🔗 Share this article

In the beginning sections of Authentic: The Myth of Bringing Your Full Self to Work, speaker Burey raises a critical point: commonplace advice to “be yourself” or “show up completely genuine at work” are not benevolent calls for self-expression – they often become snares. This initial publication – a combination of memoir, studies, societal analysis and interviews – seeks to unmask how organizations co-opt identity, moving the responsibility of institutional change on to individual workers who are frequently at risk.

Professional Experience and Larger Setting

The driving force for the book originates in part in Burey’s personal work history: multiple jobs across corporate retail, startups and in global development, viewed through her experience as a disabled Black female. The dual posture that the author encounters – a back-and-forth between standing up for oneself and aiming for security – is the engine of Authentic.

It arrives at a time of collective fatigue with institutional platitudes across America and other regions, as opposition to diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs grow, and numerous companies are cutting back the very structures that earlier assured transformation and improvement. Burey enters that arena to assert that retreating from authenticity rhetoric – that is, the organizational speech that reduces individuality as a grouping of surface traits, quirks and pastimes, forcing workers focused on managing how they are seen rather than how they are regarded – is not a solution; we must instead reframe it on our individual conditions.

Minority Staff and the Performance of Persona

Via vivid anecdotes and conversations, Burey illustrates how employees from minority groups – people of color, LGBTQ+ people, female employees, disabled individuals – soon understand to calibrate which self will “pass”. A weakness becomes a drawback and people overcompensate by attempting to look acceptable. The effort of “presenting your true self” becomes a projection screen on which various types of anticipations are cast: emotional work, revealing details and constant performance of gratitude. According to Burey, employees are requested to share our identities – but lacking the protections or the reliance to withstand what emerges.

According to the author, employees are requested to share our identities – but without the protections or the reliance to survive what emerges.’

Illustrative Story: The Story of Jason

Burey demonstrates this dynamic through the account of an employee, a hearing-impaired staff member who decided to inform his colleagues about deaf community norms and communication norms. His eagerness to discuss his background – a gesture of openness the organization often applauds as “genuineness” – temporarily made routine exchanges more manageable. However, Burey points out, that improvement was precarious. After employee changes erased the casual awareness he had established, the culture of access dissolved with it. “All the information left with them,” he comments exhaustedly. What was left was the exhaustion of having to start over, of being made responsible for an organization’s educational process. From the author’s perspective, this illustrates to be told to reveal oneself lacking safeguards: to face exposure in a structure that praises your openness but fails to institutionalize it into procedure. Sincerity becomes a trap when companies rely on individual self-disclosure rather than organizational responsibility.

Author’s Approach and Idea of Resistance

The author’s prose is at once clear and expressive. She marries intellectual rigor with a tone of kinship: an invitation for audience to participate, to interrogate, to oppose. In Burey’s opinion, workplace opposition is not overt defiance but ethical rejection – the effort of opposing uniformity in environments that expect thankfulness for basic acceptance. To oppose, in her framing, is to challenge the accounts organizations describe about equity and belonging, and to reject involvement in rituals that maintain injustice. It may appear as identifying prejudice in a discussion, withdrawing of uncompensated “diversity” work, or establishing limits around how much of one’s identity is made available to the company. Dissent, she suggests, is an declaration of personal dignity in environments that typically encourage conformity. It constitutes a habit of integrity rather than opposition, a approach of maintaining that a person’s dignity is not dependent on institutional approval.

Redefining Genuineness

The author also avoids brittle binaries. Authentic does not merely toss out “sincerity” entirely: instead, she calls for its redefinition. According to the author, genuineness is not simply the unfiltered performance of character that corporate culture often celebrates, but a more intentional correspondence between personal beliefs and personal behaviors – a honesty that rejects alteration by institutional demands. Rather than considering sincerity as a requirement to disclose excessively or conform to cleansed standards of candor, Burey urges followers to maintain the parts of it rooted in truth-telling, personal insight and ethical clarity. In her view, the aim is not to discard sincerity but to move it – to remove it from the corporate display practices and toward connections and offices where confidence, justice and responsibility make {