This bugs me.

I keep reading “executive presence” – people want more of it, how to develop it, how to project it, how to walk into a room and radiate it – blah blah blah.

And every time I read about it, I have the same reaction – (Said in my Okie accent, which I come by honestly, as I grew up there) – This ain’t right.

Here’s my issue.

The term “executive presence” has “executive” as the modifier for “presence.” As if executive presence were a thing. It’s not.

Executive presence is you, as an executive, being present, and is ZERO different from janitorial presence or chef presence.

So when someone says “executive presence,” they’re actually describing a person with presence who happens to be an executive. The presence came first. The role is just the container it shows up in.

This matters to me because I’m kind of big on language. Good communication is hard and requires more effort than people generally put into it, and the result incurs massive costs in real dollars and human suffering. Entire multimillion-dollar projects have failed because one team built in metric units and the other used inches. Wars have started because of misconstrued conversations.

If we can’t at least try to be more precise with our language, that throttles the quality of everything we do. And “executive presence” is imprecise in a way that sends people down the wrong path.

The Wrong Path

When you frame presence as a quality of being an executive, you put it in a container that’s far too small for it. And from there, it’s a short walk to the cookie-cutter approaches that are based on what presence looks like, not what presence is: stand this way, speak with authority, make eye contact – etc., etc., etc.

These behavioral practices can actually be helpful, but you can’t manufacture presence from behaviors any more than you can cook a meal by drawing it.

A good example is in learning how to “manufacture” rapport.

There’s no shortage of training on how to “build rapport” – watch the other person’s body language, mirror their posture, repeat back what they said, make eye contact in a way that looks like you’re paying attention.

And it’s true that these behaviors show up when two people are genuinely in rapport. Studies show that this is the kind of thing that actually happens when two people are in rapport. You will see mirroring. You will see attentive eye contact. You will see people naturally reflecting each other’s language.

But performing those behaviors doesn’t create rapport. It creates a performance of rapport. One that can definitely influence the other person – but it’s fake. It’s a lie. And in my book, that’s violence.

But why bother? When you are actually in genuine rapport, all those behaviors happen on their own!

You don’t have to think about mirroring. You don’t have to remember to make eye contact. It just occurs because it’s the natural expression of what’s actually happening, rather than a pretense. Now it’s authentic and far more powerful.

So why bother learning how to mimic rapport when, with about the same effort, you can learn how to authentically create it? Not to mention, it’s a great deal more personally satisfying.

Presence works the same way. You can’t build presence from the outside in. You can study what it looks like and try to replicate the visible parts, but you’ll be assembling a picture of presence rather than inhabiting it.

My work has always been from the inside out. And when you develop authentic presence that manifests as felt experience inside you, the communication skills you bring to any situation become superpowers (doing).

And no matter what role you’re in, you’ll be better at it, and the people around you will be better off for it.

Presence as an Emergent State

In my work as a coach, I’ve spent a lot of time sitting with what presence is and what it isn’t. And I’ve come to understand presence is an emergent state rather than a skill.

You can’t do presence. You can’t execute it. Presence arises within you when certain inner conditions are met: when you’re grounded in yourself, when you’re aware of what’s happening inside you and around you simultaneously, when you’re not being hijacked by your reactions, fears, or judgments. All of these can be happening, but they are not center stage. You are.

Mindfulness is the practice that helps create the conditions for presence to emerge within you.

Not mindfulness learned exclusively sitting on a cushion (though that can help), but relational mindfulness in relationship with the world, dual awareness – observing your experience of yourself and others – in the moment as it happens. You get calmer. More considered. Less reactive. And in that space, presence shows up -and other interesting thing – you make better decisions resulting in better outcomes for eveyone.

Other people notice.

Not because you’re projecting anything on them with the authority of “executive presence.” But rather because people can perceive when someone is present. It’s kind of built into our nervous systems. Why? Because humans, by design, co-regulate each other. We influence each other. Your presence (or the lack of it) influences every interaction. And someone whose presence, these days, simply stands out from the crowd.

Why This Distinction Matters for Everyone

The middle manager navigating a difficult conversation with their team needs presence. The teacher trying to reach a disengaged student needs presence. The parent sitting with a teenager who just got devastating news needs to be present. The salesperson who senses something unspoken in the room needs to be present.

In every one of these situations, what makes the difference isn’t technique. It‘s the quality of being that the person brings to the moment. That quality is available to anyone willing to develop it, regardless of title or role.

And here’s the thing: when you work on presence as a fundamental capacity rather than a role-specific performance, it shows up everywhere. Not just in the boardroom but also in your relationships, your parenting, your creative work, your ability to be with difficulty without collapsing into reactivity. It’s not “executive presence”. It’s personal.

So What Do We Do Instead?

We stop talking about “executive presence” as if it’s a thing. We start talking about personal presence – what it actually is, how it develops, and what gets in the way. (And, if we want to get really meta, “personal” as a modifier for presence is also too small a box, but it’s in an adjument in the right direction.)

We shift the conversation from “how do I look like a leader” to “how do I become more genuinely available and aware in this moment.” That’s a fundamentally different question, and it leads to fundamentally different work and better outcomes.

Ff you’re interested in exploring what this looks like in your own work and life, I’d welcome that conversation. It’s what I do.

– Brett