In recent years, vocational education and training have attained much political and societal attention – and it seems to continue. This heightened interest reflects a growing recognition that future labor markets are likely to face an even greater shortage of skilled workers than today. Indeed, the trend appears to be moving in one direction, raising increasing concern. Consequently, there has been growing debate on how this development might be reversed.

Discussions have focused on a range of interrelated issues, including efforts to improve the reputation and attractiveness of vocational education and training, enhance educational quality, strengthen pedagogical leadership (Ydesen et al., 2024), and reduce student dropout rates (EVA, 2014; EVA, 2023; Mahler et al., 2023). Addressing these challenges is widely regarded as essential, given the central role of VET in societal and economic development.

Despite the growing research interest in vocational education and training, the leadership in vocational schools remains underexplored (Frimann & Bundgaard, 2018; Friche & Andersen, 2017), despite increasing attention to collective, shared and post-heroic understandings of leadership in complex organizational settings (Crevani et al., 2007; Drath et al., 2008; Raelin, 2016). This gap is striking given the complexity, scope and societal significance of leadership in this sector.

The leadership role in vocational education differs from other educational contexts due to the unique organizational and institutional characteristics of vocational schools (EVA, 2014, 2018), including the integration of workplace-based training, governance arrangements involving local training committees and social partners (CEDEFOP, 2012), and extensive ongoing collaboration with labor market stakeholders. In addition, leadership in vocational schools also encompasses internal coordination across educational programs, continuous quality development of teaching and learning, and the enactment of shared and distributed leadership across multiple organizational levels, reflecting broader shifts towards distributed leadership in complex organizational contexts (Bolden, 2011).

The societal situation indicates that the demand for change and development in the VET sector will most likely continue to increase. Consequently, vocational schools operate in contexts of increasing complexity, while research-based knowledge on the implications of these conditions for leadership remains limited.

Against this backdrop, the paper takes a pragmatic, practice-based perspective on leadership development, focusing on how leadership teams in vocational education develop the capacity to lead together through action learning, rather than on prescribing leadership models or solutions.

Here we present findings from an action learning project examining how VET leaders can develop their capacity to shared leadership in order to respond to increasing complexity and accelerating change.

The action learning project is one element of the larger the research project on "Future Leadership in the Vocational Education and Training (VET) Sector – Complex Challenges, Local Collaboration, and Responsive Educational Leadership," conducted in collaboration between Aalborg University and the University College Copenhagen. It is a three-year project (2024-2026) funded by the Danish government.

This study is situated within a practice-based action learning research design aimed at developing leadership capacity. It is informed by prior research on leadership development through action learning in teams, which highlights how collective inquiry, reflection, and experimentation can support the development of shared leadership in complex organizational contexts (Revans, 1982; Pedler, 1997; Marquardt, 2011). The empirical setting consists of leadership teams from five vocational education and training (VET) schools. Each school established a leadership learning community comprising 4–7 leaders ranging from middle to executive management. The design combines locally embedded action learning processes with cross-institutional workshops supporting shared learning, reflection, and knowledge. At each school, the action learning process unfolds through four facilitated sessions over approximately ten months. The sessions follow a cyclical and iterative structure in which leadership teams jointly identify a shared leadership challenge grounded in their everyday practice, formulate hypotheses, design and implement leadership actions (experiments), and reflect systematically on their outcomes. The objective is to strengthen leaders’ collective capacity to inquire into, reflect on, and act upon their own leadership practices, drawing on each other’s perspectives and expertise (Pedler, 1997; Marquardt, 2011). Researchers take on the role of facilitators and co-inquirers, responsible for framing the process, sustaining reflexivity, and supporting analytical depth without directing content or outcomes. This understanding of facilitation aligns with relational and process-oriented perspectives on leadership development, emphasizing responsiveness, resonance, and attention to social dynamics in learning processes (Cunliffe, 2002; Frimann, 2021). This reflects a pragmatic understanding of action learning, in which learning develops through collective and dialogic inquiry into concrete leadership challenges, (Revans, 1982; Schön, 1987; Raelin, 2016). Each leadership team determines its own focus area. Data generation is integrated with the action learning process and evolves iteratively from one session to the next. Empirical material includes recordings of initial scoping meetings, researchers’ ethnographic field notes from action learning sessions, photographs of visual artefacts produced during meetings (e.g., flipcharts and post-it notes), and semi-structured focus group interviews conducted after completion of the local action learning cycles. In addition, three cross-institutional workshops generate data through reflective dialogues across schools. The analytical strategy combines iterative thematic analysis with process-oriented attention to how collaboration develop over time with particular attention to collective sensemaking processes within leadership teams (Weick, 1995). Analysis focuses on patterns of collective inquiry, shifts in leadership orientations, and emerging capacities to conduct shared leadership.

This paper reports from an ongoing action learning project exploring how vocational school leaders develop the capacity to lead collectively in contexts characterized by increasing complexity and pressure. At the time of submission, the local action learning cycles are still in progress; however, by the time of the conference, the full empirical material will be available, allowing for a more consolidated analysis and presentation of findings. Preliminary insights from indicate that leading as a team represents a significant shift in leadership practice for many participants, moving away from individually oriented leadership roles towards more collective and relational forms of leadership (Crevani et al., 2007; Raelin, 2016). Across cases, leaders describe difficulties in articulating a shared direction as a leadership team and in prioritizing time and attention for relational work with leadership colleagues, highlighting the challenges of developing alignment, commitment and shared responsibility in leadership teams (Drath et al., 2008). Creating spaces where doubt, loneliness, and failure can be voiced is described as both necessary and risky. The action learning process appears to interrupt these patterns by slowing down decision-making and creating structured spaces for dialogic inquiry, reflection and shared meaning-making (Weick, 1995, Raelin 2016). Leaders are encouraged to remain curious, resist premature conclusions, and attend to multiple perspectives. Early observations point to the development of a shared leadership language, increased attention to relational dynamics, and a growing capacity to frame collective leadership challenges. The analysis will examine how emerging capacities evolve and how action learning can support leadership teams in navigating complexity, fostering trust, and developing more collaborative forms of leadership practice. These insights suggest that developing the capacity to lead as a team is not primarily a matter of new tools or structures, but of cultivating shared inquiry, language, and relational trust over time.

Bolden, R. (2011). Distributed Leadership in Organizations: A Review of Theory and Research. International Journal of Management Reviews, 13(3), 251–269. CEDEFOP (2012): Vocational Education and training in Denmark. Short description. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union Cunliffe, A.L. 2002. Reflexive Dialogical Practice in Management Learning. Management Learning, 3 (1), 35–61. Crevani, L, M. Lindgren & Packendorff, J. (2007) Shared leadership: A post-heroic perspective on leadership as a collective construction. International Journal of Leadership Studies, 3 (1), 40-67. Danish Evaluation Institute (2014): Pedagogical leadership in vocational schools [In Danish]. EVA. Danish Evaluation Institute (2018): Use of data in vocational education and training. [In Danish]. EVA. Danish Evaluation Institute (2023): Knowledge on dropout and student well-being in vocational education and training [In Danish]. EVA. Drath, W., Mccauley, C.D., Palus, C. J., Velsor, V. E., O'Connor, P. & Mcguire, J. (2008). Direction, Alignment, Commitment: Toward a More Integrative Ontology of Leadership. The Leadership Quarterly. 19 (6) 635-653. Friche, N, & Andersen, V. N. (2017). Four logics of governance: Governing vocational Education and Training. Journal of Vocational Education & Training Conference. Frimann, S., & Bundgaard, S. B. (2018). Knowledge brief no. 1: Leadership development in practice in vocational schools. LIP – Leadership Development in Practice in Vocational Schools. [In Danish]. Frimann, S. (2021). Leadership development through action learning in teams. In L. Hersted (Ed.), Leadership in social processes: Relations, resonance, and responsiveness (pp. 285–314) [In Danish]. Dansk Psykologisk Forlag. Mahler, A., Thomsen, E. S., & Louw, A. (2023). Dropout, retention, and completion in vocational education and training: A review of research on young people in the Danish context (2011–2023) [In Danish]. Center for Knowledge on Vocational Education and Training (CEVEU), Center for Youth Research. Marquardt, M. J. (2011). Optimizing the power of action learning. Nicholas Brealey. Pedler, M. (Ed.). (1997). Action learning in Practice. Gower Publishing. Raelin, J.A. (2016) Imagine there are no leaders: Reframing leadership as collaborative agency. Leadership, Vol. 12(2), 131–158. Revans, R. W. (1982). The origins and growth of action learning. Chartwell-Bratt. Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. Jossey-Bass. Ydesen, C., Ziethen, M., & Rohwedder, A.-B. (2024). Pedagogical leadership [In Danish]. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur. Weick, C. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations: Foundations for organizational science. Sage Publications.