As the number of publications demonstrating the benefits and risks of being authentic at work grows, so does the variety of interpretations of what it means to be authentic—and with it increasing inconsistencies and contradictions in conceptualizations of authenticity and its outcomes. We propose that the reasons for these inconsistencies stem from differing underlying assumptions on what authenticity is and thus what it means to be “true to self”. To better understand these differences, we conducted a systematic review of authenticity constructs in organization science, concentrating on the divergence among definitions and underlying theoretical assumptions of authenticity constructs. We identified two dimensions underlying authenticity constructs’ assumptions. First, constructs differed in whether the self was oriented more toward independence (emphasis on the self as distinct from others) or toward interdependence (self as relationally oriented). Second, constructs ranged in their perspectives on the self as fixed (self as stable) to more malleable (self as changing). In this review, we delineate the different ways of “staying true to one’s self” at work and show the inherent complexities in the process of being authentic in the workplace, explaining how these differences may lead to seemingly contradictory work-related outcomes of authenticity.

中文翻译：

---

在工作中忠于自我的不同方式：真实性结构之间的分歧回顾


随着证明在工作中保持真实的好处和风险的出版物数量增加，对真实意味着什么的解释也越来越多，随之而来的是真实及其结果的概念化的不一致和矛盾越来越多。我们认为，这些不一致的原因源于对什么是真实性以及 “忠于自我 ”意味着什么的不同基本假设。为了更好地理解这些差异，我们对组织科学中的真实性结构进行了系统评价，重点关注真实性结构的定义和基本理论假设之间的差异。我们确定了真实性结构假设背后的两个维度。首先，建构在自我是更倾向于独立（强调自我与他人不同）还是相互依赖（自我是关系导向的）方面存在差异。其次，建构体对自我的看法是固定的（自我是稳定的）到更具可塑性的（自我是变化的）。在这篇评论中，我们描述了在工作中 “忠于自我 ”的不同方式，并展示了在工作场所保持真实的过程中固有的复杂性，解释了这些差异如何导致看似矛盾的与工作相关的真实性结果。