A Critique of Authentic Leadership - Literature Review
Should you be an Authentic Leader? Maybe Not.
Folks, I have a new favorite piece of literature! Jon Billsberry has written an amazing paper, and in this blog, I’m going to break down the context of the work, what I learned, and how it impacts me as a leader.
Here is Jon’s Site if you want to know more about the original author. He is one of the legendary few who openly shares PDF access to his library of first-author publications. This makes Jon epically punk rock, instantly makes him my hero, and I will be working my way through his library. If you like Jon’s writing as much as I do, you should too. You can find the original article linked off his site here.
This is Sage. She agrees with me, btw. Anyways. Read on sojourner of leadership!
Intro Lore
Authentic Leadership is one of many leadership constructions created and studied over the past decades. It is a relationship-focused approach centered on genuine, ethical behavior, self-awareness, and transparency, rather than just authority or hierarchy. An authentic leader fosters high-performing, engaged teams by aligning their actions with core values, demonstrating vulnerability, and building trust through open, consistent communication.
To explain Authentic Leadership in a broader context, I’ll have future blogs out on the history and evolution of leadership theory and how it stitches into the conceptual fabric. The framework has received critique in the literature, and those critiques were often not addressed in follow-on papers. Therefore, Billsberry has written a paper as a sort of “come together” for the field, setting the stage for interesting future discourse (Billsberry, 2024).
Previous reviews of the Authentic Leadership framework have positive results to share:
Authentic leaders make ethical decisions, have high psychological well-being, and role model positive behaviors.
Followers feel empowered, identify with their leader, and report higher job performance, satisfaction, trust, and engagement.
Organizations see strong financial performance, an ethical climate, and higher psychological safety.
Keep in mind that putting numbers to abstract organizational outcomes is very difficult. Small changes in definition can make two data sets incomparable.
The Critique: The “True Self” Trap
Authentic Leadership asks you to be vulnerable and be your “True Self.” You are told to find your beliefs and core values and bring them to the surface of your professional interactions.
The issue is that if you’re not the archetypal picture of a corporate leader, a cisgender white male from an elite education and a privileged background, then your core values and personal beliefs aren’t likely in perfect alignment with the organization.
The “Great Man Theory” tells us leaders have innate qualities that make them morally superior. While we moved away from that with modern psychology, focusing instead on how leaders impact those around them (like transformational or situational leadership), Authentic Leadership risks sliding back.
Broadening the implications, we inadvertently suggest that authentic leaders are morally and ethically superior. I’m paraphrasing Billsberry here, but this is imperative to spread: for anyone who isn’t the typical white, cisgender male leader, being “real” can cost you credibility. A study of LGBTQ leaders showed how expecting them to be “authentic” was often exhausting, invasive, and coercive (O’Rourke, 2024).
Atypical leaders often end up feeling pressured to wear a costume. You perform “leader” in a way that reads as acceptable. You’re allowed to be vulnerable, but only if it doesn’t make you seem weak. Instead of liberating the self, “authenticity” can become another form of control, binding people even tighter to emotional labor.
Authenticity as a Label, Not a Trait
Billsberry discusses these unresolved critiques and calls for the field to move forward. One of the suggestions, and I agree with this, is to look at authenticity as a follower label put onto the leader, not a style a leader can embody through personal decision.
Think about it this way: if someone says, “I’m cool,” that instantly makes them uncool. Coolness is a trait decided by the onlooker; authenticity is in the eye of the beholder.
When a follower describes a leader as authentic, they are expressing comfort, trust, and alignment. A lack of authenticity is related to feelings of betrayal or unmet expectations. Authentic leadership is not a style per se, but a cultural idiom followers use to judge moral legitimacy.
Personal Thoughts on Corporate Authenticity (my opinion not tied with Jon)
If I came to work and was my “true self” in any of my past roles, I’d likely have been fired from all of them. I have grown into a very direct person, but I put on a veil of manners, restraint, patience, and the physical uniform of a corporate professional.
Professionalism is a construct, a mask we wear. It is not always inclusive or innately diverse. It is often a performative ritual. I make a pledge to atypical leaders, or those aspiring to be: I will acknowledge my own privilege and spread more research about the intersection of leadership and being a real human who is not a white, cisgender, neurotypical male.
Actionable Steps for Leaders
Here are some thoughts on how to embrace the benefits of authenticity without making it about “yourself”:
Share your intent out loud.
“My intent here is X (protect the team / be transparent). What I’m optimizing for is Y.”
Tell the truth about constraints.
“We’re making this decision because we have a resource constraint. As soon as this is resolved, we will go back to the status quo. Does anyone have questions?”
Use a visible fairness process. Apply rules equally across the team and give everyone the same resources for success.
Share credit in public; take heat in public. You are the umbrella when things go wrong and the focusing lens when kudos are in order.
We discussed authentic leadership, powerful critiques of the framework, and professionalism as a construct. We learned how to bring aspects of authenticity into our practice without succumbing to the pitfalls of the “True Self” trap.
Until next time,
Dan
References
Billsberry, Jon. “Authentic Leadership: A Critical Review and Strategies for the Future.” Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies (2024). [Note: Assuming 2024 based on the “New favorite” context; please verify year if different.]
O’Rourke, S. “What we ask of authenticity: How LGBQ experiences illuminate the possibilities, constraints, and expectations of being an authentic leader.” Leadership 20, no. 5 (2024): 279-288.
Sinek, Simon. Start with Why: How Great Leaders Inspire Everyone to Take Action. New York: Portfolio, 2009.
Three Thoughts on Bolstering Transparent Communication
Don’t Think For Your Team - Training Critical Thinking
Learn more about me at www.dankours.com
Learn more about my project at www.kestryledge.com
@People Pleaser Rehab Let me know what you think. This literature article changed how I think about authenticity and authentic leadership.