The authority problem associations can’t ignore

What is a professional association for exactly?

The most glib answer is keeping its members out of jail (or at least trouble), but good associations do a lot more than that. They lead their profession, both for the benefit of members and for society more broadly. Of course, that leadership is impossible without trust and authority. The rub is that trust in institutions is plummeting just as the rate of technological, geo-political, social and economic change is soaring.

For many years, the leadership of professional associations was naturally buoyed by their position as central providers of training, networking and support resources. But these services are becoming increasingly commoditised. Suppliers offer free CPD, online communities offer networking opportunities without needing a conference lanyard and digital resources abound. Association voices are also far from the only ones in the room now too, with content creators of all stripes building and reaching audiences.

So how can professional associations continue to earn the right to set standards and shape behaviour?

Authority gets tested when the room heats up

As member benefits become commoditised, it is a risk for professional associations to stake their value proposition on tangible member benefits. Members are simply asking “What do I get?”. They also want to know “What do you stand for?”.

The decision to affiliate is at the heart of professional associations – after all, they have members, not customers. For associations, this makes challenging times both a risk and an opportunity to prove authority and leadership.

When things are calm, an association can look authoritative simply by publishing a code of conduct and running webinars. In disruption, the real question turns up: do you have the standing to tell people what “right” looks like, and to bring them with you?

This is why trust and authority are tested most in moments of controversy or disruption – when, for example, a new technology breaks old rules (hello, generative AI), a scandal hits the profession, or the public starts asking whether the profession is policing itself or protecting itself.

This is associations – from comms to policy to member experience – earn their keep. Fights over a standard or a directive are only partially about the decision itself. They are also about whether stakeholders believe the association has earned the right to set it.

Authority can’t be declared in those moments. It needs to be built, tested and defended in the years leading up to that moment.

Five strategies that build legitimate authority‍

If you want the profession to follow you – and the public to believe you – these moves matter more than your tagline.

1. Show your working
Publish the rationale, not just the verdict. Explain what evidence you relied on, what you weighed, and what you ruled out. It’s much easier for people to write-off opaque consultation processes.

2. Separate expertise from interests
Design governance so the loudest fee-payer isn’t also the ethical compass. Independent voices, rotating panels, clear declarations of interest – unglamorous, but essential.

3. Back standards with capability
If you tell members “do better” without tools, you’re just issuing wishes. Resources like training, templates, decision trees, supervision models, hotlines are how standards become habits.

4. Enforce consistently, especially when it’s awkward
Nothing kills authority faster than selective toughness. Members watch what happens to high-status offenders.

5. Update quickly when reality shifts
New risks arrive faster than annual updates. AI use, new business models, changed community expectations – if your standards lag too far behind practice, you stop leading and start narrating.

Disagreement inside, unity outside

No profession ever operates in lockstep; it means associations are coalitions, not cults.

Internal disagreement is normal because professions contain competing incentives: commercial and public interest, tradition and innovation, city and regional practice,
older and early-career members. The goal is not fake unity. It is disciplined disagreement that still produces external clarity.

Managing these tensions is core to the project of building and maintaining authority, and far from simple. But there are some approaches that can help.

1. Agree principles before you argue policies
Public interest, competence, integrity – write them down, keep them short, and use them as evidence, published rationale and genuine chances for minority views to be recorded. You can’t control whether people dislike the outcome but you can control whether they respect the process.

2. Decide once, then speak with one voice externally
This is the moment many associations flinch. But stakeholders don’t want an internal transcript; they want a clear position and what it means for practice.

3. Commit to review triggers
Set the conditions under which you will revisit the decision (new evidence, material market change, regulatory shift). This stops those on the other side of a decision feeling trapped forever and reduces the temptation to keep relitigating the past.

This is also where comms and governance intersect. If the process is disciplined, comms becomes simpler: the association can explain the decision without sounding defensive, and can still respect internal diversity without importing it into every public statement.

The takeaway‍

Standing for something is the easy part. Earning the right to make it stick – in the profession and beyond it – is harder. That work is built from transparent decisions, credible governance, practical support, consistent enforcement and the willingness to lead when the room gets noisy.