The Illusion of Thought Leadership

Nestled within the collective consciousness of LinkedIn is the concept of?thought leadership. This term once had a particular cachet in professional circles but has become tainted and diluted through overuse in a wickedly competitive creator economy. With more people referring to themselves as?thought leaders, the mental construct of thought leadership—becoming a trusted source, an innovator, and one who moves others through ideas, opinions, and expression—has become abstract and a cognitive illusion.

Many folks, present company included, believe that “thought leadership” and “thought leader” are annoying buzzwords and should be retired from the business lexicon.

Thought Leadership: A Personal-Historical Perspective

The term “thought leadership” was coined in 1994 by?Joel Kurtzman?(1947 – 2016), the former editor-in-chief of the?Harvard Business Review?and founding editor-in-chief of?strategy+business?magazine. He defined thought leaders as “those people who possess a distinctively original idea, a unique point of view, or an unprecedented insight into their industry.” With the advent of the Digital Age, thought leadership and its related principles seeped into serious business discourse, eventually gaining popularity in a burgeoning professional development industry.?

Fueled by the social media revolution, the Kurtzman philosophy found relevance as a marketing tactic to boost credibility and increase influence.?I first remember hearing “thought leader” and “thought leadership” in the early 2010s, as my LinkedIn consultancy and speaking business gained momentum.?In the following years, I noticed an exponential increase in thought leadership-driven content on LinkedIn and in the number of users who rewired their profiles to bolster themselves as thought leaders. The terms?acquired a vague connotation of self-aggrandizement that would strengthen with time.?

For the record, I never have self-declared as a thought leader.?As the term acquired more public attention, I liberally used “thought leadership branding” to broaden commerce with executives, business owners, advisors, conference organizers, and meeting professionals. These strategies aligned with my belief system and how my business was taking shape. I redesigned my media kit to make a strong thought leadership impression using an ego-suppressing?third-person narrative that softened the impact while highlighting my capabilities.

That was then.?

Since the onset of the pandemic, I have rethought thought leadership. The virtualization of business, coupled with the rise of the creator economy, upped the ante for spotlight-seeking professionals and culture-focused organizations. As marketing morphed into storytelling, LinkedIn swelled with content from self-styled “experts” who blurred the lines between “classic” thought leadership and trendy thought regurgitation. Thought leadership, like so many concepts in the business world, has become jargonized and commoditized, adding a touch of irony to a perception so intertwined with branding.?

Thought Leadership Narrative and Illusory Superiority

LinkedIn enables professionals to build their capacity to inspire, educate, and conjure new realities. In the surging content marketing revolution, creators curate, differentiate, and compete on the strength of their intellectual properties. However, the surplus of self-anointed thought leaders on this site calls into question the validity of the approach, creating what is known as a?positive illusion, a form of self-enhancement that manifests as an “inflated assessment of one’s abilities.” (Kruger, Chan, and Roese, 2009.)?

Taking liberties with one's narrative is a normative behavior on LinkedIn. By overestimating their qualities, knowledge, and talent compared to others, self-professed thought leaders generate an unconscious cognitive bias known as?illusory superiority,?also called the?above-average effect, the?primus inter pares?effect,?or the?Lake Wobegon effect. Studies in intelligence and self-esteem specific to illusory superiority, a term first used by Van Yperen and Buunk (1991), demonstrate ties to egocentrism, focalism, and narcissism.

When written in a?first-person narrative, a LinkedIn profile dense with mentions of “thought leader” and “thought leadership” smacks of a vainglorious boast. For example, touting myself as a thought leader in my profile headline might deter you from scrolling down the page. Loading up on phrases like “I am a thought leader” or “My thought leadership in the industry is indisputable” would cause you to question the validity of such claims, and rightly so.

How did I arrive at that conclusion?

What makes me a thought leader?

Who conferred the title upon me?

Now consider the?third-person narrative. An omniscient, “all-knowing” narrator becomes an impartial observer with access to the subject’s thoughts and feelings and tells the story without bias or preference. Consider reading or hearing, “Through his dedication and years of rigorous study, JD has gained widespread regard as an industry thought leader.” You would still question who is doing the regarding, but an air of neutrality makes the assertion more palatable.

Through numerous facilitations and conversations, I know there is growing disenchantment with the continuous use of the thought leader label and its associated behaviors. Whereas the allure of thought leadership is not as strong for me as it once was, the process remains eagerly coveted by many individuals and companies that invest in creating and distributing shareable content to build authority, nurture trust, and engage their communities.

Nowadays, I think of myself as?a learned person leading a conversation, a guy who has paid his school dues and earned an industry standing through hard work, transparency, accountability, and results. I have lofty goals and set the bar high. Still, some event organizers who bring me in to speak will include the term “thought leader” in their introductions.

I have to say, it makes me cringe.

A Parting Thought (or Two)

Thought leadership is a mental representation that some hold close and from which others detach. Its ubiquity and illusory quality are the byproducts of a hyper-competitive environment in which too many people give in to self-exaltation and overstate their value propositions. From a style standpoint, those who exaggerate their achievements, capabilities, and potential to gain the inside track give off an air of arrogance that can sabotage their branding efforts.

Unquestionably, as?generative AI?and?chat programs?escalate the content wars and further distort the perception of thought leadership, professionals and companies will find themselves in an even greater illusion—a marketplace awash with AI-generated books, white papers, articles, and LinkedIn posts.

Maybe the machines are the true thought leaders.

Why SUBSCRIBE to The LinkedIn Style Guide?

Through this newsletter, I aspire to create a forum for a diversity of engagement on LinkedIn culture and a vehicle for meaningful connection. I welcome your participation. If you have not subscribed yet, don’t worry. There is still time. Scroll back to the top of the page and?smack that blue?SUBSCRIBE?badge.?You will receive a notification when each new edition drops. How easy is that?

A Note from our Sponsor

Since 2006, OWLISH COMMUNICATIONS has served professionals in all walks of business seeking a greater understanding of LinkedIn. Services include LinkedIn profile redesigns, personalized LinkedIn consultation, and LinkedIn educational programs for companies. To request a complimentary LinkedIn profile assessment, please contact JD GERSHBEIN via LinkedIn DM.