THE AUTHENTICITY PARADOX: LEADERSHIP PERSPECTIVE

The ultimate standard for leadership has become authenticity. However, a misunderstanding of what it signifies might stifle your progress and limit your influence. We tend to use authenticity as an explanation for sticking with what's comfortable because going against our natural impulses might make us feel like impostors. However, few occupations allow us to do so for an extended period. This is especially true as we develop in our occupations and as needs and expectations change. 

To succeed in our careers, we must all step outside of our comfort zones. At the same time, they elicit a powerful counter-instinct to preserve our identities: We typically resort to familiar behaviours and patterns when we are unsure of ourselves or our abilities to perform effectively or measure up in a new context. The situations that test our sense of self the most are the ones that may teach us the most about effective leadership. We may establish a personal style that feels right to us and matches our companies' shifting demands by perceiving ourselves as works in progress and refining our professional identities via trial and error.


WHY DO LEADERS HAVE A HARD TIME BEING AUTHENTIC?


The term "authentic" is used to refer to any work of art that is an original rather than a reproduction. Of course, when used to define leadership, it has additional connotations that can be problematic. The idea of sticking to one's "real self," for example, contradicts significant research on how people change with experience, uncovering aspects of themselves that they would never have discovered via introspection alone. Being completely transparent—revealing every single thought and emotion—is both unrealistic and dangerous.

For a variety of reasons, today's leaders struggle with authenticity. First, we shift the types of tasks we undertake more frequently and with greater radiance. A clear and firm sense of self is a compass that helps us navigate choices and advance toward our goals as we attempt to better our game. When we're trying to improve our game, however, a strict self-concept can act as a stumbling block.

Second, many of us work in a global company with people who do not share our cultural norms and have different expectations of how we should act. It may appear that we must choose between what is expected—and so effective—and what feels genuine. 

Third, in today's age of omnipresent connectivity and social media, people's identities are constantly on show. How we show ourselves as people, with idiosyncrasies and broader interests, rather than just as CEOs, has become a crucial component of leadership. Having to carefully curate a public character can be incompatible with our intimate sense of self. 


SITUATIONS WHERE MOST LEADERS STRUGGLE WITH AUTHENTICITY:

  • Taking command in a new situation: As everyone knows, the first 90 days in a new leadership position are crucial. First impressions are important because they are formed rapidly. Leaders react to greater visibility and performance pressure in different ways depending on their personalities. The University of Minnesota's psychologist Mark Snyder found two psychological characteristics that influence how leaders establish their styles. "High self-monitors"—or chameleons, as I like to call them—are naturally able and willing to adjust to the needs of a scenario without being phoney. Chameleons are conscious of their public image and frequently use bluster to hide their fragility. They may not always get it perfect the first time, but they keep trying on different styles until they find one that works for them and their circumstances. They frequently advance quickly as a result of their versatility. However, even when they're revealing their "real" chameleon nature, chameleons can face challenges if people regard them as deceitful or lacking in moral centre.
  • Processing of negative feedback: When successful executives take on higher roles or responsibilities, they often receive meaningful negative criticism for the first time in their careers. Even if the objections aren't technically new, the stakes are higher, therefore they loom larger. Leaders, on the other hand, frequently convince themselves that problematic features of their "natural" style are an unavoidable cost of success. 
  • Promoting your concepts along with yourself: When it comes to leadership development, it's common to go from having solid ideas to proposing them to a variety of stakeholders. Inexperienced leaders, particularly true-to-sellers, dislike the process of gaining buy-in because it feels artificial and political; they believe their work should stand on its own. We have problems feeling real when showcasing our strengths to prominent people until we perceive professional growth as a way of extending our reach and growing our effect in the organization—a group victory, not just a selfish ambition. True-to-sellers have a particularly difficult time selling themselves to senior management when they are yet untested. However, research suggests that this uncertainty fades as people gain experience and grow more confident in the value they provide.
  • A playful mindset: Too much reflection can lead to such a rigid self-concept. When we solely search within for answers, we unintentionally reinforce old worldviews and outmoded self-perceptions. Habitual habits of thought and conduct box us in without the benefit of what I call outsight—the beneficial external viewpoint we gain through trying new leadership practices. To start thinking like a leader, we must first take action: dive into new initiatives and activities, engage with a wide range of people, and try out new methods of doing things. Thinking and introspection should come after the experience, not the other way around, especially in times of transition and uncertainty. We transform who we are and what we believe is worthwhile when we take action.

CONCLUSION: 

Each time you go on to greater and better things, our leadership identity may and should alter. We can only grow as leaders by pushing the boundaries of who we are—doing new things that make us uncomfortable but teaching us who we want to be via direct experience. Such development does not necessitate a complete personality transformation. Small changes in how we hold ourselves, speak, and interact can make a big difference in how effective we are as leaders.


REFERENCES:

https://hbr.org/2015/01/the-authenticity-paradox

https://challengingcoaching.co.uk/the-authenticity-paradox-can-we-be-too-authentic/

https://ideas.ted.com/yes-good-leaders-are-authentic-leaders-but-heres-what-that-actually-means/

 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

CONFLICT OF INTEREST IN APPOINTMENT

INTRODUCTION: When an individual applies for any position in the public/private sector it is a must for him/her to get fully familiar with the ethics and laws of the government, and protect the moral values and principles of the organization at all costs. On the other hand, it is the work of the department to invest in the individual who can serve integrity and meet the probity principle. Because the appointment of individuals in the public sector is always considered a high-risk area for conflict of interest situations. WHAT IS A CONFLICT OF INTEREST SITUATION IN THE APPOINTMENT? An individual who is bounded to serve an organization or any government organization should be able to work on the principles such as selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty, leadership, and commitment to the highest standards of propriety and impartiality. And the individual with such qualities should be considered the ideal candidate for the position. But the involvement of c
Read more

ETHICAL ANALYSIS OF CORPORATE FRAUDS

As many prominent firms continue to be tarnished by a slew of scandals and frauds, business ethics is critical. Corporate fraud results in the loss of a company's market capitalization and brand image. They are disturbingly common in a variety of countries and sectors of the economy. Corporate fraud has a long and tumultuous history in India. For decades, ethics has been a grey area in Indian corporations. As competition has become stronger over time, organizational structures have been increasingly fragmented, resulting in a lack of internal control within organizations. As a result, the number of large and small corporate frauds has increased. To combat this threat, early detection is becoming increasingly vital. According to a PWC survey, internal controls, internal and external audits, compliance programs, and a code of ethics have all been implemented to combat fraud. In India, corporate fraud has increased dramatically in the past few years, and firms, strangely, believe it i
Read more

ETHICS AND TERRORISM

Ethics has a critical, if often unacknowledged, role in the majority, if not all, concerns relating to terrorism and political violence. These are frequently most visible in counterterrorism debates but are frequently lacking from conversations concerning academic research practice. At the very least, ethical questions of terrorism have rarely been publicly addressed directly or thoroughly.    Meaning of terrorism: Terrorism is defined as the unlawful use of force or violence against people or property in order to frighten or coerce a government or its populace into pursuing specific political or social goals. Domestic and international terrorism are usually recognized by law enforcement. Thus, the use of violence, intimidation, or the threat of violence against a person or a (large) group in order to achieve political, ideological, social, or religious goals by putting pressure on or intimidating another group of people or another individual to carry out actions they would otherwise o
Read more