🔗 Share this article

Throughout the beginning sections of Authentic: The Myth of Bringing Your Full Self to Work, speaker Burey raises a critical point: typical injunctions to “come as you are” or “show up completely genuine at work” are far from well-meaning invitations for individuality – they often become snares. This initial publication – a combination of personal stories, studies, cultural commentary and conversations – seeks to unmask how businesses take over individual identity, shifting the burden of institutional change on to staff members who are frequently at risk.

Personal Journey and Broader Context

The motivation for the work stems partly in the author’s professional path: various roles across corporate retail, new companies and in worldwide progress, filtered through her background as a woman of color with a disability. The dual posture that Burey experiences – a push and pull between standing up for oneself and aiming for security – is the engine of the book.

It lands at a time of widespread exhaustion with institutional platitudes across the United States and internationally, as backlash to diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs mount, and numerous companies are reducing the very systems that earlier assured transformation and improvement. The author steps into that landscape to assert that retreating from corporate authenticity talk – specifically, the corporate language that reduces individuality as a collection of appearances, quirks and pastimes, keeping workers concerned with controlling how they are viewed rather than how they are regarded – is not the answer; rather, we should reinterpret it on our personal terms.

Marginalized Workers and the Display of Self

By means of vivid anecdotes and interviews, Burey illustrates how employees from minority groups – people of color, LGBTQ+ people, female employees, people with disabilities – learn early on to adjust which persona will “fit in”. A weakness becomes a drawback and people overcompensate by striving to seem agreeable. The act of “showing your complete identity” becomes a projection screen on which numerous kinds of expectations are projected: emotional work, revealing details and continuous act of gratitude. As the author states, we are asked to share our identities – but without the safeguards or the trust to survive what emerges.

As Burey explains, workers are told to share our identities – but lacking the protections or the trust to withstand what emerges.’

Illustrative Story: Jason’s Experience

The author shows this dynamic through the account of Jason, a employee with hearing loss who decided to educate his co-workers about deaf culture and communication norms. His readiness to talk about his life – a gesture of transparency the workplace often commends as “genuineness” – for a short time made everyday communications easier. But as Burey shows, that improvement was fragile. When personnel shifts eliminated the casual awareness the employee had developed, the environment of accessibility vanished. “All the information left with them,” he notes wearily. What was left was the exhaustion of being forced to restart, of having to take charge for an company’s developmental journey. In Burey’s view, this is what it means to be asked to expose oneself lacking safeguards: to face exposure in a system that applauds your transparency but declines to codify it into regulation. Authenticity becomes a snare when organizations rely on individual self-disclosure rather than institutional answerability.

Writing Style and Notion of Opposition

The author’s prose is at once understandable and lyrical. She marries scholarly depth with a style of solidarity: a call for audience to participate, to interrogate, to dissent. In Burey’s opinion, dissent at work is not noisy protest but principled refusal – the practice of rejecting sameness in environments that expect appreciation for basic acceptance. To oppose, in her framing, is to question the narratives companies tell about equity and inclusion, and to decline participation in rituals that perpetuate unfairness. It may appear as identifying prejudice in a gathering, opting out of unpaid “equity” effort, or establishing limits around how much of one’s personal life is offered to the institution. Opposition, the author proposes, is an declaration of self-respect in spaces that frequently reward obedience. It constitutes a habit of principle rather than defiance, a way of maintaining that one’s humanity is not conditional on corporate endorsement.

Restoring Sincerity

She also refuses inflexible opposites. Authentic avoids just toss out “genuineness” wholesale: rather, she advocates for its redefinition. According to the author, sincerity is not the unrestricted expression of character that business environment often celebrates, but a more thoughtful correspondence between personal beliefs and individual deeds – a honesty that opposes alteration by organizational requirements. As opposed to considering genuineness as a requirement to overshare or conform to sterilized models of openness, the author encourages followers to preserve the parts of it rooted in sincerity, individual consciousness and ethical clarity. From her perspective, the aim is not to abandon authenticity but to relocate it – to move it out of the boardroom’s performative rituals and into connections and organizations where reliance, equity and accountability make {