How Well-Meaning Allies Can Increase Stress for Marginalized People at Work
Workplace allyship is usually rooted in good intentions. When someone witnesses a sexist or racially insensitive remark, the instinct to step in and help feels like the right thing to do. But new research suggests that how allies choose to help can sometimes have unintended consequences—especially for the very people they are trying to support.
A recent set of studies led by organizational behavior researcher Merrick Osborne explores a surprisingly underexamined question: what happens when allies ask marginalized coworkers to help confront prejudice in the workplace? The findings suggest that these requests, though well-meaning, can increase emotional stress for marginalized individuals and even harm their perception of the ally.
The Workplace Scenario Many People Recognize
Imagine a common office situation. Someone makes a racially insensitive or sexist comment. A coworker who wants to act as an ally steps in—but instead of confronting the offender alone, they turn to a marginalized colleague and ask them to help address the issue.
At first glance, this might look like collaboration or inclusion. After all, who better to speak about prejudice than someone who has lived experience with it? However, Osborne’s research shows that this approach can place an unexpected emotional burden on marginalized individuals, making them feel pressured to participate in uncomfortable or stressful confrontations simply because of their identity.
Why Researchers Wanted to Study This
Osborne traces the motivation for the research back to the early days of the Black Lives Matter movement and similar social justice movements. During this time, many people from marginalized groups found themselves repeatedly asked to comment on traumatic or sensitive events—such as the police killing of Breonna Taylor in March 2020—not because of professional expertise, but because of who they were.
This pattern raised an important question: while marginalized individuals may have valuable perspectives on prejudice, does being repeatedly asked to speak up come at a cost?
Social science has long assumed that marginalized people are more knowledgeable about discrimination and therefore more willing—or better suited—to confront it. Osborne and his colleagues wanted to go further and examine what it actually feels like when marginalized individuals are asked to take on this role in real-world workplace scenarios.
The Research Team Behind the Study
The research was conducted by a team of organizational scholars:
- Merrick R. Osborne, assistant professor of organizational behavior at Cornell University’s ILR School
- Eric Anicich, associate professor of management and organization at the University of Southern California
- Cydney Dupree, associate professor of organizations and innovation at University College London
This work grew out of Osborne’s doctoral research at USC, where Anicich served as his adviser. The collaboration expanded after the researchers connected during an academic talk at USC in 2021.
Three Studies, Nearly 1,500 Participants
To explore how ally requests affect marginalized individuals, the researchers designed three separate studies involving nearly 1,500 participants. Each study focused on workplace prejudice, such as sexism or racism, and examined how marginalized people responded when allies sought their help versus when allies handled the situation independently.
Across all three studies, the pattern was remarkably consistent.
What the Studies Found
The core finding is simple but powerful: being asked by an ally to help confront prejudice is more emotionally burdensome than not being asked at all.
In Study 1, participants were asked to imagine a situation involving workplace prejudice and then evaluate an ally coworker. In some cases, the ally asked for their help in confronting the offender; in others, the ally did not. Participants who were asked to help reported higher emotional strain and viewed the ally less positively.
Study 2 expanded on this idea by testing different variations of ally behavior. Some allies directly asked for help, while others merely referenced the marginalized person without explicitly involving them. The results showed that direct requests were especially stressful, highlighting that it wasn’t just being mentioned—it was the expectation to act that created the burden.
In Study 3, the researchers focused on women responding to sexism. They examined whether the presence or absence of the perpetrator during the ally’s request changed the outcome. Regardless of whether the offender was present, being asked to help still led to greater emotional burden and more negative evaluations of the ally.
How Ally Requests Affect Relationships
The emotional strain didn’t stop at stress alone. The studies also found that this heightened burden partially damaged the ally’s standing in the eyes of marginalized group members.
Participants were less likely to want to:
- Work with the ally in the future
- Socialize with them
- View them as a supportive or trustworthy colleague
In other words, even though the ally’s intentions were positive, the request itself changed how the relationship was perceived.
Why These Requests Feel Burdensome
One key factor appears to be the feeling of obligation. When an ally directly asks a marginalized person to speak up, it can feel less like an invitation and more like a mandate. Saying no may feel awkward, socially risky, or even professionally dangerous.
Marginalized individuals often already navigate workplace dynamics carefully. Adding the expectation that they must confront prejudice—especially in real time—can amplify stress, emotional labor, and potential backlash.
Rethinking What Effective Allyship Looks Like
The researchers are clear that this work is not an argument against allyship. Instead, it’s a call to think more carefully about how allyship is practiced.
One possible alternative is creating space for marginalized individuals to engage only if they choose to, without putting them on the spot. Quietly offering support, addressing the issue independently, or following up later can reduce the emotional pressure while still taking prejudice seriously.
Allyship, the researchers suggest, should be evaluated not by intention alone but by impact—especially on those it aims to support.
Why This Research Matters Right Now
As workplaces place greater emphasis on diversity, equity, and inclusion, many employees genuinely want to do the right thing. This research highlights that good intentions are not always enough.
Marginalized employees already face disproportionate emotional and cognitive labor at work. Adding the responsibility of educating others or confronting prejudice—simply because of their identity—can quietly undermine well-being and workplace relationships.
Understanding these dynamics helps organizations and individuals move toward forms of allyship that are supportive rather than stressful, and collaborative rather than extractive.
The Bigger Picture on Emotional Labor
This study also contributes to a broader conversation about emotional labor in professional settings. Emotional labor includes managing feelings, responding to sensitive issues, and navigating social expectations—tasks that often fall unevenly on women and marginalized groups.
By highlighting how ally requests can unintentionally increase this burden, the research encourages a more thoughtful, informed approach to addressing bias at work.
Final Thoughts
The takeaway is not that allies should stay silent. Instead, it’s that speaking up doesn’t always require asking marginalized colleagues to lead the charge. Sometimes, the most helpful action is taking responsibility, using one’s own voice, and allowing others the freedom to engage—or not—on their own terms.
As conversations about equity continue to evolve, studies like this offer valuable insight into what meaningful, respectful allyship can look like in practice.
Research paper:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2025.104865
