By Dela Glevey (24-25)

When you think about getting ready for work, what’s on your mind? Picking an outfit? Checking your diary for the day ahead? For many Black women, one of the first questions is: what will my hair say about me today?

That might sound small, but it’s not. Hair, particularly Black hair, is never “just hair”. It is loaded with identity, heritage and culture. While in the workplace, it can also be a source of judgement, bias and daily stress. Recent research has set out to explore how Black British women navigate their hair choices, professional image and identity at work, here’s what the latest study finds.

Why Hair Matters at Work

To understand why hair matters, we need to step back. For centuries, Eurocentric styles have been pushed as the standard of beauty. In workplaces these standards have shaped what it means to be “professional”. Straight, sleek hair is seen as neutral, tidy and respectable. While natural Afro-textured styles (braids, twists, Afros, locs etc) are seen as unruly, distracting and “unprofessional”.

The evidence backs this up. The Black British Voice project (2023) found almost all respondents (98%) felt pressure to change themselves in the workplace, including hair, to “fit in”. The Broken Ladders Report (2022) found a quarter of women of colour had to alter their hair at work. While, research has shown natural styles are rated less professional or employable than straight styles by hiring managers (Donahoo, 2022; Koval & Rosette, 2020; De Leon, 2023).

These findings highlight what many Black women already know: hair is never just about style. It influences how they are seen, how they feel and the opportunities available to them.

The study

Despite growing recognition of hair bias in the US, there is a vast lack of UK focused research. To address this, 15 Black British women working across industries took part in interviews and a photograph exercise. Participants shared two photos: one when they felt “most like me” and one where they felt “most professional”.

The contrast was powerful. The simple exercise highlighted the tension between showing up as themselves, using words around authenticity and confidence in the “most like me” map, while words use for the “professional” photo spoke to pressures to conform to workplace expectations.

Figure 1 “Most like me” (top) and “Most professional” (bottom) word clouds

From the interviews three overall themes were developed- Spheres of Influence, Strategic Styling and Navigating the Personal Journey. However, two main overarching ideas stood out: the daily managing of hair and identity and the longer “hair journey” across their careers.

Finding 1: Managing hair and Identity

The first key finding was the sheer amount of thought and energy that went into managing hair on a daily basis. The women described a constant balancing act, managing external perceptions and internal anxieties. Interviews, client meetings or senior audiences often shaped their styling decisions, with Eurocentric looks favoured to minimise risk of questions, touching and doubts over their credibility. This daily management was rarely about preference, instead a strategy for avoiding negative stigma, stereotypes or unwanted attention. In practice hair became a tool of impression management, understood to remove hurdles and allow them to stand out for their work. Echoing Social-Identity Based Impression Management (SIM;Roberts, 2005), which describes how people from marginalised groups manage aspects of their identity to “fit in.”

The cost of managing, however, was high. Participants spoke of planning hairstyles weeks in advance, sticking to consistent and predictable ‘office safe’ looks, or dealing with the constant low-level anxiety of wigs slipping or curls frizzing. This drained energy that could otherwise be used on their work.

Finding 2: The “Hair Journey”

Beyond daily management, women also described a longer “hair journey” across their careers. Early in their careers, most adopted conservative, Eurocentric styles as a form of protection. Straightened or tied-back hair was viewed as the safest way to establish credibility and avoid being singled out.

But over time many women described a shift. With greater seniority, life experience, or personal turning points, they began to embrace authenticity. For some, this gave them freedom to wear natural styles, feeling they had earned the right to wear their hair naturally. Others mentioned milestones such as parenthood, a new job, relocation or even the pandemic as moments which inspired them to reconsider hair choice.

The sectors they worked in also mattered. Finance and fashion were described as stricter, with unwritten Eurocentric norms, while teaching and creative fields were seen as more open. This suggests both workplace culture and career stage shape how black women feel. Supporting what Black Feminist Thought (BFT;Collins, 2009) proposes, these choices are not just personal but shaped by wider systems. What is seen as “professional” is not neutral, but rooted in whiteness and many women describe having to unlearn this thinking and rebuild confidence in their natural selves.

Practical Implications

So, what can you do with all this? For Black women, these strategies shouldn’t be necessary, but supportive networks can help ease the burden of code-switching and build confidence. For colleagues, respect boundaries, avoid intrusive questions and challenge bias when you see them. For leaders, step up and use your influence to model inclusion. For organisations, review your policies, train managers and hiring teams on hair bias, ensure representation and co-design solutions appropriate for your workplace. Why not make a visible first step and adopt the Halo Code. The goal? Workplaces where Black women don’t need to second-guess their hair and can turn up authentically.

Conclusion

This study showed for Black Women hair is not just about style, it is central to their identity, confidence and how professionalism is judged. The findings highlight two key threads: the daily effort of managing their hair and the longer “hair journey” over their career. Both reflect how Eurocentric pressures still shape workplace expectations. While the findings support SIM and BFT they also suggest there is an emotional weight not fully captured by either theory. Making space for this issue will not only allow Black women to show up fully, but in doing so create more inclusive, creative and productive workforces.

References

Black British Voice Project. (2023). In Black British Voice (pp. 1–104). University of Cambridge. https://www.bbvp.org/

Collins, P. H. (2009). Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203900055

De Leon, M. (2023). Workplace Hair Acceptance Report. In https://www.worldafroday.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Workplace-Hair-Acceptance-Report-2023.pdf.

Donahoo, S. (2022). Working with style: Black women, black hair, and professionalism. Gender, Work & Organization, 30(2), 596–611. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12838

Gyimah, M., Azad, Z., Begum, S., Kapoor, A., Ville, L., Henderson, A., & Dey, M. (2022). Broken Ladders: The myth of meritocracy for women of colour in the workplace. Fawcett Society and Runnymede Trust. https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/61488f992b58e687f1108c7c/628cf1924ac4e10b1ba8917b_Fawcett%20%26%20Runnymede%20Trust%20-%20Broken%20Ladders%20(final).pdf

Halo Collective. (n.d.). Hair Discrimination in Workplace. Halo Collective. Retrieved September 2025, from https://www.halocollective.co.uk/halo-workplace

Koval, C. Z., & Rosette, A. S. (2020). The Natural Hair Bias in Job Recruitment. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 12(5), 194855062093793. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550620937937

Roberts, L. M. (2005). Changing Faces: Professional Image Construction In Diverse Organizational Settings. Academy of Management Review, 30(4), 685–711. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2005.18378873

By Archie Allen (24-25)

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is no longer a futuristic concept, it is here, shaping how organisations work, make decisions, and compete. From automating repetitive tasks to enhancing data-driven insights, AI has the potential to transform entire industries. But as organisations rush to adopt these tools, an equally important question arises: what kind of leadership do we need in this new era?

That was the central focus of my research. For my MSc dissertation, I interviewed twelve senior leaders and leadership development professionals across industries, from healthcare to finance to technology, to explore what human leadership looks like in the AI era. The answers were clear: leadership needs to become more human than ever.

Why leadership needs to change

AI adoption is happening at speed. Unlike past technological revolutions that unfolded over decades, today’s shift is taking place in just a few years. Leaders are navigating uncharted territory: employees are unsure about how AI will affect their roles, organisations face ethical dilemmas around fairness and transparency, and many people are simply overwhelmed by the pace of change. My research shows that what people most want from leaders today is not more data or more certainty, but more honesty, empathy, and human connection.

What was the research?

To answer the research questions, what human competencies are required to lead in the AI era, and why are they necessary, I conducted twelve in-depth interviews with senior leaders and leadership experts. The participants ranged from Chief HR Officers and Managing Directors to organisational psychologists and leadership consultants. Together, they represented decades of experience leading teams and shaping leadership development. The interviews were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis, which looks for patterns of meaning across conversations. From this, three themes emerged that capture the essence of human leadership in the AI era: human leadership, relational leadership, and visionary leadership.

Theme 1: Human Leadership

The first theme centred on integrity, empathy, and credibility. Participants described transparency as vital, even when the message is difficult. Employees want leaders who show up as real people, not polished robots. Empathy was also seen as critical, helping leaders respond to the mix of excitement, fear, and resistance that AI often generates. Finally, many warned against letting AI erode credibility. Leaders who rely too heavily on AI-generated communication risk appearing inauthentic and losing trust. The message is clear: in a world where machines process information faster than us, credibility comes from staying unmistakably human.

Theme 2: Relational Leadership

The second theme focused on how leaders relate to others. Humility was described as a powerful quality. Leaders who admitted uncertainty or mistakes were seen as strengthening connection rather than weakening authority. This vulnerability encouraged others to be open too, creating a culture of learning rather than fear. Psychological safety was also seen as essential. In the context of AI, employees need reassurance that experimenting, failing, and asking questions are not only allowed but expected. Leaders who modelled openness and normalised mistakes created the conditions for innovation and adaptability.

Theme 3: Visionary Leadership

The final theme highlighted the role of vision. When vision was meaningful, it helped anchor people during disruption by connecting daily work to a bigger, human purpose. Leaders who could tell this story reduced anxiety and built trust. But when vision was absent, employees were left to fill the gaps with their own narratives, often fuelled by fear and uncertainty. The lesson is that leaders do not need to have all the answers, but they do need to provide a sense of direction that feels steady, human, and hopeful.

Why these findings matter for organisations

The success of AI adoption depends not just on the technology itself, but on how people respond to it. If employees feel anxious, excluded, or silenced, they are less likely to engage with new systems. But if they feel heard, supported, and inspired, they are more willing to experiment, adapt, and innovate. This means organisations need to rethink how they prepare their leaders. Leadership development should make empathy, humility, and ethical communication core priorities, not optional extras. Building psychological safety should be treated as a deliberate leadership practice, one that allows teams to learn and adapt without fear. And leaders must remain present in their communication, ensuring that human tone and visibility are not lost when supported by AI tools.

Bringing theory into practice

Much leadership theory already points to these ideas, emotional intelligence, authentic leadership, transformational vision. What this research shows is that in the AI era, these are not luxuries but necessities. As machines take on more technical and cognitive tasks, the distinct value of human leadership lies in things AI cannot replicate: empathy, integrity, humility, and the ability tocreate shared meaning. Put simply, the more AI we have in the workplace, the more human our leaders need to be.

Conclusion

My dissertation set out to answer two questions: what are the human leadership competencies required in the AI era, and why are they necessary? The findings suggest that employees are looking for leaders who show up with honesty and empathy, who build trust and collaboration through humility and psychological safety, and who provide grounded and meaningful direction in uncertain times. AI will keep evolving, but these human needs remain constant. For organisations, the practical takeaway is clear: technology alone does not guarantee success. What makes the difference is leaders who bring a distinctly human presence, leaders who can connect, communicate, and create meaning in ways no machine ever could.