Exclusion in the Workplace

This page summarizes the work "Is negative attention better than no attention? The comparative effects of ostracism and harassment at work" by O’Reilly et al. (referenced below).

Ostracism vs. Harassment at Work

When we think of mistreatment at work, harassment usually comes to mind. Harassment means direct negative actions: insults, threats, humiliation. Ostracism, by contrast, means being ignored, left out, or excluded. It can be subtle — colleagues not acknowledging you, not inviting you to meetings, or acting as though you are not there. Because it is silent, ostracism often goes unnoticed or is dismissed as unintentional.

Yet research shows ostracism is not less harmful than harassment. In fact, it can have effects that are just as serious. A large project by O’Reilly, Robinson, Berdahl, and Banki (2015) compared both forms of mistreatment across different workplaces.

How People Perceive Exclusion

When people are asked to judge examples of harassment and exclusion, they consistently see harassment as more harmful. Exclusion is treated as minor, more acceptable, and less likely to be against workplace rules. This underestimation is part of what makes it so persistent — if colleagues and leaders don’t recognize exclusion as serious, they are unlikely to address it.

What Employees Experience

When employees describe their own experiences, the picture looks different. Exclusion turns out to be more common than harassment, with nearly three-quarters of people saying they have been left out or ignored at work in the past six months. And its impact is strong: those who experience exclusion report lower job satisfaction, weaker commitment to the organization, and a greater desire to withdraw or leave.

The mechanism is clear. Exclusion undermines belonging, and once belonging is shaken, well-being and motivation decline. Harassment hurts too, but because it still acknowledges someone’s presence, it does not cut at belonging in the same way.

Long-Term Effects

Looking at workplaces over time, exclusion also proves more predictive of lasting harm. Employees who feel ostracized report more health problems, less satisfaction, and a higher likelihood of leaving their jobs. In fact, exclusion is a better predictor of who actually quits than harassment. The silence of being ignored wears people down until disconnecting completely seems like the only option.

Why This Matters

The evidence shows that exclusion is widespread, underestimated, and just as damaging as harassment. It undermines the basic human need to belong, harms well-being, and pushes people out of their jobs.

Because harassment is easier to recognize, organizations often focus there. But exclusion deserves equal attention. Both exclusion and harassment have profound effects, and both must be taken seriously if inclusion is to mean something real.

References

O’Reilly, J., Robinson, S. L., Berdahl, J. L., & Banki, S. (2015). Is negative attention better than no attention? The comparative effects of ostracism and harassment at work. Organization Science, 26(3), 774–793. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2014.0900