Why Leaders Should Stop Saying "Vulnerability" and "Networking" And the Two Reframes That Get People on Board

Two words — "vulnerability" and "networking" — are quietly getting in the way of ideas worth spreading. The concepts behind them? Essential. The words themselves? They're killing the message. Here's the language shift that changes everything.

The words we choose shape how people receive our ideas. And sometimes, the best ideas get buried under the worst words.

Why "Vulnerability" Fails as a Leadership Word  

I'm supposed to tell you that leaders should be more vulnerable. That's the modern leadership gospel, right? Share your struggles. Show your humanity. Be vulnerable.

Here's my problem: when we say "leaders should be more vulnerable," to many listening (or reading), it sounds weak. Many who hear it likely think, "Well, that's lame, and definitely not my style." It also sounds potentially inappropriate for the workplace. And perhaps most importantly, how to actually be vulnerable as a leader is rarely discussed.

The Case for "Honesty" Over "Vulnerability" in Leadership 

What if instead of "be vulnerable," we said that leaders should simply "be honest"? Honesty is simply telling the truth — struggles included. Who can argue that honesty is inappropriate or weak? Honesty in pursuit of integrity. Honesty in service of real trust.

That sounds better, doesn't it?

I can see how leaders resist — even argue against — being vulnerable. But who argues against being honest?

When employees hear their leader acknowledge their own struggles, something powerful happens. It can be motivating. They appreciate the honesty. They want to support the leader. They feel more connected to the company and the mission, because they feel safer to be themselves, flaws included.

I’ve talk openly about being on Zoloft. About having a therapist to work through disordered thoughts around food, body, and weight. These aren't me being vulnerable — these are me being honest about the investments I'm making to be my best self. If anything, this makes me LESS vulnerable, because it makes me stronger. See the different ways of using the words?

Now, let me be clear: there are sensible limits. No one needs to know about your diarrhea or STDs or foot fetish. But within reasonable professional boundaries, authentic leadership communication – sharing honest personal context to build real trust – creates genuine value for leaders and the people they lead.

This is an imperative for leaders. But let's stop calling it vulnerability and just start calling it honesty. I think we'll get a lot more people on board with the movement when we use language that doesn't make them cringe.

Why "Networking" Is the Wrong Word — And What to Call It Instead  

We tell people to build their network. To attend networking events. To "connect" with people on LinkedIn. We say the value of the network can be enormous. It's not what you know, it's who you know — so get out there and network.

Ugh. Gross.

Can we stop with the word and instead just encourage people to build relationships? To look for ways to connect with people. To be supportive of others. To establish relationships where both people involved genuinely want to help the other succeed?

I'm not debating that building a web of human relationships is valuable for your career and your life. I'm absolutely convinced it is. The question isn't whether building professional relationships matters — it's whether the word "networking" is actually helping people do it well. It isn't.

What Relationship Building Actually Looks Like 

I'm just reframing it — from "networking," which feels like a binary approach for selfish purpose ("build your network to grow your career"), to something more honest about what it actually is. For example, on LinkedIn, any time you click "Connect," always consider and include a note that conveys the relevance, the sentiment, the intention, of getting to know each other. This replaces generic, shallow "networking” with a real attempt to being a "relationship."

People quickly sniff out someone who is just in it for themselves. We all know that person at the event who's essentially treating humans like Pokémon cards they're trying to collect — working the room, eyes scanning for the next target, barely listening because they're already calculating the value of this particular card to their collection. It's transparent, it's exhausting, and it's off-putting to everyone around them.

When we reframe "networking" as "relationship building," we help people see it's about two-way value creation — not just what's in it for one person. It shifts the focus from extracting value from someone to creating value together. And that's a thing people actually want to do.

Why Leadership Language Shapes Leadership Culture  

Here's what I've learned: the resistance often isn't to the concept — it's to the language we've wrapped around it.

“Vulnerability” sounds risky and weak. “Honesty” sounds confident and strong.

“Networking” sounds transactional and self-serving. “Relationship building” sounds human and mutual.

Same core ideas. Different intention and reception. The language leaders use doesn't just communicate a message — it shapes the culture around that message. When leaders use words that make people want to run in the opposite direction, even the best ideas don't stand a chance.

So yes — be honest as a leader. Share your humanity within sensible limits. And yes, build genuine relationships with people where you both want to help each other succeed.

Just change the words you use, and in doing so, you are also expanding where they can take you.

I'm still on Zoloft. I still see my therapist. I’m still talking openly about it. And I'm still building relationships with people I genuinely care about. I'm just done calling any of it by the wrong names.

Call it what it actually is: being honest and building relationships. Watch how many more people get on board when we use words that don't make them want to run in the opposite direction. 

Words matter — the ones we choose, and the ones we leave behind. 

Agree? Disagree? Have a word or phrase you think we should retire? I'd love to hear it — reach out or drop it in the comments.