We know that allies can play an important role in making organizations more inclusive. But are potential allies staying mum out of fear of misstepping or appearing insensitive?

This week, we’ll discuss new research that explores just how warranted this fear is. Plus: what really gives activist-led boycotts their power?

Encouraging allyship

People from historically advantaged groups are sometimes reluctant to engage in acts of allyship because they are afraid that their efforts will fall short and end up offending their colleagues. But new research from Kellogg professor Adam Waytz and his colleagues Hannah Birnbaum of Washington University and Desman Wilson of Greener by Default indicates that potential allies’ fears may be unjustified.

Across several studies, the researchers show that allies’ good-faith efforts are more appreciated by historically disadvantaged groups than these allies think. The authors recently wrote an excellent summary of their work in Harvard Business Review:

For example, in one study examining race-based allyship, white participants read a scenario in which a Black colleague recounted their experiences of racism in their organization, such as being constantly interrupted and asked to do menial tasks like buying coffee for other employees. These white participants then read about various acts of allyship one could take, ranging from simple gestures (e.g., asking how they can help) to more challenging ones (e.g., expressing concerns to organizational leaders), and indicated how much they thought the Black colleague would appreciate these acts of allyship. Black participants read the same scenario, were asked to imagine themselves in the role of the Black colleague, and indicated how much they would appreciate these same allyship acts. The results showed that white people underestimated the extent to which Black people appreciated allyship behaviors.

The results, which hold for gender-based allyship as well, are important, the researchers argue.

This miscalibration between perceived versus actual appreciation of allyship is important because feelings of appreciation can guide whether or not people choose to act as allies. In a study with white male employees, we found that the less people think their acts of allyship will be appreciated, the less likely they are to engage in this behavior.

Knowing this disconnect, leaders can take active steps to help employees get past their inhibitions by explaining how acts of allyship are received.

In one of our studies, we found that when people saw testimonials from real people expressing how much they appreciated allyship, it increased people’s intentions to engage in it. To be clear, the onus should not be on disadvantaged groups to increase allyship through expressing their appreciation; rather we suggest that awareness of this appreciation can spur allyship.

Even employees who are motivated to act may not know exactly how they should get involved. This is another place company leadership can step up, perhaps by surveying traditionally underrepresented group members about the kinds of allyship behaviors they’d like to see, and then sharing the information with others.

You can read more about their research in Harvard Business Review.

Boycotts that hurt

What makes some activist-inspired company boycotts so much more successful than others? This is a topic we’ve covered extensively on Kellogg Insight, but Kellogg’s Brayden King recently gave a great summary on Marketplace.

For the most part, he explains, customers are habitual creatures: “They like what they like. And even when they say they boycott something, or when they’re ideologically aligned to the boycott, they often don’t actually change their behavior.”

Plus, with social media making it easier than ever to start a boycott, it can be tough for any individual boycott to cut through the clutter and see traction. Those few boycotts that do manage to change behavior tend to involve products that have specific qualities that make them susceptible, such as being used in social contexts (where peer-pressure matters more) or having readily available substitutes. (In Bud Light’s case, for instance, both of these are true.)

But even boycotts that don’t hurt the bottom line can be effective, says King, if they pose a threat to a company’s reputation. “We found that about 25% of the time when there’s national media attention given to the boycott, companies will concede to some of the boycotters’ demands.”

You can listen to the entire interview (or read the transcript) on Marketplace.