🔗 Share this article

Within the initial chapters of Authentic: The Myth of Bringing Your Full Self to Work, writer the author poses a challenge: everyday injunctions to “bring your true self” or “show up completely genuine at work” are far from well-meaning invitations for individuality – they often become snares. This initial publication – a blend of recollections, investigation, cultural commentary and interviews – attempts to expose how businesses take over individual identity, shifting the responsibility of organizational transformation on to individual workers who are frequently at risk.

Personal Journey and Larger Setting

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 background as a disabled Black female. The two-fold position that Burey faces – a tension between expressing one’s identity and looking for safety – is the core of the book.

It emerges at a period of general weariness with institutional platitudes across the United States and internationally, as resistance to diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs increase, and various institutions are reducing the very structures that earlier assured transformation and improvement. The author steps into that arena to contend that retreating from corporate authenticity talk – namely, the business jargon that minimizes personal identity as a grouping of surface traits, quirks and interests, keeping workers concerned with controlling how they are seen rather than how they are handled – is not an effective response; instead, we need to redefine it on our individual conditions.

Minority Staff and the Act of Identity

By means of colorful examples and conversations, the author demonstrates how underrepresented staff – individuals of color, LGBTQ+ individuals, women, people with disabilities – soon understand to calibrate which persona will “pass”. A weakness becomes a disadvantage and people try too hard by striving to seem palatable. The practice of “showing your complete identity” becomes a projection screen on which all manner of assumptions are cast: emotional work, disclosure and continuous act of gratitude. As the author states, we are asked to reveal ourselves – but without the defenses or the reliance to withstand what arises.

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

Illustrative Story: The Story of Jason

Burey demonstrates this phenomenon through the story of an employee, a employee with hearing loss who chose to educate his colleagues about the culture of the deaf community and communication practices. His willingness to talk about his life – an act of openness the organization often commends as “authenticity” – briefly made everyday communications easier. But as Burey shows, that progress was precarious. When staff turnover eliminated the unofficial understanding Jason had built, the culture of access dissolved with it. “Everything he taught left with them,” he notes wearily. What remained was the fatigue of being forced to restart, of being held accountable for an organization’s educational process. From the author’s perspective, this demonstrates to be told to reveal oneself without protection: to risk vulnerability in a system that praises your honesty but declines to institutionalize it into procedure. Authenticity becomes a trap when organizations rely on personal sharing rather than organizational responsibility.

Literary Method and Concept of Dissent

The author’s prose is both clear and expressive. She blends intellectual rigor with a style of kinship: a call for followers to engage, to challenge, to oppose. According to the author, professional resistance is not overt defiance but ethical rejection – the effort of opposing uniformity in workplaces that require thankfulness for simple belonging. To dissent, from her perspective, is to challenge the accounts companies narrate about justice and inclusion, and to reject participation in rituals that perpetuate injustice. It could involve naming bias in a gathering, opting out of uncompensated “inclusion” labor, or establishing limits around how much of oneself is provided to the organization. Opposition, Burey indicates, is an assertion of personal dignity in spaces that often reward conformity. It constitutes a habit of principle rather than opposition, a way of asserting that one’s humanity is not based on institutional approval.

Restoring Sincerity

The author also avoids inflexible opposites. Her work does not simply discard “authenticity” wholesale: rather, she urges its reclamation. According to the author, genuineness is not simply the unrestricted expression of personality that business environment frequently praises, but a more thoughtful harmony between individual principles and personal behaviors – a honesty that resists manipulation by institutional demands. As opposed to viewing sincerity as a mandate to disclose excessively or adjust to cleansed standards of candor, the author encourages audience to keep the elements of it based on honesty, personal insight and moral understanding. From her perspective, the goal is not to give up on sincerity but to move it – to remove it from the corporate display practices and to connections and offices where trust, equity and responsibility make {