Cambridge, MA, March 12, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- “You don’t sound Black.” “You should smile more often, sweetheart.” “You’re so brave for dealing with your handicap.”
Microaggressions like these have the power to strain or damage relationships in the workplace and negatively impact culture and productivity. But such outcomes need not be absolute. Under the right conditions, the targets and perpetrators of workplace microaggressions can restore their relationship and, in some cases, grow from the incident and cultivate a bond stronger than what they had before, according to recent research.
A new paper co-authored by MIT Sloan School of Management assistant professor Basima Tewfik and Harvard Business School assistant professor Summer Jackson (MIT Sloan SM ’18, PhD ’21) offers a new theory on how some perpetrators and targets can cultivate stronger bonds, with practical implications for organizations, human resources departments, and for microaggression discourse more broadly. Their theory addresses gaps in past theories, which have not taken into account the perpetrator and target’s relationship when thinking about what happens to the interaction patterns following the workplace microaggression. Most often, it has been assumed that the relationship between a target and a perpetrator is doomed.
“There are different pathways people can follow after a microaggression,” Tewfik said. “Part of it is trying to understand the different motivations people have going into it. We unpack what those trajectories are, while recognizing that it’s really hard to get on to that good trajectory.”
Microaggressions – those slights that undermine social identity – are typically made by a person with a dominant social identity toward someone who has a marginalized social identity. According to researchers, they can hurt because they attack a person’s core identity. When a microaggression happens, targets often respond with a self-protective stance. They may get angry, avoid the perpetrator, or withdraw.
Tewfik and Jackson advised helping targets shift their mindset to one focused on the relationship, which is possible under certain circumstances. If in the past, a target had more positive than negative interactions with a perpetrator, then they’re more likely to consider mending the relationship. Likewise, if a target feels close to the perpetrator before the transgression, or if they have a reason to maintain the relationship – maybe they’re working together on a big project – the pair is more likely to get on a healthier trajectory.
“A natural reaction for a lot of us is to be self-protective, but if you want to get to a better place, you have to take a more proactive role and get to a less protective space, and it can happen,” said Tewfik.
Meanwhile, a perpetrator’s response is critical, added Jackson. After they commit an alleged microaggression, some perpetrators interpret targets’ self-protective reaction as a threat to their own self-image. If that happens, they might respond with hostility or withdraw. The same factors for perpetrators as for targets play a part in perpetrators’ response, according to the researchers.
The researchers note that perpetrators are more likely to adopt a less defensive stance right away if they’ve had more positive interactions with the target. They may also be more open to relationship repair if they feel close to the target or if they’re invested in a future relationship with their co-worker. Jackson said, “It’s crucial for perpetrators to take a proactive role. While some might see that stance as diminishing targets’ power, it is in fact, the opposite. Considering both targets’ and perpetrators’ responses and behaviors after a microaggression can empower targets by taking some of the burden off of them.”
“If you don’t acknowledge the perpetrator, you’re putting all of the onus on the target,” Tewfik said. “Our theory ensures targets are empowered, but it’s not just them who are left to manage microaggression after-effects.”
The researchers have found that when both a target and perpetrator stick to a self-protective stance, little repair work is likely. Targets and perpetrators can do the deepest work to mend their relationship when both adopt a ‘relationship-promotive’ stance. When targets and perpetrators have opposite stances, the mending falls somewhere in between. What’s more, two factors appear to influence the depth of repair work. Co-workers who both believe their work is meaningful, and that inclusive teamwork is critical for their firm, can do the most extensive work.
Companies can use the theory to encourage positive outcomes when microaggressions inevitably occur in the workplace. “People are going to make mistakes, we’re human. Firms can work to foster a culture in which employees firmly believe the job they’re doing is meaningful, while also highlighting the importance of collaboration and inclusion,” said Tewfik.
The more companies can do to encourage healthier resolutions around microaggressions, the better for productivity. “People will be more willing to work together,” said Tewfik. “It’s really important to develop this more holistic perspective around what we know about relationship consequences because, if you take bad outcomes for granted, it can make you feel really locked in at a time when workplaces are becoming more diverse.”
Attachment
Matthew Aliberti MIT Sloan School of Management 7815583436 malib@mit.edu
