AUTHENTICITY AT THE WORKPLACE: BEHAVIOURS ASSOCIATED AND DRAWBACKS
Authenticity is surely the buzzword of the past year and much has been written recently about bringing our “whole” selves to work. But what does it look like in practice to “be real” in a professional setting? And is it truly advisable? And if so, for whom? It sure has its positives. It does increase our overall well-being and happiness, creates psychological safety that strengthens relationships, leads to higher job satisfaction, and gives rise to undeniable improvements in productivity.
Firstly, authenticity can sometimes be seen as unprofessional. In many workplaces, there is an expectation of maintaining a certain level of decorum and professionalism. This can include things like dressing appropriately, using proper language, and behaving in a certain way. If someone prioritizes authenticity over professionalism, they may come across as unprofessional, which can be detrimental to their career. Secondly, authenticity can sometimes lead to oversharing. In an effort to be honest and transparent, people may share personal information that is not relevant to the workplace. This can create an uncomfortable work environment and potentially damage relationships with colleagues.
Thirdly, authenticity can sometimes lead to conflict. Being honest about one’s thoughts and feelings can be valuable, but it can also lead to disagreement and conflict. If someone prioritizes authenticity over tact, they may unintentionally offend others or create tension in the workplace. Fourthly, authenticity can sometimes be mistaken for lack of competence. In some workplaces, there is an expectation of projecting confidence and expertise. If someone prioritizes authenticity over projecting confidence, they may be perceived as lacking competence or expertise, even if they are skilled and knowledgeable.
Finally, authenticity can sometimes create a sense of vulnerability. Being authentic requires us to be open and honest, which can leave us feeling vulnerable. In a workplace that is competitive or cut-throat, vulnerability can be seen as a weakness and can be exploited by others.
Conversely, having to hide our authentic selves, or to “wear a mask” (the figurative, not the literal kind), or even “code switch” in order to disprove negative stereotypes around race or sexual orientation or to conform to a particular gender role, leads to higher rates of physical and psychological stress and lower job satisfaction.
Most organizations, while they talk a good game, do not really celebrate and cherish all their employees equally. Perhaps that is why some experts in leadership and management urge employees to be themselves but “carefully”, or just sometimes, and only with certain people. In fact, many employees of minority groups believe the notion of authenticity at work may be for others, e.g. those in the dominant culture, but not for them.
The Human Library Initiative
What if the ability to truly be yourself and share your story were a normal, natural thing at every organization? What if workplace culture were based on the Danish organization “Menneskebiblioteket” or the “Human Library”? Founded in Copenhagen in 2000 by Ronni Abergel, his brother Dany, and two other colleagues, the Human Library’s motto is “unjudge someone” and its mission is to “publish people as open books.” The library, which now operates in 85 countries on six continents, creates a safe space where people can share their stories with others who listen and respond without judgment.
The success and growth of the Human Library confirms the findings of a groundbreaking political persuasion study on how personal narratives can be used to help shift someone’s beliefs. Using what is called the “deep canvassing” method, a form of canvassing that uses empathic storytelling to reveal the struggles of marginalized groups, authentic conversations will lead to lasting changes in opinion. Essentially, the Human Library is just one big, extended, deep canvas where people get together and share their stories on the road to “unjudgment”.
Could the sharing of personal stories build real, authentic connections between diverse employees in corporations? And not just through the increasingly common ERG’s and other communities formed around shared identity and hobbies, but through top-down, company-wide initiatives where authenticity — whether physical, emotional or cultural — is emphasized and celebrated?
The Toxic Side Of Authentic Leadership
It would be nice to live in a world where we can just be ourselves, and not just at home, during a family reunion meal, or office Christmas party, but in any given situation.
Imagine, for instance, if we were just ourselves when the boss asks us to do something tedious, when an interviewer asks about our biggest weaknesses, or when we go on a first date with someone. Surely our chances of success would be greater than what they are now. Why? Because the actual reality is this: in any important life situation or event, people are not rewarded for behaving in a spontaneous, uninhibited or unfiltered way — but rather, for putting on the right repertoire of behaviors, managing impressions and conforming to the dominant social norms and etiquette.
Research shows that the ability to monitor and adjust our behavior to adhere to others’ expectations is a consistent predictor of career success and that the most accurate interpretation of what we call social skills or “EQ” (emotional intelligence) is social desirability. We can call it “faking” if we want, but the fact is that those who are better at it are generally deemed more rewarding to deal with, more employable, and more effective as leaders. It is rather curious that leaders are constantly told to “be true to themselves”, to “just be themselves”, and to “stop worrying about what others think of them”, when in fact most of the critical ingredients that make leaders effective, require the exact opposite. For example, controlling emotional outbursts, exercising self-control, caring more about others than ourselves, making an effort to understand others’ perspectives, and being aware of our reputation in order to harness it, finesse it, curate it.
There’s no loss (and many gains) if we learn to become more aware of how others perceive us. Most of the problems in the world are largely caused by poor leadership, and in the vast majority of cases, the root of the problem is not a lack of authenticity, but an excess of it: leaders who are too ego-centric, self-centred, and entitled to engage in any self-restraint, self-censorship, or considerate behaviours.
Emotional Intelligence and Authenticity
Now onto the good news: it is not just possible, but also feasible, to keep our authentic self in check, without being a fraud, or violating our own core values and beliefs. To be sure, being true to our values isn’t always a good thing either — as we have learned from Mao, Hitler, and Stalin — we have to actually have good values, to begin with. Assuming we do, then there’s no loss (and many gains) if we learn to become more aware of how others perceive us, which is what competent leadership coaching and development interventions do — they enhance self-awareness, which is really other-awareness (awareness of how people see us).
Of course, we need to have a modicum of Emotional Intelligence or EQ (not always the case with leaders) in order to become self-aware. This is why coaching interventions rarely work with those who need it the most: if we are really arrogant, entitled, and self-centred — in other words, “just being ourself” — then no feedback, whether from a coach, assessment, AI or our spouse — will be sufficient to help us understand that we are not as good as we think. But if we respond to this feedback, then great: we have taken the first step towards improving. And whatever our self-improvement or leadership development journey looks like, it will usually comprise one big task, namely to learn how to go against our nature.
All great leaders are a work in progress, and the best leaders manage to become an augmented version of themselves. Their identity and self-views (who they are in their own eyes) may not change much, but in the eyes of others, they are more complete, more diverse, and more adaptable, because they have learned to display a much broader range of behaviours, becoming less predictable. Take the example of great actors: Tom Hanks and Amithab Bachan stand out from their peers, not because they always play themselves (which is what talentless actors do) but because they can transform themselves into any character. And when they do this, they manage to fool others that they are authentic because they seem really natural and genuine — but this requires a great deal of talent and even more work. Needless to say, nobody will trust a leader if they seem fake, but what matters in leadership is not whether people are being true to themselves, but whether they are good to others.
We should not hold one morally superior to the other, but assess what the impact of their actions are. By the same token, we should spend less time discussing leaders’ styles, including whether they are authentic, charismatic, confident, funny, etc., and more time discussing their substance.
And while every leader is unique, the substance of leadership talent is universal: can they convince a group of people to collaborate effectively in the pursuit of a positive goal. Typically, this will depend on their competence, integrity, and social skills, which will include the ability to seem authentic, but our best home is that they can keep the uninhibited version of themselves at home.
Content Curated By: Dr Shoury Kuttappa
