“Professionalism” encompasses the broad set of shared beliefs and expectations about how people within an industry or workplace should interact with one another: Think communication style, punctuality, or meeting etiquette. But opinions differ: Cameras on? Cameras off? Do meetings start precisely on the hour? Is arriving a few minutes late acceptable or offensive?

Our conversations about professionalism tend to proceed like a garden that has been allowed to grow without controlling for weeds or pests and is then subject to endless debate over whether the result is “good” or “bad.” But that has never been the right conversation, because context matters: Are your organization’s professional norms good or bad for your particular workplace?

While some norms are common to many workplaces — such as following through on commitments, treating colleagues with respect, and communicating appropriately — professionalism has no single definition. It varies across regions, cultures, sectors, and industries. But as a set of norms for differentiating wanted (“professional”) from unwanted (“unprofessional”) behaviors, professionalism is inherently about excluding some for the benefit of the whole. When defined well and fairly, professional standards can effectively guard against harmful behavior while creating a shared sense of identity among people from a range of backgrounds, compounding their individual efforts into collective impact. But, defined poorly, professionalism can divide and distract teams, systematize active discrimination, and discount — or even incentivize — detrimental behavior.

As an organizational consultant, a leadership adviser, and an analyst of workplace systems, I’ve learned that the key to establishing a professionalism that works is to actively define norms and standards for your particular organization. Far too many leaders ignore their own agency to shape what professionalism means, defaulting to “how we’ve always done it” rather than questioning which norms would, in fact, serve their people best. As a result, workplace professionalism is often a mixed bag: norms that signal competence and skills alongside outdated norms that can unintentionally disadvantage some team members. For example, norms that discourage discussion of caretaking at work can exclude caretakers and parents; expectations of “normal” appearance and body language can hinder neurodivergent or LGBTQ+ people’s self-expression; and dress codes defining “acceptable” hairstyles can stigmatize people with natural, Afro-textured hair.

Contextually Defined Norms

Every leader has the responsibility to create a version of professionalism designed for their unique workplace context.

* * *