🔗 Share this article

Within the beginning sections of the publication Authentic, speaker Jodi-Ann Burey raises a critical point: typical injunctions to “bring your true self” or “bring your full, authentic self to work” are not harmless encouragements for individuality – they’re traps. This initial publication – a blend of personal stories, studies, cultural commentary and conversations – aims to reveal how companies take over individual identity, moving the responsibility of corporate reform on to individual workers who are already vulnerable.

Professional Experience and Broader Context

The impetus for the publication lies partially in Burey’s own career trajectory: multiple jobs across business retail, emerging businesses and in global development, filtered through her background as a woman of color with a disability. The two-fold position that the author encounters – a tension between asserting oneself and seeking protection – is the driving force of her work.

It emerges at a period of general weariness with corporate clichés across the United States and internationally, as backlash to diversity and inclusion efforts mount, and numerous companies are cutting back the very systems that previously offered transformation and improvement. Burey delves into that arena to contend that withdrawing from corporate authenticity talk – namely, the organizational speech that reduces individuality as a grouping of appearances, quirks and hobbies, forcing workers concerned with handling how they are seen rather than how they are regarded – is not the answer; instead, we need to redefine it on our personal terms.

Marginalized Workers and the Act of Identity

By means of detailed stories and conversations, Burey illustrates how marginalized workers – people of color, LGBTQ+ people, women, disabled individuals – quickly realize to modulate which self will “be acceptable”. A weakness becomes a disadvantage and people overcompensate by striving to seem palatable. The effort of “bringing your full self” becomes a reflective surface on which numerous kinds of assumptions are cast: emotional work, revealing details and ongoing display of appreciation. In Burey’s words, we are asked to reveal ourselves – but lacking the safeguards or the confidence to withstand what emerges.

According to the author, workers are told to expose ourselves – but without the protections or the trust to withstand what arises.’

Illustrative Story: An Employee’s Journey

She illustrates this dynamic through the narrative of Jason, a employee with hearing loss who took it upon himself to teach his team members about deaf culture and communication practices. His willingness to talk about his life – a gesture of candor the office often praises as “genuineness” – temporarily made everyday communications smoother. But as Burey shows, that progress was fragile. After personnel shifts erased the informal knowledge he had established, the culture of access dissolved with it. “All of that knowledge left with them,” he notes wearily. What was left was the fatigue of being forced to restart, of being held accountable for an institution’s learning curve. From the author’s perspective, this illustrates to be requested to expose oneself lacking safeguards: to endanger oneself in a system that applauds your transparency but declines to formalize it into procedure. Authenticity becomes a snare when companies rely on individual self-disclosure rather than organizational responsibility.

Author’s Approach and Notion of Opposition

The author’s prose is both clear and expressive. She blends intellectual rigor with a style of connection: a call for audience to participate, to challenge, to oppose. For Burey, dissent at work is not noisy protest but moral resistance – the act of rejecting sameness in environments that expect appreciation for mere inclusion. To oppose, from her perspective, is to interrogate the accounts companies describe about equity and inclusion, and to refuse engagement in practices that perpetuate inequity. It could involve identifying prejudice in a gathering, opting out of unpaid “equity” effort, or defining borders around how much of one’s personal life is provided to the organization. Dissent, she suggests, is an affirmation of self-respect in settings that typically encourage compliance. It represents a discipline of principle rather than opposition, a approach of asserting that a person’s dignity is not dependent on corporate endorsement.

Restoring Sincerity

She also refuses rigid dichotomies. Authentic avoids just toss out “sincerity” entirely: on the contrary, she advocates for its reclamation. According to the author, sincerity is far from the raw display of character that organizational atmosphere typically applauds, but a more intentional harmony between individual principles and one’s actions – a principle that resists distortion by corporate expectations. As opposed to viewing sincerity as a mandate to disclose excessively or adjust to sterilized models of transparency, Burey urges audience to maintain the parts of it grounded in truth-telling, self-awareness and moral understanding. From her perspective, the aim is not to give up on authenticity but to move it – to move it out of the corporate display practices and toward relationships and offices where reliance, equity and responsibility make {