As the role of the Executive Assistant continues to evolve, so do the opportunities for career progression. But what does it really mean to become a strategic business partner, and how can EAs demonstrate their value and take the next step in their careers?
We spoke to Emily Partridge, Managing Director of eavolve, a specialist training and development provider for PAs, EAs and Chiefs of Staff. With 15 years of experience as a senior EA, including supporting executives in FTSE 100 organisations and leading a global team of 60 EAs, Emily brings a wealth of first-hand knowledge to the conversation.
In this interview, she shares her insights on the changing EA profession, the skills needed to progress into more strategic roles, the impact of AI and why professional development should be a priority for both assistants and employers.
1. You’ve experienced the EA profession from several perspectives. How has your understanding of the role changed throughout your career?
My understanding of the profession has changed enormously, although I think the biggest shift has been in how I recognise and articulate the value an exceptional EA can bring to an organisation.
As my career progressed, I found myself working increasingly closely with senior executives, becoming involved in decisions, navigating complex organisational challenges and influencing outcomes that extended far beyond traditional executive support. I began to recognise that the real value I brought wasn’t necessarily in what I was doing, but in what my involvement enabled other people and the wider business to achieve.
Moving into leadership and managing a global team of 60 EAs gave me another perspective entirely. I could see the enormous variation in how organisations understood, utilised and invested in their assistants.
Today, having worked with hundreds of EA and PA professionals through eavolve, I recognise that one of the profession’s greatest challenges is not necessarily a lack of capability, but a lack of clarity. Clarity around what good looks like, what strategic contribution actually means, how to demonstrate value and what career progression could look like.
If your value is entirely dependent on being the person who fixes everything, knows everything, and keeps everyone afloat, you can inadvertently become trapped by your own competence.
2. What prompted you to establish eavolve? Drawing on your own experience as an EA, what gaps did you identify in the professional development and support available to EAs and PAs?
eavolve was born out of a combination of my own experiences and a growing frustration with how professional development was being approached across the EA and PA profession.
What struck me was the disconnect between what organisations increasingly expected from their assistants and the development opportunities available to help them meet those expectations.
We were asking EAs to become more strategic, commercially aware, influential, and proactive, yet very few people were actually explaining what that meant in practice, how to develop those capabilities or how success should be measured.
There was also a tendency for development to focus on improving the execution of existing responsibilities rather than preparing people for greater responsibility. Of course, technical skills and operational excellence matter, but if we want assistants to contribute at a higher level, we need to develop their judgement, commercial understanding, confidence, communication, and ability to influence.
Another significant gap was the lack of meaningful career guidance. For many years, the profession has been presented as though there is a natural progression from PA to EA to Senior EA and eventually Chief of Staff. In reality, careers are rarely that linear, and nor should they be.
I also felt strongly that training needed to deliver something tangible. Attending an inspiring event or leaving a workshop feeling motivated is wonderful, but what happens when you return to your desk on Monday morning? What changes? What do you do differently? How does your employer see a return on that investment?
That’s why we established eavolve as something more than a traditional training provider. We wanted to bring together practical development, coaching, career guidance, and organisational insight, informed by people who genuinely understand the profession because they’ve worked within it.
3. The EA role has become increasingly strategic, with many assistants contributing to business decisions and influencing senior stakeholders. What does it really mean to operate as a strategic partner rather than simply an excellent organiser?
I think we need to be careful with the word ‘strategic’, because it’s become one of the most overused and least understood terms in our profession.
For me, the distinction isn’t necessarily about the tasks you’re doing. It’s about how you’re thinking, the judgement you’re applying and the impact you’re having.
An excellent organiser can coordinate a leadership meeting, prepare the agenda, manage the logistics and ensure everything happens as planned. A strategic partner goes further. They understand why the meeting is happening, what decisions need to be made, whether the right people are involved, what information is missing and how the outcomes connect to the organisation’s wider priorities.
One of the exercises I regularly use in our development sessions asks EAs to consider three things: what they execute, what they improve and what they influence.
Execution is essential, and we should never diminish its importance. Improvement demonstrates that you’re thinking beyond the immediate task and identifying better ways of working. Influence is often where your strategic contribution becomes most visible because you’re beginning to shape decisions, behaviours, priorities, and outcomes.
The difficulty is that many experienced EAs are already operating in this space without recognising it. They influence decisions, challenge priorities, identify risks and make recommendations every day, but because these activities are embedded within their normal responsibilities, they don’t necessarily see them as strategic.
The question I encourage EAs to ask themselves is: What is different, better, or more effective because of my involvement?
4. Career progression can look different for everyone. What opportunities are available to experienced EAs who want to move beyond traditional executive support, and how can they identify the right next step for them?
One of the biggest misconceptions I encounter is that career progression must involve moving away from being an EA.
There’s absolutely nothing wrong with wanting to remain an EA. In fact, I think we should be doing far more to recognise and celebrate those who want to build long, successful careers as exceptional executive support professionals.
An experienced EA can develop into a highly influential strategic business partner, support increasingly complex executive portfolios, take on broader organisational responsibilities or become a specialist within a particular industry. Progression can mean greater autonomy, commercial exposure, influence, and remuneration without necessarily requiring a completely different job title.
For those who do want to explore other opportunities, the skills developed throughout an EA career can translate into areas such as business operations, project and programme management, executive operations, governance, people leadership, transformation and, of course, Chief of Staff.
However, I think the starting point should be understanding what you actually enjoy, where your strengths lie and what kind of responsibility you want to hold.
I also encourage people to look beyond their job title and examine the substance of their current role. What are you already accountable for? Where do you exercise judgement? What decisions do you influence? What responsibilities have you acquired that aren’t reflected in your job description?
One of the most important things I say to the professionals I coach is that you don’t need to have a five-year career plan, but you do need to understand what you’re working towards and why.
5. Moving from EA to Chief of Staff is an increasingly popular career ambition. What additional experience, skills or commercial knowledge might an EA need to develop before making that transition?
I think the first thing we need to acknowledge is that Chief of Staff is not simply a more senior version of an Executive Assistant.
There can be significant overlap between the two roles, particularly when we’re talking about highly strategic EAs, but the level of accountability, organisational responsibility and commercial understanding expected of a Chief of Staff can be very different.
A Chief of Staff may be expected to translate executive strategy into organisational priorities, oversee complex initiatives, influence senior stakeholders, challenge decisions, manage competing business interests and drive accountability across functions.
Commercial acumen is particularly important. You need to understand how the organisation makes money, what drives profitability, where risks sit, how resources are allocated and how business decisions affect performance.
You also need to develop your ability to think critically, interpret information, challenge constructively and make recommendations that consider the wider organisation rather than simply the needs of one executive.
Another significant distinction is the shift from supporting delivery to potentially being accountable for it. An EA might coordinate a strategic initiative, whereas a Chief of Staff may be expected to lead it, resolve competing priorities, influence stakeholders, and ensure the intended outcomes are achieved.
My advice would be to focus less on how quickly you can acquire the title and more on whether you’re developing the commercial knowledge, leadership capability, strategic judgement, and breadth of experience needed to succeed once you’re there.
A title might get you into the room, but it won’t equip you to operate effectively within it.
6. How can EAs communicate their value more effectively, demonstrate their impact and make a stronger case for promotion, greater responsibility, or investment in their development?
I think one of the biggest barriers facing experienced EAs is that they’re often exceptionally good at doing their jobs but far less comfortable explaining the value of what they do.
I encourage EAs to move away from describing their responsibilities and start demonstrating their outcomes.
For example, saying you manage a complex executive diary tells me what you do. Explaining that you’ve redesigned how executive time is allocated, reduced unnecessary meetings, improved decision-making, and created more capacity for commercially important priorities tells me what your contribution achieves.
You don’t necessarily need to attach a financial figure to everything, although understanding the commercial implications of your work is incredibly valuable. Time saved, risks reduced, processes improved, decisions accelerated and stakeholder relationships strengthened are all legitimate measures of impact.
I also think EAs need to become much more disciplined about collecting evidence throughout the year rather than trying to remember everything they’ve achieved when their annual appraisal comes around.
Keep a record of the problems you’ve solved, the improvements you’ve introduced, the decisions you’ve influenced and the responsibilities you’ve taken on. Understand which examples demonstrate operational excellence, and which show broader organisational contribution.
I would always encourage someone to research the external market, understand how their responsibilities compare with similar roles and use credible salary data, such as the Lily Shippen Annual Salary Survey, to support their case.
Being busy isn’t a measure of your value, and being indispensable isn’t a substitute for being recognised.
7. Do you have any advice on how employers should approach training and career development for their EA and PA teams?
For too long, EA and PA development has been treated as something individuals need to take responsibility for themselves, often with limited budgets, little career structure, and inconsistent access to meaningful opportunities.
My first recommendation would be to stop treating EA development as a generic training requirement.
Two assistants working in the same organisation may have completely different levels of experience, responsibilities, confidence, and career ambitions. Sending them both on the same course simply because they share a job title doesn’t necessarily address either individual’s development needs.
Employers need to understand what their assistants are currently doing, what they’re capable of, what the organisation needs from them and where the gaps exist.
Development should also involve the executive, not just the assistant.
You cannot reasonably expect an EA to become more commercially aware, influential, or strategically involved if the executive they support doesn’t provide the context, access, trust, or opportunity required to develop those capabilities.
I also believe employers should be measuring the return on their investment. Not by asking whether someone enjoyed a training day, but by exploring what they’ve applied, how their behaviour has changed and what difference that has made to the business.
Development doesn’t always need to lead to a new job title. It might involve broader responsibilities, exposure to different business functions, involvement in strategic projects, mentoring opportunities or developing specialist expertise.
If organisations want to retain exceptional assistants, they need to offer more than a good salary and the occasional training course. They need to demonstrate that they understand their potential and are prepared to invest in it.
8. AI and automation are changing the way many professionals work. What should EAs and PAs be learning now to stay relevant?
I think AI presents an enormous opportunity for the EA profession, but only if we approach it with the right mindset.
Many of the activities traditionally associated with executive support are already being transformed by automation and AI. Scheduling, information gathering, document preparation, meeting summaries, research, and administrative processes can increasingly be supported by technology.
For me, the opportunity is to create greater capacity for the things that genuinely require human judgement, commercial understanding, relationship management, discretion, and influence.
EAs need to become confident in understanding how tools such as ChatGPT and Microsoft Copilot work, where they can add value and, equally importantly, where their limitations and risks sit.
That includes learning how to write effective prompts, evaluate outputs critically, understand data protection and confidentiality requirements, identify opportunities for automation, and use AI to support research, analysis, communication, and decision-making.
I would also encourage assistants to develop a much stronger understanding of business processes. Rather than simply using AI to complete an existing task more quickly, ask whether the task needs to be done in the same way at all.
Technology will continue to change, and the tools we’re using today may look very different in a few years. Critical thinking, adaptability, commercial awareness, curiosity, and sound judgement will remain essential.
Learning to use AI is important. Understanding how to use it to create meaningful business value is what will set you apart.
9. Finally, what advice would you give an EA or PA who feels ready for more but isn’t sure how to take the next step?
My advice would be to stop waiting for someone else to define what ‘more’ looks like for you.
I would start by taking a proper look at your current role, not just your job description, but what you actually do.
Where are you adding the most value? What do people consistently come to you for? What problems are you trusted to solve? Where are you making decisions, influencing outcomes, or taking responsibility beyond what might traditionally be expected of an assistant?
Then ask yourself which parts of your role you genuinely enjoy and which parts you would like to do more of.
Sometimes the answer isn’t that you need a completely different career. You might simply need a different environment, a more progressive executive partnership, greater responsibility, or an organisation that understands how to utilise your capabilities.
I would also encourage people to seek an external perspective. When you’ve spent years working in one organisation, it can be surprisingly difficult to recognise how your experience translates into the wider market.
Most importantly, don’t confuse being comfortable with being fulfilled, and don’t assume that because you’re good at something, you have to keep doing it forever.
Your next step doesn’t have to be a promotion, a new title, or a move into Chief of Staff. It needs to be a step towards a career that makes sense for you, your strengths, and your ambitions.
The most important thing is that you make that decision intentionally, rather than allowing your career to be shaped entirely by the opportunities other people happen to give you.
