🔗 Share this article

In the initial chapters of the publication Authentic, writer the author poses a challenge: typical injunctions to “bring your true self” or “bring your full, authentic self to work” are not harmless encouragements for individuality – they’re traps. Burey’s debut book – a blend of personal stories, investigation, societal analysis and discussions – aims to reveal how companies take over individual identity, shifting the weight of corporate reform on to staff members who are frequently at risk.

Professional Experience and Wider Environment

The impetus for the book lies partially in Burey’s personal work history: various roles across business retail, emerging businesses and in worldwide progress, viewed through her experience as a Black disabled woman. The dual posture that the author encounters – a back-and-forth between asserting oneself and looking for safety – is the driving force of Authentic.

It lands at a period of general weariness with institutional platitudes across the US and beyond, as resistance to diversity and inclusion efforts mount, and many organizations are scaling back the very structures that previously offered transformation and improvement. The author steps into that terrain to argue that backing away from the language of authenticity – namely, the corporate language that trivializes identity as a grouping of aesthetics, idiosyncrasies and pastimes, keeping workers focused on controlling how they are perceived rather than how they are handled – is not an effective response; we must instead redefine it on our individual conditions.

Minority Staff and the Display of Identity

Through colorful examples and conversations, the author demonstrates how employees from minority groups – employees from diverse backgrounds, LGBTQ+ people, women workers, employees with disabilities – quickly realize to calibrate which self will “be acceptable”. A vulnerability becomes a disadvantage and people overcompensate by working to appear agreeable. The effort of “presenting your true self” becomes a reflective surface on which numerous kinds of assumptions are projected: emotional work, sharing personal information and ongoing display of thankfulness. As the author states, employees are requested to share our identities – but without the protections or the reliance to withstand what arises.

‘In Burey’s words, workers are told to share our identities – but absent the safeguards or the trust to survive what comes out.’

Case Study: Jason’s Experience

Burey demonstrates this phenomenon through the account of Jason, a hearing-impaired staff member who chose to teach his colleagues about the culture of the deaf community and communication practices. His readiness to share his experience – an act of transparency the organization often praises as “sincerity” – for a short time made routine exchanges smoother. Yet, the author reveals, that improvement was unstable. After staff turnover eliminated the unofficial understanding he had established, the atmosphere of inclusion dissolved with it. “All of that knowledge departed with those employees,” he notes wearily. What was left was the fatigue of being forced to restart, of being made responsible for an organization’s educational process. In Burey’s view, this demonstrates to be requested to reveal oneself lacking safeguards: to face exposure in a structure that praises your transparency but fails to institutionalize it into policy. Authenticity becomes a pitfall when organizations depend on personal sharing rather than structural accountability.

Writing Style and Notion of Opposition

Her literary style is at once understandable and poetic. She combines scholarly depth with a manner of connection: a call for audience to lean in, to challenge, to dissent. For Burey, dissent at work is not overt defiance but moral resistance – the act of rejecting sameness in environments that demand appreciation for mere inclusion. To resist, according to her view, is to interrogate the stories institutions narrate about equity and acceptance, and to reject engagement in customs that maintain unfairness. It may appear as calling out discrimination in a discussion, choosing not to participate of uncompensated “equity” labor, or setting boundaries around how much of one’s personal life is made available to the institution. Resistance, Burey indicates, is an declaration of individual worth in settings that often reward obedience. It is a discipline of integrity rather than opposition, a way of asserting that one’s humanity is not dependent on organizational acceptance.

Restoring Sincerity

Burey also rejects inflexible opposites. Her work avoids just discard “sincerity” wholesale: rather, she calls for its restoration. For Burey, genuineness is not simply the unfiltered performance of individuality that corporate culture frequently praises, but a more thoughtful alignment between one’s values and one’s actions – an integrity that resists alteration by institutional demands. As opposed to treating authenticity as a directive to disclose excessively or adjust to sterilized models of transparency, Burey advises followers to keep the aspects of it based on sincerity, individual consciousness and ethical clarity. In her view, the goal is not to abandon sincerity but to move it – to move it out of the corporate display practices and to interactions and offices where confidence, fairness and responsibility make {