The Illusion of Gravitas:
When “Executive Presence” Works for Some and Penalises Others.
Search almost any leadership development programme and you will find the same advice recycled under the banner of executive presence.
Quiet confidence, vision, approachability, strategic thinking, empathy. On paper, these traits appear universal. Neutral. Fair. Almost benevolent.
But leadership is not assessed in a vacuum. Gravitas, as it is commonly defined, is not as objective as it pretends to be.
For Black and women of colour, “executive presence” often operates less as a development framework and more as a moving target, one shaped by racialised expectations, gendered bias and historical exclusion. This is where the illusion begins.
Gravitas Is Not Neutral, It Is Coded
The dominant image of gravitas has been culturally coded for decades. It draws heavily from white, male, Western norms of authourity. Restrained emotion, clipped communication, low vocal register, minimal expressiveness, controlled body language.
These traits are rarely named as racialised, yet they are routinely rewarded as “natural leadership.”
When Black women display the same behaviours, they are often interpreted differently.
Quiet confidence becomes aloofness. Strategic directness becomes aggression. Passion becomes emotional instability. Warmth becomes a lack of seriousness.
The same behaviour, filtered through a different body, produces a different judgment.
Performing Presence vs Being Perceived
Consider two senior leaders delivering the same message in a boardroom. Both are composed, articulate and future-focused. One is praised for gravitas and authority.
The other is told, in feedback, to “soften her tone” “be more approachable” or “work on executive presence.” This pattern is not anecdotal. It is structural.
According to McKinsey and Lean In’s ‘Women in the Workplace’ report, Black women are significantly more likely than their white peers to receive vague, subjective feedback focused on personality rather than clear, actionable guidance linked to performance.
While white men are most likely to receive feedback tied to outcomes and advancement, Black women are more often assessed on how they show up rather than what they deliver.
McKinsey also reports that Black women experience the lowest sense of belonging and psychological safety in corporate environments, which directly affects how their behaviour is interpreted and judged.
Sociologist Dr. Adia Harvey Wingfield, one of the leading Black academics on race, gender and leadership, describes this phenomenon as racialised task and emotion management. In her research, she shows that Black women are expected to carefully regulate tone, facial expression, language and confidence in ways that their peers are not, simply to avoid being perceived as aggressive, intimidating or unlikable.
The same leadership behaviours that signal authourity in white leaders are frequently reframed as “attitude problems” when expressed by Black women.
The result is that “executive presence” becomes a moving target. It is invoked not as a developmental tool, but as a disciplinary one, a way of signalling non-belonging without naming bias.
Presence becomes a catch-all critique that is difficult to measure, impossible to benchmark and nearly impossible to challenge, yet it carries real consequences for promotion, sponsorship and visibility.
This is not a skills gap. It is a perception gap, reinforced by organisational norms that reward familiarity over fairness and comfort over competence.
Until leadership cultures address how presence is perceived, not just how it is performed, Black women will continue to be over-prepared, under-recognised and unfairly assessed through a lens that was never designed with them in mind.
The Emotional Tax of the Illusion
The illusion of gravitas forces women of colour into constant self-monitoring. How am I coming across? Was that too firm? Too warm? Too confident? Not confident enough?
This cognitive and emotional labour drains energy that could otherwise be invested in innovation, strategy and leadership growth. It also creates a double bind: adapt too much and you are accused of inauthenticity; adapt too little and you are deemed “not ready.”
Executive presence becomes less about leadership and more about survival.
Does Gravitas Help Black and Women of Colour?
In its current form, often not. Traditional gravitas frameworks rarely account for:
Racial bias in perception and evaluation
Cultural communication styles
The penalties attached to confidence in marginalised bodies
The unequal tolerance for mistakes, emotion or visibility
As a result, these frameworks often reinforce exclusion rather than dismantle it, while appearing progressive on the surface.
Reframing Gravitas:
From Performance to Power
If gravitas is to be meaningful for Black women and women of colour, it must be reframed.
True leadership presence is not about conforming to a narrow aesthetic of authourity. It is about clarity, consistency and credibility over time. It is about decision-making under pressure, ethical influence and the ability to move people without self-erasure.
Organisations that are serious about inclusion must stop asking women of colour to perform presence and start interrogating how leadership is perceived, rewarded and gate-kept.
The Question Leaders Must Sit With
Before recommending another executive presence programme, ask this “Who benefits from the current definition of gravitas and who pays the price for it?”
If the answer is not evenly distributed, then what we are calling leadership development may simply be inequality with better branding.
This conversation is not about rejecting gravitas. It is about exposing the illusion and rebuilding leadership standards that recognise excellence without demanding assimilation.
If this reflection resonates, share it with someone navigating leadership visibility. If it challenges you, sit with that discomfort. If you lead others, consider whose presence you are truly recognising and why.
