How Women Navigate Code-Switching and Constrained Authenticity

By Kaylin Baker-Fields

“Bring your whole self to work.”

For many women — particularly those from marginalized communities —this modern leadership mantra can feel less empowering than perilous. Authenticity, in practice, often comes with real professional risk. Instead of signaling inclusion, “showing up fully” can expose women to bias, microaggressions, and cultural misinterpretation.

Compounding this tension is code-switching: the conscious or unconscious adjustment of language, behavior, or self-presentation to align with dominant workplace norms. While often invisible, this constant recalibration carries a measurable emotional and cognitive toll.

For Black women, code-switching may involve altering hairstyles or speech patterns to avoid harmful stereotypes. For Indigenous women, it can mean muting cultural references to prevent tokenization. For immigrant women, minimizing accents or traditional dress to sidestep assumptions about competence. For LGBTQ+ women, concealing parts of identity to reduce the risk of judgment or exclusion.

Across these experiences lies a shared truth: authenticity is frequently constrained by the need for safety.

The hidden costs are significant. Research published in Harvard Business Review by Courtney McCluney and colleagues characterizes code-switching as a “survival strategy” that demands sustained cognitive effort — often contributing to burnout, diminished job satisfaction, and stalled career progression. Additional findings in the Academy of Management Review link identity masking to emotional exhaustion and reduced innovation.

Recent research reinforces this pattern. A 2025 study in the SA Journal of Industrial Psychology found that job insecurity drives employees to adopt “facades of conformity,” mediating increases in emotional exhaustion and disengagement. While masking may temporarily ease strain in psychologically safe environments, it deepens stress when safety is absent.

Together, these findings point to a systemic issue. 

Despite well-intentioned diversity efforts, many workplaces continue to operate within narrow definitions of “professionalism” — standards that privilege certain identities, communication styles, and cultural norms over others.

Against this backdrop, authentic leadership cannot be framed as an individual courage problem. It is not about asking women to be braver, louder, or more exposed.

It is about redesigning workplace cultures so safety and belonging are non-negotiable. Leaders must expand their understanding of professionalism, value multiple modes of expression, and build environments where success does not depend on self-erasure.

Authenticity is not about bringing every part of yourself into the room. It is about not being required to leave essential parts behind.

Which raises a more fundamental question: what would it take for authenticity at work to be a right — not a risk.