🔗 Share this article

Within the beginning sections of Authentic: The Myth of Bringing Your Full Self to Work, speaker Jodi-Ann Burey issues a provocation: commonplace injunctions to “be yourself” or “show up completely genuine at work” are not harmless encouragements for personal expression – they’re traps. Burey’s debut book – a blend of recollections, studies, societal analysis and interviews – aims to reveal how companies co-opt identity, transferring the burden of corporate reform on to individual workers who are already vulnerable.

Personal Journey and Broader Context

The impetus for the publication lies partially in the author’s professional path: different positions across business retail, emerging businesses and in international development, interpreted via her perspective as a disabled Black female. The two-fold position that the author encounters – a tension between expressing one’s identity and aiming for security – is the engine of Authentic.

It arrives at a period of widespread exhaustion with organizational empty phrases across the United States and internationally, as resistance to diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs increase, and numerous companies are cutting back the very frameworks that previously offered transformation and improvement. Burey delves into that terrain to assert that retreating from the language of authenticity – namely, the corporate language that trivializes identity as a grouping of appearances, quirks and pastimes, forcing workers focused on handling how they are perceived rather than how they are regarded – is not an effective response; instead, we need to reframe it on our individual conditions.

Marginalized Workers and the Act of Self

By means of vivid anecdotes and interviews, the author demonstrates how employees from minority groups – employees from diverse backgrounds, members of the LGBTQ+ community, female employees, disabled individuals – soon understand to adjust which persona will “pass”. A weakness becomes a drawback and people try too hard by working to appear agreeable. The act of “presenting your true self” becomes a reflective surface on which numerous kinds of expectations are projected: affective duties, disclosure and constant performance of appreciation. In Burey’s words, we are asked to expose ourselves – but absent the safeguards or the confidence to withstand what emerges.

As Burey explains, employees are requested to expose ourselves – but absent the protections or the reliance to survive what emerges.’

Case Study: Jason’s Experience

The author shows this situation through the story of Jason, a deaf employee who took it upon himself to educate his co-workers about deaf community norms and communication norms. His readiness to discuss his background – a behavior of transparency the workplace often applauds as “authenticity” – briefly made routine exchanges smoother. However, Burey points out, that progress was fragile. After staff turnover erased the casual awareness he had established, the atmosphere of inclusion dissolved with it. “All of that knowledge left with them,” he notes wearily. What stayed was the weariness of needing to begin again, of being held accountable for an company’s developmental journey. In Burey’s view, this is what it means to be told to share personally without protection: to risk vulnerability in a structure that celebrates your transparency but refuses to institutionalize it into procedure. Authenticity becomes a pitfall when organizations rely on individual self-disclosure rather than organizational responsibility.

Author’s Approach and Notion of Opposition

Her literary style is simultaneously understandable and lyrical. She marries scholarly depth with a tone of kinship: an offer for audience to lean in, to interrogate, to oppose. According to the author, professional resistance is not overt defiance but moral resistance – the act of opposing uniformity in workplaces that expect appreciation for mere inclusion. To resist, in her framing, is to challenge the accounts institutions describe about equity and inclusion, and to refuse participation in practices that perpetuate inequity. It may appear as naming bias in a discussion, withdrawing of voluntary “diversity” effort, or defining borders around how much of one’s identity is made available to the organization. Dissent, the author proposes, is an affirmation of self-respect in environments that frequently reward compliance. It constitutes a discipline of principle rather than defiance, a way of asserting that one’s humanity is not based on corporate endorsement.

Redefining Genuineness

She also refuses rigid dichotomies. Authentic avoids just toss out “sincerity” completely: instead, she calls for its redefinition. According to the author, authenticity is not the unrestricted expression of individuality that corporate culture often celebrates, but a more thoughtful harmony between individual principles and individual deeds – a honesty that opposes distortion by institutional demands. As opposed to considering authenticity as a mandate to reveal too much or adapt to cleansed standards of candor, Burey advises audience to preserve the elements of it grounded in honesty, self-awareness and ethical clarity. From her perspective, the goal is not to abandon sincerity but to move it – to transfer it from the corporate display practices and to connections and organizations where reliance, fairness and accountability make {