The Authenticity Myth - When Being Real Doesn’t Work
What you will learn: The popular leadership advice to “be authentic” overlooks the complexities of real-world leadership. While authenticity fosters trust, engagement, and performance, too much authenticity, especially in emotional oversharing or inconsistency, can backfire, eroding trust and stability.
This post argues for a more nuanced approach: strategic inauthenticity. This means leaders occasionally modulate their behavior. Not to deceive, but to serve and lead more effectively in high-stakes environments. Examples include a leader acting calm during a crisis or projecting confidence despite inner doubt.
Drawing on Mark Bowden's work and Erving Goffman's self-presentation theory, the piece emphasizes that we're always performing. The key is to perform with integrity, intent, and empathy, aligning with core values rather than personal emotions in the moment.
Ultimately, leadership isn't about raw transparency, but about being the version of yourself that your team and organization need.
“Just be yourself.” It’s a well-meaning mantra in leadership workshops, onboarding sessions, and motivational TED Talks. Authenticity has become the north star of modern leadership, a metric of trust, and a badge of moral virtue. But what if we’ve misunderstood it? What if, in some cases, being too authentic actually hinders connection and influence?
This isn’t a defense of deceit. It’s a challenge to the simplicity of the narrative. And it starts with a provocative idea: sometimes, the most effective leaders aren’t authentic; they’re strategically inauthentic.
Authenticity Works - Until It Doesn't
The data is compelling and for good reason. Authenticity builds trust, fosters loyalty, and drives performance. When leaders show vulnerability, 81% of employees report higher levels of trust in them. Teams led by authentic leaders experience a 20% boost in engagement, and Gallup links authentic leadership to stronger communication, lower turnover, and higher performance.
So no, it's not a myth that authenticity works. The myth is that it always works.
Like any leadership trait, authenticity is a tool and not a cure-all. Used with discernment, it builds bridges. Used mindlessly, it can burn them. What often gets lost in celebrating "being real" is the messy, high-stakes complexity of leadership itself. In environments shaped by perception, power dynamics, and the need for consistency, sometimes a little restraint serves far better than full exposure.
The Hidden Cost of Too Much Authenticity
There's a line where authenticity stops building trust and starts eroding it, and many leaders don't realize they've crossed it until it's too late. In a well-intentioned effort to be open, they risk overstepping into emotional oversharing or erratic behavior. According to Edelman, 63% of employees distrust leaders who come across as inconsistent or overly personal.
What starts as transparency can quickly feel like instability. Leaders who conflate authenticity with radical honesty may unintentionally sow doubt, burden teams, or appear ungrounded. And in the process, they lose the very trust they're trying to build.
Leadership isn't therapy. And sometimes, the most responsible version of "being yourself" means editing and shaping your expression, not to deceive but to serve. Because in high-stakes environments, influence often requires something more nuanced than just sincerity. It requires strategy.
The Case for Strategic Inauthenticity
Renowned body language expert Mark Bowden flips the authenticity gospel on its head in his TEDxToronto talk, “The Importance of Being Inauthentic.” His thesis? Authenticity is not always helpful. Being inauthentic, strategically, is sometimes more ethical, compassionate, and influential.
He draws from Erving Goffman's “Presentation of Self” theory, suggesting that we are always performing. The question isn't whether we perform but how consciously and intentionally we do it. Bowden's insights, drawn from years of research in nonverbal communication, challenge the idea that our “real” selves should always lead.
“People don’t respond to your internal truth; they respond to the version of you that shows up - your behavior, your performance.”
In practice, this means:
A CEO might act calm in a crisis; not because they feel calm, but because their team needs stability.
A speaker might project confidence, even if nervous because audiences mirror energy.
A leader might suppress anger in a meeting; not to be dishonest, but to model constructive behavior.
Early impressions: New leaders may need to “fake” confidence to earn trust before it naturally develops.
Redefining Leadership Presence
The goal isn't to abandon authenticity but to evolve it. In high-stakes leadership, raw emotion isn't always the right tool - impact, clarity, and consistency often matter more. This is where strategic inauthenticity, performed with integrity, becomes not a betrayal but a discipline of service. It's not fakery - it's leadership.
When guided by empathy, values, and clear intent, leaders can shape their presence to instill calm, cohesion, or confidence, even when they don't feel it entirely themselves. Yes, the ethical lines are real: many employees distrust inauthentic leaders. But the distinction lies in purpose. Suppressing raw emotion isn't about deception - it's about choosing the version of yourself that best serves your team. As Mark Bowden puts it, the most ethical leaders aren't always “true to themselves” in the moment - they're true to the outcomes they're trying to create.
So, let's rethink the mantra:
Not “Be yourself.”
But “Be your best self - for the people who need you most.”
+++
Ready to elevate your leadership, expand your influence, and navigate challenges with clarity? Let’s connect for a no-obligation conversation to explore how coaching can accelerate your growth and impact. Book your initial call here.
