How to Intervene When You Witness a Microaggression

Microaggressions—those brief, everyday behaviors or comments that often unintentionally exclude or demean the target—have become a frequently discussed topic in management science and practice. But despite the growing understanding of the concept of microaggression in general (Google searches for the term microaggression have doubled in the last two years alone) and in academic research, in addition to the countless practical DEI workshops dedicated to raising awareness , it still remains a common experience for staff from non-majority groups and can be an unseen obstacle that impedes many DEI efforts.

Women, ethnic and racial minorities, and LGBTQ people often experience microaggression in the workplace. These behaviors often take the form of jokes, the exclusion of some voices in meetings, or subtle comments that denigrate the recipient. Perhaps you’ve seen a woman formulate an idea only to later have it attributed to a male colleague. Perhaps the one black woman in the office is often asked by others if they can touch her hair. Examples like these abound in the workplace, and they can have cumulative detrimental effects on those we choose to keep. Those who experience frequent microaggressions are more likely to feel left out, detach, and eventually leave their teams and organizations.

We have both previously explored the role of bias and exclusion as delay mechanisms in moving towards greater gender diversity in STEM careers, an area where women in senior leadership positions are still severely underrepresented. In our recent research, we examined the experience of microaggression for female STEM leaders. In doing so, we uncovered some fascinating insights into the important role allies can play in any organization or area.

What microaggressions look like at work

We’ve found that the most common types of microaggression experienced by women in STEM fields come in three ways, which you can recognize regardless of your identity or workspace:

1. Invalidation of Competence. This type of microaggression is evident in comments and behaviors that question or downplay a woman’s technical ability. Examples were the transfer of one’s work to a male colleague; both male and female colleagues or clients asking to speak to a woman’s male colleague even though the woman was the subject matter expert or project manager; and to openly allow one’s own professional achievements to be questioned during a performance appraisal.
2. Physical Presence Invalidation. This type of microaggression manifests itself as disruptive behaviors where individuals talk about a woman while she is speaking as well as completely disregarding her physical presence by not acknowledging her at meetings or gatherings.
3. Gaslighting behavior and comments that diminish or deny women’s experience of gender bias. This type of microaggression takes the form of colleagues telling the woman that what she described was not gender bias—for example, by offering alternative explanations (“He’s not sexist; he’s like that with everyone” or “Don’t you think that you? Are you too sensitive about that? I didn’t even notice it”).

These seemingly harmless, frequent encounters were associated with a range of negative effects for the women who experienced them, including negative emotional responses (e.g., frustration, sadness), cognitive overload (e.g., feeling overwhelmed), and overcompensating behavior (e.g. constantly having to “prove” oneself or one’s experience). Additionally, repeated exposure to such behaviors over time led to emotional exhaustion and depression in many women. Most shared that they expended a significant amount of cognitive energy deciphering the intent and meaning behind the aggression, and many struggled with whether to confront the attacker.

The combination of these negative effects finally caused many women to doubt their professional competence and skills. In fact, we found that repeated exposure to microaggressions can ultimately deter qualified and competent women from staying or pursuing careers in STEM.

Why Microaggressions Are So Widespread

If micro-aggressions are increasingly being noticed, why are they still such a problem? First, most microaggressions are subtle and can therefore be difficult to spot. Second, most DEI training is typically delivered as one-off sessions, which are an important first step but lack the continuity and practical skill building needed to identify and address microaggression.

As a result, microaggressions can become so commonplace that they are often ingrained in day-to-day work and embedded in corporate culture. Furthermore, it is often left to the target to shine the spotlight on the microaggression and clear up the perpetrator, which can take an immense emotional and psychological toll. Confrontation with the aggressor can also have negative professional consequences, as those who choose to address the microaggressions they experience may be labeled as troublemakers, bad sports, overly sensitive, or players on the “minority card.” In fact, research shows that the costs of confrontation can be high, especially when the confrontational person is the target. And given that development and advancement opportunities are heavily dependent on personal connections and relationships, it’s no wonder many targets prefer to remain silent.

When microaggressions proliferate, they can contribute to exclusionary and even hostile work environments, as well as weakened relationships between targets and well-intentioned individuals. It is therefore crucial that those who witness microaggressions intervene.

How allies can intervene

Passers-by often do not intervene because they either do not recognize the microaggression or if they do, they do not see it as a problem. In addition, individuals who witness microaggressions often give similar reasons for not confronting aggressors as targets do, and it may not always be safe for witnesses to publicly confront the aggressor at the moment (for example, if the witness is subordinate to the microaggressor and afraid). direct confrontation can have professional consequences).

We found that unsolicited and supportive allies—both male and female colleagues—who intervened and disrupted the negative experience played an important role in addressing microaggression and mitigating its impact on the affected women. These colleagues often had more seniority, tenure and experience within the organization than the target; However, there were also examples of peer intervention, suggesting that anyone can practice alliance. Here are three ways you can act as an ally when you spot microaggressions at work, regardless of your seniority:

Know what to look for

To best help as an ally, first educate yourself about different forms of microaggression and note that most appear as subtle behaviors and comments that are often unintentional and therefore can go unnoticed by most people – including you. This means understanding and identifying the specific ways in which microaggressions manifest and affect goals. It’s especially important to listen to targets share examples of microaggression, as they can shed light on how seemingly common, everyday behaviors that you may not even recognize can denigrate certain groups.

Do you speak

Address microaggressions when and where appropriate when you see them. As shown in our study, engaging behavior can be as simple as acknowledging a woman’s idea during a meeting (“Thank you, Maria, for the suggestion. Let’s explore this further”), interrupting the interrupter (“Actually, Priya “unfinished”) or highlighting a woman’s competence and accomplishments when others try to falsely deny her abilities (“I’m pretty sure Rachel wrote that code. You should ask her about it”). It’s important not to speak on behalf of the target person or assume you know how they feel (“You did she uncomfortable”), rather than speaking on your own behalf (“Made this comment me uncomfortable”).

For example, one study participant reported a situation where her male director openly questioned the results of her biased performance appraisal in front of a group of managers who had concluded that she was too far “under the director’s wings” and not alone achieved a lot – even though she had led several projects and was the only one who knew how to use the necessary programming language. Since the director had worked with her and could speak of her technical competence, his intervention dispelled any doubts she had about her technical abilities.

Grab it

To help women combat the common gaslighting they counteract, validate their experiences of dealing with gender bias in the workplace. This can take the form of a simple acknowledgment from a colleague that what she experienced was in fact biased or inappropriate behavior.

For example, one study participant shared the validation and appreciation she felt when one of her male colleagues noticed the disruptive behavior she had repeatedly experienced in a meeting and said he would address it next time. This intervention was particularly impactful for the woman as it appeared unprompted by her and validated her reality and struggle as a woman struggling with gender stereotypes.

This particular type of intervention by allies can be conducted privately and may be appropriate in situations where public exposure or confrontation of the attacker is not possible. We found that supporting women privately can still have a strong enhancing impact on cushioning the negative effects of microaggressions, making them feel more secure and stable in their identities as STEM professionals—for example, by preventing them from creating false ones Internalize assumptions about their competence. Unsolicited validation from allies also helped women externalize the threat, blaming the aggressor instead of themselves, while validating their own technical prowess and affiliation with STEM.

. . .

While organizations must address microaggressions at a systemic level, it is critical that the targets of microaggressions are not left alone to deal with the cumulative impact of these insults. Realistically, it’s not always easy to intervene, especially when an organization lacks psychological security and faces retaliation—even from allies. However, you can normalize the behavior of allies, helping to create a more inclusive workplace without exclusionary behavior.