The consequences of being myself: Understanding authenticity and psychological safety for LGB employees

Abstract

Although workplace authenticity has gained interest by researchers and the popular press, the construct's conceptualization as enacting only positive effects as informed by self-verification theory may not represent the experiences of workers of marginalized identities. Acknowledging that individuals deciding to disclose a stigmatized identity at work face potential prejudice, we investigated whether the benefits of authentic expression on employees' organizational commitment and job involvement depend on psychological safety. Via a time-lagged survey of sexual-minority employees, we found evidence for a model explicating the conditional indirect effects of identity disclosure and authenticity on outcomes, as moderated by perceived workgroup psychological safety. Such findings theoretically challenge the literature's present assumption of authenticity's uniform benefits via exploration of important contextual boundary conditions. Practically, this research underscores the need for psychologically safe work environments, encouraging employers to maximize psychological safety where possible to see the full benefit of employees' workplace authenticity.

Fall Issue, 2022

“…For individuals identifying as LGBTQIA, prevalent theories suggest that self-acceptance and disclosure of their orientation are key factors of identity, well-being, and authenticity (Camp et al, 2020;Cramer et al, 2017;Eliason et al, 2018;Everett et al, 2019;Fletcher & Everly, 2021;Li et al, 2019). Also pervasive in scholarly literature is that LGBTQIA identity disclosure may lead to authenticity and well-being and that this disclosure may lead to increased psychological distress and discrimination (Aldén et al, 2020;Everett et al, 2019;Fletcher & Everly, 2021;Gardner & Prasad, 2022;Martinez et al, 2017;Webster et al, 2018).…”

“…The outcomes and benefits of personal authenticity have been welldocumented by much-quoted researchers over the last two decades (e.g., Emmerich & Rigotti, 2017). The culmination of empirical studies and scholarly literature has resulted in authenticity's widely noted benefits and outcomes (Emmerich & Rigotti, 2017;Gardner & Prasad, 2022). Benefits of authenticity in the workplace include an increase in workers' subjective well-being, positive affect, productivity, and organizational effectiveness; and less burnout, stress, negative affect, and symptoms of physical illness (Emmerich & Rigotti, 2017;Ménard & Brunet, 2011;Metin et al, 2016;Reis et al, 2017;Schmader & Sedikides, 2018;van den Bosch & Taris, 2014;Zhang et al, 2019).…”

“…For LGBTQIA workers, who often feel like they cannot be their authentic selves in the workplace (Gardner & Prasad, 2022), a supportive environment may parallel the benefits of authenticity for most workers who identify as heterosexual and cisgender. Individuals who are cisgender identify with their assigned sex at birth (Ng & Rumens, 2017).…”

“…LGBTQIA workers who publicly self-identify can face adverse outcomes, discrimination, hostility, and negative attitudes (Eliason et al, 2018;Gardner & Prasad, 2022;Hossain et al, 2020;Longarino, 2019). As a result, in 2018, 46% of LGBTQIA workers did not disclose their orientation at work (Fidas & Cooper, 2018).…”

Influence of All Sexual Orientations and Gender Identity Upon Work Authenticity through Satisfaction with Supervisor

“…The outcomes and benefits of personal authenticity have been well-documented by much-quoted researchers over the last two decades (e.g., Emmerich & Rigotti, 2017). The culmination of empirical studies and scholarly literature has resulted in authenticity's widely noted benefits and outcomes (Emmerich & Rigotti, 2017;Gardner & Prasad, 2022). Benefits of authenticity in the workplace include an increase in workers' subjective well-being, positive affect, productivity, and organizational effectiveness; and less burnout, stress, negative affect, and symptoms of physical illness (Emmerich & Rigotti, 2017;Ménard & Brunet, 2011;Metin et al, 2016;Reis et al, 2017;Schmader & Sedikides, 2018;van den Bosch & Taris, 2014;Zhang et al, 2019).…”