If it’s signed off by three committees, it’s not candid anymore
We need to talk about what has happened to the word ‘authentic’.
For years, the gold standard of leadership communication has been to drop the corporate jargon, be human, and show vulnerability. It’s advice we’ve probably all given as internal comms pros. But along the way, something got lost in translation.
And the result is that we’ve entered the exhausting era of forced authenticity. It’s like the effortless look you see on social media … it’s not effortless - it actually takes a lot of work to make something look so effortless.
We all know exactly what it looks like: the beautifully lit video of a senior leader in a casual hoodie, sitting on a stool, looking thoughtfully off-camera. They speak with pauses that feel just a little too deliberate. The tone is emotive, yet somehow, every single sentence sounds like it was written by an agency, scrubbed by legal, and signed off by a brand committee. And I know how hard this is, because Grace and I attempt it every week in our Monday morning reminder videos. Too scripted? Not scripted enough? Ok background? Were we honest enough? It’s hard work.
The problem is, employees have incredibly sharp rubbish detectors. When they see a performance of vulnerability, they don’t feel connected, at best they feel nonplussed, at worst they feel manipulated.
The science of surface acting
There is a wealth of organisational psychology backing this up. Researchers often study the concept of ‘surface acting’ versus ‘deep acting’ in leadership.
Surface acting is when a leader puts on an emotional mask, like forcing a sad face or pretending to be candid, to achieve a certain corporate result.
Deep acting is when a leader actually aligns their internal values with their external message, genuinely reshaping their perspective.
Research shows that employees are incredibly sensitive to surface acting. When they detect that a leader is performing vulnerability for strategic effect, trust plummets.
In fact, the global Edelman Trust Barometer consistently highlights that in times of economic and societal anxiety, employees don't want polished, emotional executive statements. They want factual transparency and structural stability. They want to know what the business is doing, not just how the CEO feels about it.
As Brené Brown famously established, vulnerability is the birthplace of connection. But in a corporate setting, we often forget the second half of that equation: vulnerability without boundaries is not vulnerability.
When a leader shares their personal anxieties in a town hall without offering a clear plan of action, it creates panic (not connection). Employees look to leadership for stability, not to carry the emotional weight of the executive team. There’s a difference.
So, to align our values with our communication, perhaps we have to realise that true authenticity in internal comms isn't about raw, unbounded emotion. It is actually about predictability. It is about stability.
How to rescue real communication
If we want to build genuine trust, we have to stop trying to make every corporate announcement feel like an intimate, cinematic fireside chat. Instead of chasing authentic-looking content, relatable honesty is where we should focus our efforts.
Sometimes, a plain text email that simply says, ‘We don’t have all the answers to this yet, but here is exactly when we will update you next,’ is the most human, trustworthy thing a leader can write.
Let's leave the polished performances to the actors. In internal comms, the most powerful tool we have is just telling the truth, plainly.
