
Both paths involve leadership, and both require continued development. Neither is inherently superior, and choosing one shouldn’t be interpreted as evidence that someone couldn’t succeed at the other. People may also combine these responsibilities or move between paths as their career interests and capabilities evolve.
THREE PERSPECTIVES ON TWO PATHS
Career choices are shaped by the opportunities available and the contributions organizations reward. That makes this worth exploring from three perspectives: choosing your own direction, developing others, and shaping the career system. You may recognize yourself in more than one.
IF YOU'RE CONSIDERING YOUR NEXT CAREER MOVE: Start with the work you want more responsibility for. It’s possible to enjoy mentoring colleagues without wanting formal accountability for their performance. It’s also possible to love your specialty and discover that developing a team gives you greater satisfaction than doing the technical work yourself. The distinction becomes harder to see when one path comes with better pay, more influence, and a title everyone recognizes as advancement. Ask yourself: If both paths offered comparable compensation and standing, which work would I want to spend my week doing?
Give yourself an honest picture of both. People leadership includes the pleasure of helping someone flourish and the obligation to address problems you’d both rather avoid. Expert leadership includes the satisfaction of mastering difficult work and the responsibility to make that knowledge useful to people who may see things differently.
If you’re already managing people and questioning your fit, resist drawing a sweeping conclusion from one difficult role. Consider whether the problem is the work itself, the conditions surrounding it, or skills you haven’t yet had the opportunity to develop.
If you consistently prefer expert work, take that preference seriously. You don’t have to keep pursuing management just because you’ve demonstrated that you can do it. Examine the specific role you’re considering: would it give you the opportunity to apply your strengths to work you value, with responsibilities and rewards you’re willing to accept?
When discussing a possible transition, explain what you’re moving toward: the problems you want to take on and how your experience will help you contribute, rather than what you want to move away from. Your management experience may help you explain how your operational expertise can serve the wider organization. You can’t control everyone’s interpretation, but you can give them a clearer account of your intentions than “I’m going back.”
IF YOU'RE A LEADER DEVELOPING OTHERS: A strong performer’s next step can start to feel obvious, especially when they resemble an earlier version of you. Before recommending your own path, find out what attracts them to the work ahead. “What interests you about managing people?” will usually reveal more than “Would you like a promotion?”
Listen just as carefully when someone expresses a preference for expertise. What responsibilities are they ready to take on? Where else in the organization could their expertise make a meaningful difference?
Talent reviews offer another opportunity to examine these questions. In a nine-box talent review, HR and business leaders place employees on a grid using assessments of current performance and future potential to inform development and succession planning. Those conversations can shape the opportunities someone is offered, including how others see their future in management or expertise.
That makes “Potential for what?” an essential question. A person’s limited interest in managing people tells us something about their aspirations. It doesn’t establish the limit of their future contribution. Before deciding where someone could go, we need to understand both their capabilities and what they want to develop.
We also need to keep expert progression demanding and accountable. Being highly knowledgeable doesn’t excuse poor collaboration, and becoming everyone’s indispensable problem-solver can constrain a team’s capability. A credible guru path should help people extend their impact, including making others better equipped to do the work.
IF YOU'RE SHAPING THE CAREER PROGRESSION SYSTEM: The real test of parallel paths comes when someone chooses between them. Can an accomplished expert continue advancing without acquiring direct reports? Can a manager move into an expert role and retain standing appropriate to their contribution? Look at what your organization actually rewards.
Suppose a specialist advises on decisions carrying significant operational risk but is excluded from the discussions where the options take shape. Their expertise is valued, but their influence is restricted. If meaningful salary progression also depends on moving into the leadership stream, the message becomes clearer: expertise will only take you so far.
Under those conditions, choosing management may reflect the rewards available rather than a preference for people leadership.
Equal standing doesn’t require identical salaries for every expert and manager. It requires a defensible way to recognize the scope and value of different contributions, with meaningful opportunities to develop along both paths. It also requires visible examples. People need to see experts whose careers continue to grow and managers who have changed direction without becoming cautionary tales.
A strong career progression system needs language that reflects the opportunities it offers. Calling a move “back to operations” can suggest retreat, even when someone is taking on complex problems that affect the entire business. If we want people to move toward work where they can contribute most, we need to recognize that choice as a legitimate expression of ambition.
YOUR COACHING CHALLENGE
Choose the perspective most relevant to you and make space for a conversation you might otherwise postpone.
IF YOU’RE CONSIDERING YOUR NEXT CAREER MOVE: Reflect on this question: What do I hope a people leadership role will give me, and which of those things could I also pursue through the guru path? Consider what attracts you to the work itself and what depends on the opportunities and rewards attached to it.
IF YOU’RE A LEADER DEVELOPING OTHERS: At your upcoming 1:1s, move beyond asking about the next role. Ask each direct report: “As you look ahead, what would you like people to rely on you for, and how could we build your career around that?” Explore both paths before assuming which one would best support their aspirations.
IF YOU’RE SHAPING THE CAREER PROGRESSION SYSTEM: Share this article as a starting point for a discussion at the leadership table. Ask: “If one of our strongest people leaders chose to pursue the guru path, what would our response reveal about whether we genuinely value both?” Test your answer against actual career moves and the opportunities those people received afterward.
For more leadership articles, connect with Leslie Rohonczy on LinkedIn, or visit www.leslierohonczy.com