What This Study Found
Faking kindness is exhausting and ineffective. Analysis of 95 studies showed that "surface acting"—putting on a friendly mask when it doesn't come naturally—strongly correlates with impaired well-being, worse job attitudes, and lower performance. People who have to force themselves to be agreeable pay a significant psychological cost.
Authentic kindness can't be easily replicated. The research suggests that naturally agreeable people might have a sustainable advantage because their collaborative behavior doesn't require the emotional energy that surface acting demands. When disagreeable people try to mimic kind behavior, it creates internal discord that shows up in their performance and health. There's obviously a flipside to this: being disagreeable has its benefits (see Anderson et al. 2022 for one way in which being disagreeable can help people get more power).
Why This Matters for Kind Leaders
Stop apologizing for your authentic leadership style. When you naturally listen to concerns in team meetings, mediate conflicts with genuine empathy, or give credit to others, you're not being "too nice", you just tend to do this naturally. Your colleagues who force these behaviors might just be burning themselves out trying to replicate what you do effortlessly.
Leverage your energy advantage for strategic visibility. You don't waste mental resources on emotional performance, but you should try to make sure your impact gets noticed. When you successfully resolve a client issue through patient relationship-building or facilitate a breakthrough in a stuck project, ensure key stakeholders know about these wins.
Your natural agreeableness can be your competitive moat. While others exhaust themselves trying to fake the interpersonal skills that come naturally to you, you can focus your energy on strategic thinking, problem-solving, and building genuine relationships that create lasting influence.
Access the Full Paper
Hülsheger, U. R., & Schewe, A. F. (2011). On the costs and benefits of emotional labor: A meta-analysis of three decades of research. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 16(3), 361–389. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022876
💡 Can't access the paper? Here's how to get it legally (often free), and here's why it costs $40 in the first place.