Authentic leadership appeals to L&D teams because it sounds like the opposite of a script. That is also the difficulty. A programme can’t hand someone authenticity, and a manager can’t tell on Monday whether they were more authentic than last week.
Can authentic leadership be developed?
Possibly, and the best study we found is honest about how hard it is to show.
Spector and colleagues ran three studies in one hospital. In the first, 40 supervisors were randomly assigned to authentic leadership training or a waiting list, and their direct reports’ surveys showed no significant difference. In a follow-up, direct reports who were new to the supervisor rated their authentic leadership and their trust in them higher over time. A third study, using the hospital’s engagement survey, found leadership ratings rose more for trained supervisors than for a comparison group.
A three-year action learning programme studied by Baron found participants’ own ratings of authentic leadership rose steadily over the programme. The design included a comparison group, but the ratings are self-reports.
So the answer is a qualified yes, with an unusually clear warning: the most rigorous test found nothing, and the gains that did appear showed up in other people’s ratings for some relationships, not all. Critics such as Alvesson and Einola question the model’s measurement more broadly. What is authentic leadership? covers that debate.
Why do one-off workshops struggle with authentic leadership?
Because it is tested when being open costs something: admitting you don’t know, giving the real reason for a decision, letting someone change your mind in front of others.
Across leadership training generally, a meta-analysis of 335 samples found programmes were more effective with practice, feedback, sessions spaced over time and delivery on site. The action learning programme above worked on real problems over three years. A reflective workshop can get a manager thinking about how they come across. It can’t be in the room when the manager decides whether to say what they actually think.
What should managers practise?
One behaviour at a time, chosen from the component that matters most in one working relationship.
| Component | Behaviours to practise | Trust Question |
|---|---|---|
| Relational transparency | 1. Say what is true without using vague or confusing language. 2. Share relevant information openly, not selectively. | Do they believe what I say? |
| Internalised moral perspective | 7. Apply the same standards in tone, decisions and communication across people and situations. | Do they believe I’ll do what I said? |
| Balanced processing | 13. Ask questions and check your understanding before replying. 15. Show openness to others’ ideas, even when you disagree. | Do they feel I really understand them? |
Self-awareness has no behaviour of its own, because it happens inside the leader. What a manager can do is ask how they’re coming across, which is built into week 4 of the plan below.
The internalised moral perspective needs something first: values the manager has actually named. Trust Leader puts it this way: purpose is the anchor, the Trust Map is the application, and practice builds the evidence. The Hub’s Purpose playlists take a leader through questions such as “What are my values?” and “How will I act to support my values?” on the way to their Manifesto. The accidental manager: what do you stand for? explains how.
What does a four-week practice plan look like?
Week 1: choose. Write down one value you want people to experience from you. Pick one person whose confidence matters. Decide which component is weakest in how they experience you, and choose one behaviour from the table. Name three occasions in the next fortnight where you’ll use it.
Week 2: practise. Use the behaviour on the first two occasions. Straight after each, write two lines: what you did, and what the other person did or said next.
Week 3: keep going. Use it on the third occasion and wherever else it fits with that person. Look back at your notes. Is anything in their response starting to change?
Week 4: review. Talk it through with whoever supports your development. Then ask the other person one direct question, such as “do you feel you get the full picture from me?”. Listen to the answer without defending yourself. Keep the behaviour or choose the next one.
Using one behaviour at a time is Trust Leader’s approach rather than a research finding. With one change, you can tell afterwards what your part was.
How can L&D tell whether it’s working?
What the leader writes down is the most available evidence and the weakest. For authentic leadership it is especially weak, because the model is about how the leader comes across, and the leader is the one person who can’t see that directly.
Stronger evidence comes from other people:
- Ratings from the people the manager leads, before and a few months after. The hospital study suggests looking separately at people new to the manager.
- A comparison group of managers who haven’t started yet.
- A colleague or line manager watching for the specific behaviour in real meetings.
- Trust or engagement survey items for the team, used cautiously.
Where does the Trust Leader Hub fit?
As the practice layer between your sessions.
The Self-Assessment asks how often, over the last 30 days, a leader did each of the 20 behaviours. It is a starting point in the leader’s own view. Three Purpose playlists take a leader through the questions behind their Manifesto. Each leader then uses a Trust Map to choose one relationship and one behaviour, works through short activities from a Behaviour Playlist, has at least two days to practise at work, and records a Reflection.
All of that is the leader’s own account. The second view still comes from you. If someone on your programme worries that practising behaviour means learning a script, Does being authentic make people trust you? takes that question on.