Mirror Neurons VS. Authenticity

Neuroscience and authenticity - what could be the possible linkage? A common narrative in corporate ecosystems today is “be authentic and show up as yourself.” What occurs when your authentic self includes attire that is different - maybe tattoos, hair, and a visual appearance that is unusual or outside of the norm for your conservative industry?

A friend in public service recently asked me what I thought about showing up to a meeting with her hair dyed blue. She’s a great fan of beautiful wigs and wearing different hairstyles in different colors. In answering her I struggled to be a great supportive friend while also objectively questioning how this decision might impact her credibility.

We all want to believe that our expertise and intellect is far more important that our visual appearance. Certainly, strides have been made towards not considering tattoos or different hairstyles as unprofessional. What we don’t discuss or acknowledge in these dialogues focusing on inclusion and diversity, is how human beings are engineered. I recently posted on LinkedIn about mirror neurons, and how when activated, these neurons encourage feelings of bonding and connection – as well as a boost of dopamine (the happy hormone).

Mirror neurons react when we see other people act, speak, or mirror us in some way. From the way we dress, to our chosen lexicon, how we articulate our thoughts, even to whether we have similar hobbies. Fact – having things in common helps us to bond with other human beings. Shared experiences and interests help people to connect and be at ease – the “You’re Like Me” Effect! ?

When we interview potential candidates – we immediately leverage our occipital lobe (the vision center) to collect data about the person. Are they dressed appropriately for the setting? How will they “fit in” to the corporate culture? Unfortunately, these implicit biases have, over previous years, also included gender, race, culture, and religion – to the detriment of diversity. While we actively must work towards eliminating our programmed biases and associations – is it reasonable to demand that our peers/employers/clients accept however we choose to express ourselves via fashion etc.?

It's an emotionally charged question and one that calls upon us to try and fundamentally rejig the engineering of the human brain. For example, can we equate eradicating biases against women in business with eradicating biases against people with tattoos, for example? Women do not choose to be women, but people do choose to get tattoos, and they CAN choose to cover them up in certain social settings. Is this a reasonable and fair expectation and limitation to place upon people? I don’t have a quick answer.

To my friend my response was to ask her simply, will wearing a blue wig detract from your credibility and the focus on what you are saying as a subject matter expert? Her reply was honest – yes it would be a distraction and her audience would be more focused on her hair than on the valuable information she was intending to share with her team. This honest answer begs a bigger question – is it more important to show up “authentically” or to be heard? And beyond this question – CAN we show up expressing our nuanced fashion choices and expect to be heard?

Ultimately, authenticity and its’ expression in the workplace ecosystem continues to evolve. In the interim, how can we acknowledge the scientific proof that our brains are wired to connect with those we feel mirror ourselves? In less “civilized” times – seeing someone who looked like you signaled safety and that they were part of your tribe – they weren’t a threat. While I think we’d all like to believe that our limbic system and the instinct of “fight-or-flight” doesn’t prescribe as much of our behaviors as it did during the Paleolithic period (aka when we lived in caves), the human brain has not physiologically changed so much as to eliminate the reptilian brain components.

As with most discussions, the pendulum swings from nothing to all – that is to say, while at one point inclusion and diversity were completely ignored now DEI is on everyone’s radar. Perhaps the relevant question is not “neuroscience versus authenticity” but rather how do we balance being our authentic selves while also leveraging the useful physiological data and science that mirroring in meetings and the workforce is a practice that can work to our benefit?

In mentorship work I often answer such questions by suggesting to those starting their careers that it may not be logical or reasonable to expect one's boss to forget 30+ years of associating rainbow hued hair with being frivolous. All levels of leaderships are called upon to involve and reconsider established biases - but perhaps so too are those building careers called upon to consider that part of connecting and networking is trying to foster alignment (which sometimes includes wearing a suit to meetings instead of converse and a t-shirt). Choosing to show up in environments where our appearance conforms to an industry expectation may not be "inauthentic" - perhaps it is part of acknowledging that our work attire and personal choices on appearance may not always be identical.