How leaders find the balance between adapting to others and being true to themselves

For years, leaders have been told that ”being true to themselves” and “ignoring what others think” represent the gold standard of effective leadership, a kind of moral and emotional north star. But in practice, this type of advice often gets leaders into trouble.

For a vivid illustration, consider how two famous fictional (yet hyper-realistic) characters, namely Don Draper (Madmen) and Michael Scott (The Office) embody these two mantras. Draper clings to a rigid, unchanging identity, using “this is who I am” as armor to avoid confronting his insecurities, while Scott approaches management with unfiltered candor, oversharing, and acting on impulse. Both believe they are being true to themselves, so others should appreciate it, but in reality they are trapped behind a rigid self-protective shield that excuses poor judgment and blocks growth.

The real problem arises not so much from being untrue to themselves, but rather, from mis-calibrating how they show up, mistaking self-expression for effectiveness. Leaders who are reduced to this kind of pattern routinely erode trust, exhaust their teams, and undermine their own influence while sincerely believing they are acting with genuineness and integrity.

As psychological research shows, every leader carries internal narratives shaped by early experiences about how to stay safe, earn belonging, or manage uncertainty. These narratives result in behavioral patterns that were once adaptive. But over time, they harden into identity (“this is just who I am”) and limit leaders’ flexibility and versatility.

Leaders are therefore presented with a difficult psychological choice, namely: (a) to resist pressures to conform, and act without consideration for what others think, but, in doing so, risk alienating or antagonizing others; or (b) to adjust their behavior to meet the situational demands—mostly, what other people want and need from them—but risk alienating . . . themselves.

The question, then, is how leaders can skillfully navigate the intricate balance between their self-expression needs and their obligation to others. To this end, here are a few science-based recommendations to consider:

Communicate with greater precision and empathy

Leaders don’t struggle because they speak the truth, but because they speak it without intention, timing, or attunement. Balancing candor with empathy is the discipline of telling the truth in ways that preserve dignity, empathy, and trust. Here’s how:

1. Pair honesty with intention. Before speaking hard truths, ask: “What impact do I want this message to have?” Clarifying intent helps you choose language that builds trust rather than simply offloading what’s on your mind. Think of it as an emotional aim: honesty without intention is like firing an arrow without checking what or who is behind the target.
2. Slow the reflex. If you feel urgency to “just say it,” pause. Urgency often signals an activated trigger, not clarity. This is your mind’s equivalent of a car engine revving too hot; giving it a moment prevents you from speeding into the wrong lane. Use that pause to let adrenaline fall and cognition rise.
3. Practice “empathetic accuracy.” Test your instincts by naming what others might feel, then adjust your delivery in service of effectiveness, not self-expression. Great communicators act like emotional cartographers, mapping the terrain before entering it so they know where the cliffs, rivers, and fragile bridges are.

Regulate emotion before you express it

Vulnerability builds trust only when it is regulated, purposeful, and contained. Grounded vulnerability allows leaders to be real without turning their teams into emotional shock absorbers or co-regulators. Here’s how:

1. Share what is useful, not what is unfiltered. Vulnerability should serve others, not the leader’s emotional relief. Raw disclosure is not always courageous; sometimes it is simply an emotional data dump that burdens the listener. Useful vulnerability, by contrast, is like offering a compass: personal, yes, but handed over with the intent to orient others, not to lighten your own load.
2. Do emotional processing upstream. Use peers, mentors, or therapists as your primary space, not your colleagues. This preserves your team’s psychological safety while still giving you the support you need. Upstream processing allows you to show up composed, thoughtful, and ready to metabolize complexity on behalf of others rather than through them. For example, employees often report feeling “emotionally hijacked” when leaders vent openly about board pressure or uncertainty, unsure whether they are being informed or enlisted as emotional support.
3. Replace unloading with grounding. Before sharing, ask: “Is this helpful to them? Or helpful to me?” Grounding yourself first allows you to express vulnerability as perspective, not pressure. Think of grounding as fastening your oxygen mask before assisting others: when you regulate your own emotional state, your words become stabilizing rather than contagious. Leaders who ground themselves create a conversational climate where honesty feels safe instead of sharp.

Balance identity with adaptability

Many leaders confuse integrity with sameness. True reliability comes not from repeating the same behaviors, but from expressing the same values with greater responsiveness and emotional range. Here’s how:

1. Redefine consistency. Anchor to values, not behaviors. Values stay largely steady; behaviors can evolve. When leaders treat consistency as performing the same behaviors in every situation, they confuse predictability with rigidity. True consistency comes from being reliably guided by the same principles even as contexts shift.
2. Try 10% adjustments. Micro-flexibility builds confidence without threatening identity. A modest shift in tone, timing, or format can expand your influence far more than sweeping reinventions, demonstrating that authenticity and adaptability can coexist.
3. Name what rigidity protects. When you feel resistant, ask: “What part of me feels endangered right now?” Identifying the fear beneath the resistance opens the door to more adaptive choices. This self-reflection keeps self-expression honest while ensuring that protective impulses do not override responsibilities to the people they lead.

Demonstrate values with judgment, not dogma

Strong values don’t require rigid postures. Moral maturity allows leaders to stand for what matters while remaining curious, connected, and oriented toward collective impact rather than personal righteousness. Here’s how:

1. Distinguish values from validation. Ask: “Am I standing in a principle or hiding behind it?” This distinguishes conviction from ego. By interrogating whether a stance is truly principle-driven or simply self-affirming, leaders prevent rigid authenticity from becoming a shield for stubbornness.
2. Expand the aperture of “right.” Seek nuance in situations that challenge your certainty. Curiosity reduces the need to treat disagreement as a moral referendum. By widening their interpretive frame, leaders move from defending their identity to understanding the system they are operating in.
3. Prioritize impact over insistence. Sometimes the most ethical choice is the one that maintains relationships, not the one that wins the argument. Insisting on being right can satisfy the ego but damage the social fabric leaders rely on to get things done. 

In short, if you are interested in being a better leader who is true to her/himself, focus on being your best possible self rather than your unfiltered or uncensored self. Why? Because the less you care about your reputation, the more others will care—and not in a good way.

Leadership is fundamentally relational, so leaders’ professional selves must be optimized to the needs of others. People don’t need leaders to share every inner thought but to provide clarity, stability, and a responsible, human presence. Effective leaders prioritize impact over self-expression and treat authenticity as an active, intentional process. By contrast, misguided self-expression creates friction that slows decisions, distorts information, and weakens execution, even in otherwise capable teams.

The best leaders commit to continuous improvement and becoming more effective in their roles.​​ This demands self-awareness and emotional intelligence, recognizing what traits to emphasize or adjust to meet the moment’s demands. Instead of unfiltered self-expression, leaders engage in thoughtful self-presentation tailored to the collective needs of their teams and organizations. As a result, leaders’ professional reputation becomes a practiced skill of managing how to show up powerfully while staying true to core values, not a static identity to be discovered or defended at all costs.​

In summary, effective leadership is less about rigid self-identity and more about strategic self-curation aimed at adaptive effectiveness and relational impact. Leaders who understand this evolve beyond trapped patterns and refine themselves to lead with clarity, competence, and integrity.