Breaking the Mask

By Kaylin Baker-Fields

“Bring your whole self to work.”

For many women – especially those from marginalized communities – the modern leadership principle of “showing up fully” can feel disingenuous. Being authentic often comes with real risks for them. Instead of feeling empowered, “showing up fully” can actually make them vulnerable and exposed to bias, micro-aggressions, and cultural misunderstandings.

Adding to this complexity is the phenomenon of code-switching. This involves adapting one’s speech, behavior, or expression to align with dominant workplace norms. This often invisible, yet, constant balancing act can be incredibly taxing, demanding an emotional and mental toll from those who engage in it.

For Black women, code-switching might mean changing hairstyles to avoid harmful stereotypes. For Indigenous women, it might mean softening cultural references to prevent tokenization. For immigrant women, it might mean minimizing accents or traditional dress to sidestep assumptions about competence. For LGBTQ+ women, it might mean concealing aspects of identity to avoid judgment or exclusion.

Across these experiences lies a shared truth: authenticity is often constrained by a desire for safety.

The hidden costs are profound. A Harvard Business Review article by Courtney McCluney and colleagues describes code-switching as a “survival strategy” that demands constant cognitive effort, often leading to burnout, lower job satisfaction, and stalled career advancement. Other research in the Academy of Management Review has shown that masking or suppressing one’s identity at work can lead to emotional exhaustion and discourage innovation. More importantly, these patterns reveal a deeper issue: workplaces, despite good intentions, are still built around narrow definitions of “professionalism” that privilege some identities over others.

Meanwhile, a 2025 study in the SA Journal of Industrial Psychology reveals that job insecurity drives employees to adopt “facades of conformity,” which mediates rises in emotional exhaustion and disengagement. This research also suggests masking might momentarily ease strain, but only when the environment supports psychological safety; otherwise, it deepens stress. What truly matters is that these combined findings underscore a pattern: workplaces, despite good intentions, still embed narrow definitions of “professionalism” that privilege some identities over others.

So what does authentic leadership look like in this context? It’s not about asking individuals to “be braver” or to “show up more fully.” It’s about building workplace cultures where safety and belonging aren’t negotiable. Leaders need to expand the frame of what professionalism looks like, value different forms of expression, and create environments where no one feels their career depends on shrinking themselves.

Authenticity isn’t about bringing all of yourself into the room; it’s about not being forced to leave essential parts behind.

That raises the deeper question: What would it take for authenticity at work to be a right, not a risk?