The office presents a particular set of disclosure dilemmas, starting with the unusual fan dance of interviewing. We try to place our greatest foot ahead; to persuade our potential employer we’re an ideal match and consummate skilled, but we’re requested, “What are your weaknesses?” and “What are the most important errors you’ve made?” Even the seemingly laidback “So, inform me about your self” can really feel like a lure. The place ought to we begin?
There was a variety of buzz lately about the advantages of “bringing your complete self” to work. There’s some proof for these advantages. Letting others see extra of you than you would possibly ordinarily present them forges bonds, together with within the office. We noticed this within the early pandemic, when hardened leaders abruptly became endearing softies the second their toddlers mischievously bumped into their dwelling workplaces.
However for compartmentalizers preferring to maintain work and private life separate, the “convey your complete self to work” motion may be one thing of a nightmare. For others, like me, it’s liberating. However this new terrain is crammed with land mines, and it may be laborious to know if you’re going to step on one.
The query of how a lot of our genuine selves to share at work is a pivotal one. It’s additionally a troublesome one to reply. We wish to share sufficient to really feel understood and linked to others, however not a lot that we alienate folks or trigger them to query our competence or our seriousness.
Making issues much more sophisticated, every office has its personal tradition and its personal norms concerning the diploma of self-disclosure that’s deemed acceptable. That doesn’t imply they’re clearly articulated, normally removed from it. We should uncover them. And under no circumstances ought to everybody resolve to easily conform to these norms; bucking them is likely to be good not just for one’s personal happiness and engagement at work, however for the entire crew and for society at giant.
So how do we discover the suitable stability? What are the trade-offs between being somewhat extra open at work and preserving strict skilled boundaries intact? How a lot “backstage entry” can we give to our colleagues and our bosses with out risking our office picture?
Backstage versus Entrance Stage: transparency versus vulnerability
In keeping with my colleague Monique Burns Thompson, who works intently with members of Gen Z, “At this time’s era craves a degree of openness that’s totally different from after I was a younger skilled.” New York College organizational scientist Julianna Pillemer’s analysis means that revealing features of our backstage selves at work, when finished thoughtfully, can assist us construct rapport and stand out in a great way. In office contexts, she recommends what I’d name discerning authenticity—a balancing act that entails giving colleagues some, however not whole, entry to our interior lives. When finished nicely, Pillemer argues, it helps construct belief and sparks extra significant conversations. Over time, this type of considerate openness can deepen office relationships, improve collaboration, and even enhance efficiency.
What does it imply to be discerningly genuine—to be open in a considerate approach? Pillemer specifies two varieties of backstage entry. The primary, which she calls transparency, entails “conveying openness” by giving folks a window into your ideas, beliefs, or preferences. For instance, you would possibly say, “I’ve at all times been extra drawn to the artistic aspect of issues, although I’m technically in a data-heavy position.” This sort of sharing can carry some danger—particularly in case your perspective is unpopular or surprising—however it usually affords solely a glimpse beneath the floor.
The second degree of entry, which Pillemer calls vulnerability, goes deeper and carries extra danger. It entails “sharing doubtlessly delicate interior states comparable to intimate feelings,” particularly unfavorable ones—like admitting that you simply really feel insecure about public talking or disclosing a incapacity that may lead others to underestimate you.
For example, somebody would possibly say, “I get nervous presenting in entrance of senior management, even after I know the fabric chilly” (revealing a performance-related insecurity), or “This sort of ambiguity is hard for me. I like having extra construction, and I’m attempting to get extra snug with the grey space” (revealing a trait that may not align with organizational norms).
One shortcut I discover useful is to consider transparency as cognitive openness and vulnerability as emotional openness. In contexts the place impressions actually matter, the road between transparency and vulnerability turns into a strategic one. Pillemer doesn’t draw a tough line, however she emphasizes that vulnerability is riskier—particularly in excessive stakes, evaluative settings like job interviews, the place disclosing insecurities would possibly chip away at perceptions of competence. If doubtful, transparency is the safer guess.
Vulnerability ought to usually be prevented in these contexts except, say, it’s framed as a narrative of development or overcoming a problem (“I used to battle with public talking, so I joined Toastmasters”). Even if you’re explicitly invited to share one thing private—like within the dreaded “inform me a few weak spot” query—transparency usually does the trick. You would possibly supply cognitive openness: “I feel higher in writing than I do talking off the cuff.” You would additionally body it as development: “I’ve realized to prep extra intentionally for conferences so I can articulate my concepts clearly in actual time. However should you give me a second to arrange my ideas, I’ll at all times convey sharper perception.”
This sort of considerate disclosure strains up with what Pillemer would name transparency: revealing how your thoughts works in a approach that’s candid however not dangerous. Vulnerability, in contrast, would possibly contain admitting that you simply usually doubt your skills or concern being judged—disclosures that might elevate pink flags except rigorously framed. Nonetheless, even in high-stakes settings, being a bit extra open can assist.
From Revealing: The Underrated Power of Oversharing by Leslie John printed on February 24, 2026 by Riverhead Books, an imprint of Penguin Publishing Group, a division of Penguin Random Home LLC. Copyright © 2026 by Leslie John
