YOU DIDN’T GET WHERE YOU ARE TO REMAIN WHO YOU’VE ALWAYS BEEN

There is a silent moment in the journey of those who lead — an instant when technical competence is no longer enough, titles lose their shine, and past achievements start to feel too small for the scale of what is now required. It is the moment when you realize, with uncomfortable clarity, that you have reached a place where who you have been will not be enough for where you need to go. And then, faced with that realization, two radically opposite choices emerge: retreat to familiar territory or cross the abyss that separates the safe version of yourself from the version you have not yet dared to become.
Most people, when confronted with this crossroads, choose the first option without even realizing they have chosen. They retreat disguisedly. They maintain the appearance of progress while, internally, reinforcing the same thought structures, the same automatic reactions, the same relationship patterns that have always defined them. They change positions but not posture. They take on greater responsibilities but continue operating from the same limiting beliefs. They occupy higher chairs but remain emotionally seated in the same place they have always been.
And it works — for a while. Until it no longer does. Because the world does not wait. Demands intensify. Complexity grows. And the person you have been, no matter how competent, proves insufficient in the face of the magnitude of what life is now asking of you. Not because you are incapable. But because you are trying to face new challenges with an old identity. And old identities, no matter how well they served you in the past, eventually become invisible prisons.
The problem is not technical. It never was. You know how to manage projects, lead teams, deliver results. The problem is existential. You are still operating from a version of yourself built to survive in contexts that no longer exist. That version of you that learned to be indispensable in order to feel valuable. That version that avoids confrontations because, deep down, it believes being loved is more important than being respected. That version that seeks external validation because it never learned to validate itself internally.
And now you are in rooms where that version no longer fits. You are facing people who don’t need you to be nice — they need you to be clear. You are in contexts where pleasing does not build authority; it only erodes it. You are taking on responsibilities that demand not just competence, but presence. Real presence. Not the performance of presence. Not the simulation of confidence. But the ability to occupy space without asking permission, to make decisions without needing collective validation, to sustain discomfort without emotionally collapsing.
And here is the truth no one told you: you do not develop executive presence by learning communication techniques or body posture. You develop executive presence by dying to the need to be who others need you to be. Presence is not something you add. It is something that emerges when you finally stop performing.

PRESENCE IS NOT POSTURE — IT IS A NEUROPHYSIOLOGICAL STATE
Most people believe executive presence is about how you present yourself: firm voice, upright posture, direct eye contact, controlled gestures. And they spend years trying to “improve presence” by adjusting external variables, as if leadership were well-rehearsed theater. But real presence has nothing to do with bodily performance. It has everything to do with regulation of the autonomic nervous system.
When you are in genuine presence, your body enters a specific state that neuroscience calls ventral vagal activation — the branch of the parasympathetic nervous system responsible for secure social connection. In this state, you have simultaneous access to the prefrontal cortex (responsible for strategic clarity, complex reasoning, decision-making) and a regulated amygdala (capable of processing threats without collapsing into defensive reactivity). It is a rare, sophisticated state that most people never experience in high-pressure contexts.
When you are in performance — trying to manage impressions, control how you are perceived, maintain the facade of unshakable competence — you activate a completely different state: social threat mode. Your sympathetic nervous system fires, releasing cortisol and adrenaline. Your heart rate increases and becomes chaotic. Your voice rises in pitch and speeds up. Your gestures become tense or excessively controlled. And most importantly: you lose access to the prefrontal cortex. Literally. Your executive capacities — strategic reasoning, cognitive empathy, creativity, discernment — become impaired because all your energy is consumed by impression management.
And here is what no one told you: the other person feels it before they rationally understand it. Presence is not perceived by the interlocutor’s conscious mind. It is felt by their nervous system. When you are in real presence — regulated, anchored, ventral vagal activated — the other person’s body unconsciously responds with safety, openness, trust. When you are in performance — dysregulated, anxious, threat mode activated — the other person’s body responds with distrust, defensiveness, distance.
This is not mysticism. It is biology. It is what happens when two nervous systems interact. And that is why you can master every communication technique in the world and still lack real executive presence. Because technique does not regulate the nervous system. Consciousness does.
Think of a concrete situation: you are in a board meeting. Someone publicly questions your decision, with veiled aggression, trying to destabilize you in front of others. If you are in performance, your body immediately enters threat mode: heart racing, shallow breathing, high-pitched voice, defensive gestures. You respond too quickly, justify excessively, counterattack or withdraw. And everyone in the room feels the dysregulation — even if they cannot name what they are feeling. Authority evaporates in that instant, not because you “lost composure,” but because your nervous system collapsed under social threat.
Now imagine the same situation, but you are in real presence. Someone verbally attacks you. You notice the activation in your body — the impulse to defend, justify, counterattack. But instead of reacting automatically, you breathe. Deeply. Consciously. You anchor your attention in the sensation of your feet on the floor, your back against the chair. You do not flee the discomfort. You sustain it. And your nervous system, instead of collapsing into threat mode, remains in ventral vagal. Your voice does not speed up — in fact, it slows down and lowers in tone. You look at the person confronting you, without rigidity, without aggression, but also without submission. And you respond slowly, without defensiveness: “Interesting that you raise this. Let’s look together at the data that supported the decision.”
What happened there? You did not use a “non-violent communication technique.” You simply did not collapse. And when you did not collapse, the entire emotional field of the room reorganized itself. What was confrontation became dialogue. Not because you “managed the situation,” but because your regulated nervous system became a regulatory anchor for the other nervous systems present.
This is real executive presence. And it is not trained with public speaking courses. It is trained by developing interoceptive awareness — the ability to perceive what is happening in your body in real time — and autonomic regulation — the ability to consciously choose your nervous state instead of being hijacked by it.
Most leaders spend their entire lives trying to “improve presence” by adjusting external variables. And they repeatedly fail because they are treating the symptom, not the cause. Presence is not what you do. It is the state from which you act.

PRESENCE IS NOT DOMINATION — IT IS A RELATIONAL FIELD
There is widespread confusion about what it means to “occupy space” as a leader. The traditional view — still widely taught in leadership programs — is that executive presence means dominating the room: speaking louder, interrupting when necessary, imposing your ideas, ensuring everyone knows who is in charge. It is a view of leadership as control. And it works — in military environments, in acute crisis situations, in contexts where rapid obedience matters more than critical thinking.
But in complex environments, where innovation matters, where decisions need to integrate multiple perspectives, where genuine engagement is more valuable than passive obedience, that model of presence collapses. Because real executive presence is not about dominating space. It is about reorganizing the relational field so that everyone present can access their best thinking.
When you are in genuine presence, something extraordinary happens: space does not need to be occupied by you — it naturally reorganizes around your anchoring. Not because you are the most important person in the room, but because you are the most regulated person. And emotional regulation is contagious. Nervous systems co-regulate. When you remain anchored, others can anchor themselves. When you do not collapse under tension, others can sustain tension without fleeing.
This has a name in organizational psychology: psychological safety. Amy Edmondson, Harvard professor, spent decades studying why some teams innovate and others stagnate. And she found that the difference is not talent, diversity, or method. It is the group’s ability to take risks without fear of humiliation. And psychological safety is not created with speeches about “everyone can speak here” — it is created with the leader’s regulated presence, which demonstrates, through their own nervous system, that discomfort is not danger.
See the concrete difference: you enter a room where two people on your team are in open conflict. Tension is palpable. Everyone else is uncomfortable, avoiding eye contact, hoping someone resolves it quickly. If you are in performance mode — trying to “be a good leader,” maintain harmony, resolve fast — you do what most do: interrupt the conflict, offer a ready-made solution, impose false consensus. “Everyone, let’s calm down. You two will sit together later and sort this out. Now let’s focus on the meeting.”
Everyone leaves the room. The conflict is not resolved. It is merely postponed. And everyone knows it. Worse: everyone has learned that, on this team, emotional discomfort is not tolerated. That conflict must be hidden, not worked through. That psychological safety is a lie — because the leader, in the moment of real tension, fled.
Now imagine the same situation, but you are in real presence. You enter the room, feel the tension, notice the collective discomfort. And instead of fleeing, you sit. Breathe. Look at the two people in conflict and say, slowly: “Okay. You two have something that needs to be said. So let’s do it differently now. Each of you will speak, without interruption. I will just listen first. And we will all listen too. Because if this is happening here, it is important.”
And you sustain the silence that follows. You do not flee it. You do not fill it with a joke, an order, a ready solution. You simply remain. Anchored. Regulated. And something extraordinary happens: the level of aggression drops. Because you are not trying to control the conflict — you are creating a space where it can exist without destroying anyone. And when you do not flee, others stop fleeing too. The first person speaks. Then the second. And slowly, what was destructive conflict transforms into productive disagreement.
You did not use a “conflict mediation technique.” You did not apply “non-violent communication.” You simply did not collapse. Your nervous system remained ventral vagal, and that allowed the other nervous systems to co-regulate as well. This is executive presence as a relational field.
And here is what changes everything: when you lead from real presence, you do not need to make people trust you. They trust because their nervous system feels that you are safe. Not safe in the sense of “will not make mistakes,” but safe in the sense of “will not emotionally collapse when things get hard.” And that — the ability to remain regulated amid chaos — is what creates real loyalty, not performative obedience.
Leaders who operate in performance create performative teams. Everyone pretending everything is fine, everyone hiding difficulties, everyone afraid of disappointing. Leaders who operate in real presence create real teams. Where problems are named, where discomfort is worked through, where vulnerability is not punished.
And this is not about being “nice” or “empathetic.” It is about not collapsing. It is about sustaining tension without fleeing it. It is about having a nervous system sufficiently regulated that others can temporarily dysregulate without destroying everything.

PRESENCE IS NOT QUICK DECISION — IT IS SUSTAINING AMBIGUITY
There is immense cultural pressure for leaders to decide quickly. Quick decision-making is seen as a sign of competence, clarity, strong leadership. And in simple contexts, it makes sense. If the building is on fire, you do not call a meeting to discuss the best evacuation routes. You shout “GET OUT NOW” and everyone obeys.
But most challenges leaders face today are not fires. They are complex, ambiguous problems where there is no obviously right answer, where different perspectives reveal different facets of reality, where the best solution is not available at the start — it needs to emerge from the collective investigation process. And in those contexts, quick decision is not a sign of competence. It is a sign of intolerance to ambiguity.
Real executive presence includes the rare, sophisticated, immensely difficult ability to remain in the “I don’t know” without collapsing. To sustain the tension of uncertainty long enough for a third way, unseen by anyone initially, to emerge. And this requires something most leaders do not have: emotional tolerance for prolonged discomfort.
Because ambiguity is uncomfortable. Neurologically, the brain hates uncertainty. Uncertainty activates the amygdala, which interprets lack of clarity as potential threat. And when the amygdala fires, the brain enters quick-resolution mode: either seek consensus (to reduce social tension) or impose an authoritarian decision (to end the discomfort soon). Both are escapes. Both avoid the real work of inhabiting the question until it reveals the answer.
See the concrete difference: you are facing a crucial strategic decision. Half the team wants solution A. Half wants solution B. Both have solid arguments. Both have risks. And everyone is looking at you, waiting for you to decide. Pressure is palpable. Silence is uncomfortable.
If you are in performance — trying to appear decisive, trying not to disappoint anyone, trying to end the discomfort quickly — you do one of two things: seek consensus (“let’s do a middle ground between A and B”) or impose authority (“we’ll do A because I decided”). Both are escapes. The middle ground dilutes both solutions and usually does not work well. Authoritarian imposition resolves the moment’s tension but creates resentment, disengagement, and you lose the collective intelligence that could have generated something better.
Now imagine the same situation, but you are in real presence. Half want A, half want B, everyone awaits your decision. And you breathe. Feel the discomfort in your body — the chest pressure, the urge to resolve quickly, the fear of appearing indecisive. And you do not flee that discomfort. You sustain it. And you say, slowly: “I don’t know yet what the best decision is here. And I will not decide until we understand what we are really trying to solve.”
Silence. Discomfort. Someone tries to fill the void with repeated arguments. You listen, but you do not decide. You continue inhabiting the question. “What else are we not seeing? What assumption are we making without questioning? Is there a third option no one has considered yet?”
And in the midst of that sustained discomfort, something happens. Someone says something new. A perspective that had not been considered. An assumption everyone was making unconsciously. And suddenly, a third way reveals itself — not A, not B, but C, which no one had seen because everyone was trying to resolve too quickly.
This is not meeting facilitation. This is executive presence as the capacity to sustain ambiguity without collapse. And it requires two things: sharp interoception (awareness of what is happening in your body while you sustain the discomfort) and top-down regulation (ability to not automatically react to the impulse to flee uncertainty).
Most leaders do not develop this because no one teaches them. They are taught to “make quick decisions.” They are taught to “show confidence even when unsure.” They are taught performance. They are not taught presence. And the difference between the two is that performance makes you appear decisive — but presence leads you to better decisions.
Because the best decisions, in complex contexts, are rarely obvious at the beginning. They emerge when you have the courage to inhabit the question long enough. And that courage does not come from technique. It comes from having a nervous system sufficiently regulated to sustain prolonged emotional discomfort without needing to eliminate it with premature decision.

THE PRICE NO ONE MENTIONS
And now we reach the territory no one wants to discuss. Because everything said so far sounds, in a way, desirable. Who wouldn’t want real presence? Who wouldn’t want the ability to regulate the nervous system, create healthy relational fields, make better decisions? It seems that if you develop all this, your life as a leader will be better, easier, more successful.
And it will be. In some respects.
But there is a cost. A cost that leadership books do not mention, that coaches avoid naming, that motivational talks completely ignore. And it is this: when you stop performing and start inhabiting real presence, some people will no longer recognize you. And some of those people are people you love.
Because the version of you that performed — that avoided conflicts, sought approval, adjusted to please, carried others’ emotional burdens to be seen as indispensable — was comfortable for many people. Comfortable for the colleague who depended on you to validate them. Comfortable for the boss who saw you as “always available, never complains.” Comfortable for the team that knew you would never truly challenge them because you feared disappointing them.
And when you die to that version, when you finally set boundaries, when you stop carrying what is not yours, when you say no without endless explanations, when you make difficult decisions without seeking consensus that dilutes responsibility — some of those people will distance themselves. Some will criticize you. Some will say “you’ve changed,” as if it were an accusation. And they are right. You have changed. You have stopped being the version that was convenient for them.
And here is the question you need to answer, alone, without an audience, without validation: are you willing to be less loved by the old version of yourself in order to finally be respected by the true version?
Because those two things are not always compatible. Some people loved you not because they truly knew you, but because you fulfilled a function in their lives. And when you stop fulfilling that function, the “love” they felt reveals itself as transaction. And that hurts.
But here is what also happens: when you finally stop performing, when you inhabit real presence, you attract a different kind of person. Not those who need you to be small so they can feel big. Not those who depend on your weakness to sustain their own illusion of strength. But those who respect you precisely because you no longer pretend. Those who trust you precisely because you do not collapse. Those who follow you not because you please them, but because you challenge them to be better.
And those relationships — built on truth, not performance — are the only ones that sustain real leadership. Because real leadership is not measured by how many love you. It is measured by how many grow beside you.
You didn’t get where you are to remain who you’ve always been. You got where you are because, on some deep level, you always knew you were capable of more. Much more. And now life is demanding — not asking, demanding — that you abandon the safe, predictable, socially approved version of yourself and become the true version.
The one who does not ask permission. The one who does not avoid discomfort. The one who does not trade integrity for approval. The one who inhabits real presence — neurophysiologically regulated, relationally anchored, capable of sustaining ambiguity without collapse.
That version exists. You have already felt it emerge in moments of extreme pressure, when there was no time to perform and you simply were.
And the only thing separating you from that version is not competence. Not experience. Not time. It is choice. The choice to stop protecting who you have been and start discovering who you can be.
And if the price of that choice is the temporary loneliness of no longer being recognized by the people who only loved the old version of you?
Then that is the price. And you decide if it is worth it.
The sky is the limit. But only for those willing to let go of the ground.

#ExecutivePresence #NeurophysiologicalLeadership #ExistentialTransformation #AuthenticLeadership #EmotionalRegulation #HumanDevelopment #DeepSelfKnowledge #RealLeadership #AppliedNeuroscience #EmotionalIntelligence #PsychologicalSafety #TransformationalLeadership #ExecutiveAwareness #marcellodesouza #marcellodesouzaoficial #coachingevoce

To continue exploring the hidden dimensions of leadership, authentic cognitive-behavioral development, and conscious human relationships, access my blog and dive into hundreds of articles that challenge conventional thinking and invite you to question not only what you do, but fundamentally who you choose to be.
👉 www.marcellodesouza.com.br

There you will find deep analyses on executive presence, organizational transformation, and the invisible structures that govern both individuals and organizations. Original, provocative, and transformative content — because real change demands real thinking.