Authentic leadership theory (ALT) is viewed as a value-based, positive concept that promotes openness and transparency at work. While being true to yourself has its merits, combining authenticity—a self-referent concept—with leadership—a dyadic concept—has been critiqued as paradoxical and complex at best. Since most scholars agree that there are multiple selves, it is unclear if the authentic self at work is the true self, the best self, the current self, the future self, or the prescribed self that must conform to organisational roles. Scholars also claim that practising authenticity is difficult, since organisations do not focus on individuals' true selves but rather on the outcomes of their practices and behaviours. In addition, there are codes of conduct and regulations which individuals and leaders alike are required to adhere to. The root of ALT is also debated, with some basing it on positive psychology and others on existential philosophy. This critical piece, therefore, highlights the lack of consensus on the definition and measurement of ALT and how its prescription of subjective morality allows for varied interpretations of moral conduct. ALT's prescribed attributes leave some pending questions about how individuals can be purely authentic in the presence of contextual influences that lead to adherence or conformity to organisational norms. This paper, therefore, calls for a theoretical reconceptualisation, and some recommendations are offered for reimaging ALT to emphasise its focus on values and positive outlook on life.