SHRM26 Debrief · Leadership & Development · #2686

The Leadership Clarity Gap: Why "Authentic Leadership" Fails Without Definition

with David Pettrone Swalve

▶ Watch on the SHRM portal ~52 min, distilled

authentic leadershippsychological safetyleadership clarity gap

"You cannot develop what you can't define."

What it was about

Organizations tell leaders to "be authentic" without ever defining what that looks like in practice. The undefined gap between what leaders intend and what people experience, the "leadership clarity gap," is a systemic leadership and definition problem, not a culture or values problem.

By the numbers

$9 trillion annually

Cost of active employee disengagement, according to Gallup

95% believe they're self-aware, only 10-15% actually are

Self-awareness gap, from Tasha Eurich's research

5 times more shareholder value

Top-performing managers vs. average managers, according to McKinsey

Key notes

Build a definition of authentic leadership before trying to develop it, because you cannot develop what you cannot define.
Use the six-step authentic dialogue tool (set intention, create psychological safety, listen beneath content, speak with courage not just clarity, name disagreement directly, and end with action steps) to build a genuinely safe room rather than just a comfortable one.
Before making any significant decision, run it through the three-question aligned execution filter: is this consistent with who I say I am, would I make this choice if everyone could see it, and will it build or erode trust? If any answer is no, stop and change the decision before you make it, not after.

The contrarian takeBias-interruption in talent decisions isn't a diversity or values initiative, it's a performance argument: inclusive, structurally-grounded decisions are simply better decisions, not just more equitable ones.

Take this back Monday

Do this for your team

Before your next promotion or hiring call, run it through the four-question equitable insight filter: behavior, would-I-feel-the-same, personality-vs-structural, objective criteria.

Say this in your next leadership meeting

We keep telling leaders to 'be authentic' with no definition of what that means, and that undefined gap is why authenticity turns into performance instead of practice.

Watch out for

Telling leaders to "just be themselves" or "be authentic" without giving them a working definition, which sets them up to perform authenticity rather than live it.
Mistaking a comfortable room (low friction) for a safe room (people can say something hard without paying a price), when they are not the same thing.
Canceling one-to-ones or making "resource" decisions while claiming to lead with "people first" values. That's the knowing-doing gap: leaders know the right thing but act otherwise because no system forces alignment.

Fun fact · David Pettrone Swalve

He's West Point-trained and wrote a book called Pirate Jokes Aren't Funny, out February 2026.

If this landed, see these

↳ Go deeperBe More Human: Authentic Leadership in an AI WorldSame authenticity problem, harder: AI makes performing it even easier to fake.⇄ The counterpointThe Secret Superpower of High Functioning Leaders: How Process Intelligence Creates Aligned, Accountable TeamsArgues personality-driven EQ leadership, authenticity included, doesn't scale without process.✦ The unexpected oneHR Service Delivery and Culture Transformation: A Lean Six Sigma Diagnostic and RoadmapSame insight, different domain: replace vague culture activities with defined systems.