“Bringing your whole self to work” has passed into workplace orthodoxy. CEOs on both sides of the Atlantic routinely talk about the need for truth or authenticity in leadership. Hanneke Willenborg is the CEO of supplement manufacturer Olly, a Unilever firm. She speaks passionately about the need to “show up real” in the workplace. Macy’s boss Jeff Gennette wants his people to bring their “authentic selves” to work a view shared by Bill George, former CEO of Medtronic and now faculty at Harvard. George describes his latest book as a “clarion call to lead with authenticity.”
These management mantras sound compelling, and I do believe they point to the essential humanity of the leaders who use them. But what do they mean? What does bringing your whole self to work look like in practice? How do you show up “real” or “authentic” in the workplace, or in any situation for that matter? More importantly, how useful are these kinds of dictates to leaders grappling with the everyday realities of the job?
I believe there is a critical distinction between the notions of self and role; between “me the person” and “me the person in a role.” I also believe that we underestimate the power of context in determining how we show up in role.
So, what do I mean by that? Let’s start by unpacking the idea of “role.”
What is role?
I recently worked with a senior executive at a multinational in his mid-40s who was promoted to CEO. Alex had always presented himself as a congenial guy, willing and able to articulate and share his feelings. Shifting gears into this new role, Alex was struggling to modify these behaviors, which in turn were at risk of becoming destabilizing to his team. Talking it through together, he understood that his new role required him to be less articulate about his emotions. Sure, his former colleagues, now subordinates, might think he’d become a real jerk. But these would be their projections onto Alex in role, not onto Alex as a person. And the role required him to show up differently.
What does this tell us about role?
In social psychology, the concept of role helps us to define what’s different or unique about ourselves in a social situation or context. Role has many layers to it. It can include formal roles (e.g. job titles) but it can also be roles as they relate to other people (peer, sibling, friend, boss, parent, child, subordinate). There’s an even deeper layer which relates to social roles: the behaviors we use or the way we show up in a particular role –jocular, authoritative, empathic or studiously neutral.
Social roles suggest that we never bring our entire selves to any situation. Instead, we deploy different parts of ourselves – different colors from the palette of our identity or personality, so to speak – depending on the needs and exigencies of the different roles and contexts that we inhabit. Think about it. Are you the same (whole) self when you are interacting with a family member, sibling or spouse as you are when you are talking to your team, supervisory board, or workforce? Or do you bring in different dimensions of your identity – your warm side, your critical side, your subordinate side, or sometimes your more strident, bullish side – according to the requirements of the role and the circumstances?