Measured, strategic changes are better for business, particularly when it comes to leaders receiving feedback. A new study found that leaders who change too quickly can face an authenticity penalty, leaving employees suspicious about the validity of the change. Choosing the pace of change is not common practice, as business decisions are primarily plotted on the “faster is better” ethos. That strategy holds up in most situations where errors in operations need to be corrected promptly, but haste can be dangerous for more reasons than one.
If you’re a leader determined to show your workforce that you’re willing to earn their trust and support, a more introspective and thoughtful approach to change might be in order.
Leaders who change too quickly risk facing an “authenticity penalty,” as employees firmly believe that real change takes time. (Image: Pexels)
Leaders Risk Facing an Authenticity Penalty If They Change Too Quickly on Receiving Feedback
Change is the only constant in business and in life, and how we approach this change can determine how it is received. A new study from the University of South Florida, published in the Academy of Management Journal by Danbee Chon, Ovul Sezer, and Francis J. Flynn, found that leaders can often seem less authentic when they change too rapidly when presented with feedback. Why is that? According to the study, it’s because “people believe that true change takes time.”
“For leaders, sometimes it’s not enough to just change. We have to consider how it might also be perceived, and people believe that true change takes time,” Danbee Chon, assistant professor of management in the Muma College of Business, said in an article by the university.
The link between authenticity and the pace of change may sound reasonable retrospectively, but it’s not something that we often realize.
The Link Between Change and Trust in Leadership Is One Worth Exploring
When employees provide feedback and request a leader to change, most want to see the feedback considered and understood before it is implemented. Managers and leaders who make swift changes may be perceived as inconsiderate or rash, acting before fully understanding why they have to change.
We’ve all heard our parents yell at us to “think about what we’ve done” when we’ve made a mistake, and it is likely that same retrospection that employees are looking for as well. Inauthentic fast-paced change may solve a problem or concern in the present, but it does not reassure employees that the same incident or issue won’t occur in the future. The authenticity penalty faced by leaders can be particularly strong when the change is difficult, making it essential for leaders to personally reflect on the change being asked of them before they act.
It is also true that “authenticity” may not be the ultimate goal in every situation. Sometimes it is more beneficial to have a firm, uncompromising decision maker, or at other times, the situation calls for a leader who reacts quickly to a problem that is about to boil over. Quick changes have occasional benefits of their own, but if an authentic connection with employees is the ultimate goal, choosing the pace of change by actively reflecting on the problem will always serve you well.
Turning to HR Leaders to Ensure Authenticity and Oversee the Pace of Change
A business leader who solicits feedback already stands two steps ahead of competitors that don’t, and a leader who also acts on the change stands leagues before the rest. The authenticity penalty is an unfortunate hiccup in this process, but it does benefit leaders to consider the change carefully before making any alterations to how they present themselves or approach their work. Thankfully, they don’t have to evolve alone.
Leadership development is a key HR responsibility, particularly when it comes to assisting leaders with becoming the best versions of themselves to steer the organization. Managers and leaders are perfectly capable of evolving on their own, but with HR teams available to gather feedback and understand the needs of the workforce, it helps to consider their input on how to approach the intended change.
Particularly in 2025, when employees are juggling multiple obstacles in their career, trust in leaders appears to be extremely low. Many have also opened up to the idea of AI replacing their leaders in hopes of a fair, level-headed decision-maker at the top. Such alienation does not serve a business well, with employees uninspired to follow those at the top. Authenticity can bridge a considerable number of existing gaps and spark a sense of unity, making it a quality worth pursuing for any leader.
What do you think about the authenticity penalty faced by leaders? Should change be fast-paced or slowly pursued? Share your thoughts with us. Subscribe to The HR Digest for more insights on workplace trends, layoffs, and what to expect with the advent of AI.