The Dual Mandate: Executive Presence vs. Authenticity

I have had the luxury of attending many events with incredible speakers and to explore and workshop great development and growth topics. I have gained so much value from each out and have always left with some gem that has changed my career and my life forever.

Sometimes, in the churn of great intentions, these topics can conflict with one another and even conflict with the guidance that you might receive from mentors and leaders that you admire. One example is the guidance to improve your executive presence with guidance on posture, eye contact, and where you might place yourself in the room or at the table. A conflicting message is presented with the much celebrated teachings of Brene Brown encouraging us all to be vulnerable in our glorious awkwardness. So, which is it?

In the world of business leadership, two terms often get thrown around with great frequency: "executive presence" and "authenticity." Both are touted as essential qualities for success, yet they can often seem at odds with one another. Leaders want their teams to exhibit executive presence, which typically means displaying confidence, control, and a polished demeanor. At the same time, they encourage authenticity, urging team members to be genuine, transparent, and true to themselves. So, what happens when these two directives clash? Let's dive into this leadership dilemma and explore the balance between these seemingly contradictory expectations.

Executive Presence

Executive presence is all about the image you project. It’s the ability to inspire confidence and command respect. This often involves:

• Appearance: Dressing appropriately and professionally.

• Communication: Speaking clearly, confidently, and concisely.

• Behavior: Demonstrating composure, decisiveness, and strategic thinking.

In a survey conducted by the Center for Talent Innovation, executive presence accounted for 26% of what it takes to get promoted . This highlights its significant role in career advancement.

Authenticity

On the flip side, authenticity is about being true to oneself. It involves:

• Transparency: Being open and honest about your thoughts and feelings.

• Genuineness: Acting in ways that are true to your values and personality.

• Relatability: Building trust through genuine interactions.

Research from Harvard Business Review suggests that authentic leadership can lead to higher levels of employee engagement and performance . People are more likely to follow leaders who are perceived as genuine and trustworthy.

The Conflict

Herein lies the conflict: how can one project an image that might not entirely align with their true self? Let’s break down some of the key areas of tension:

1. Appearance vs. Individuality:

• Executive presence often demands a specific, polished appearance. However, this can clash with an individual’s personal style or cultural expressions. For instance, a leader may feel pressured to wear a suit to convey authority, even if they feel more authentic in casual attire.

1. Controlled Communication vs. Honest Dialogue:

• Effective leaders are expected to communicate strategically, often glossing over uncertainties to maintain confidence. This can conflict with the authenticity of sharing vulnerabilities or admitting mistakes.

1. Behavioral Expectations vs. Personal Values:

• Executive presence encourages behaviors like decisiveness and assertiveness, which might not align with a person’s natural inclinations. For example, someone who values collaboration and consensus might struggle with the expectation to make unilateral decisions.

Striking the Balance

So, how can leaders and their teams navigate these conflicting demands? Here are a few strategies:

1. Find the Overlap:

• Identify areas where executive presence and authenticity can coexist. For example, you can communicate confidently while still being transparent about challenges.

1. Flexibility in Presentation:

• Encourage a range of professional appearances that allow for personal expression while maintaining a standard of professionalism. This can help individuals feel more comfortable and authentic.

1. Authentic Executive Presence:

• Redefine executive presence to include qualities like empathy, humility, and vulnerability. This broader definition allows for a more authentic expression of leadership.

1. Role Modeling:

• Leaders should model how to balance these qualities. When senior leaders demonstrate both executive presence and authenticity, it sets a powerful example for the rest of the organization.

Conclusion

The tension between executive presence and authenticity is a common challenge in leadership. However, by acknowledging this conflict and striving for balance, leaders can create an environment where their teams feel empowered to be both professional and genuine. This balance not only enhances individual satisfaction but can also drive organizational success.

As we continue to navigate the complexities of modern leadership, let’s remember that the most compelling leaders are those who can project confidence while staying true to their authentic selves. After all, as Oscar Wilde famously said, "Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."

References:

1. Center for Talent Innovation. (2013). Executive Presence: The Missing Link Between Merit and Success. Link

2. Harvard Business Review. (2015). Authentic Leadership Can Be Bad Leadership. Link

Navigating the intricate balance between executive presence and authenticity is a journey. It's about finding that sweet spot where you can lead effectively without losing sight of who you truly are. What are your thoughts on balancing these qualities in leadership? Let's continue the conversation!