Structuring Belonging: A Practical Approach to Inclusion

Inclusion as a structural practice — and how it affects retention, collaboration, and innovation

Estimated reading time: 4 minutes

Many companies talk about inclusion as a value. Fewer treat it as a system. Belonging is often framed as a feeling, but the most reliable way to build it is through design through structures, signals, and shared norms that help people know they are seen, valued, and safe to contribute.

Belonging has business implications. Research has shown that employees with a strong sense of belonging have 56% higher job performance and 50% lower turnover risk (BetterUp, 2019). Belonging also shapes innovation: when people feel psychologically safe, they are more likely to take risks, share ideas, and challenge norms (Edmondson, 1999).

The mistake many leaders make is treating belonging as something to “encourage” rather than engineer. It is not the product of a mission statement or a DEI training. It is the result of repeated interactions, design decisions, and embedded practices that either include people or edge them out.

1. Normalize contribution from the margins

Belonging is not just about being included in the room, it is about being part of the conversation. That means designing team interactions to include voices that may otherwise be left out.

At Pixar, leaders intentionally ask for dissent during creative review meetings. Feedback is structured so that junior team members can safely challenge senior ideas. According to Ed Catmull, former president of Pixar, this practice is not just about fairness, it leads to better storytelling. When people can contribute without fear, ideas improve.

To replicate this, teams can rotate meeting roles, ask for input anonymously before group discussions, or intentionally hold space for the least heard perspectives. The goal is not just to listen to everyone, but to build systems where everyone expects to be heard.

2. Design rituals that reinforce identity and cohesion

Belonging thrives on shared language, rituals, and identity signals. These do not have to be grand gestures. Even small, repeatable acts, like onboarding rituals, team check-ins, or naming conventions help people understand where they fit and what matters.

At Salesforce, new hires participate in “Ohana” onboarding, which is not just about compliance or tools. It’s about culture, connection, and building early relationships. The program includes storytelling from senior leaders, introductions to employee resource groups, and time for reflection on values. This signals early that identity and community are not side topics, but integral to the employee experience.

Smaller teams can borrow this principle by creating team charters, celebrating milestones in inclusive ways, or setting norms that honor cultural and communication differences. The point is not to create uniformity, but to create cohesion without erasure.

3. Audit how opportunity is distributed

Belonging erodes quickly when people notice that advancement is limited to those who act, speak, or look a certain way. If stretch assignments, mentoring, or visibility are distributed informally, those with dominant identities tend to receive more.

A Harvard Business Review study found that employees from underrepresented groups are 24% less likely to receive informal mentoring than their peers, which directly impacts their likelihood of promotion (HBR, 2021). Informality is often where bias hides.

Organizations should track who is receiving growth opportunities and why. Succession plans, performance calibrations, and promotion pipelines should be reviewed for representation. Transparency alone cannot fix inequality, but it often reveals where structural fixes are most needed.

4. Treat psychological safety as a performance enabler

When people feel they must code-switch, downplay their identities, or constantly prove their worth, they are using cognitive energy on survival rather than contribution. Psychological safety — the belief that one can speak up without risk — is a predictor of team performance, not just team harmony (Edmondson, 1999).

Leaders can build this safety by owning mistakes publicly, asking better questions, and responding to feedback with curiosity rather than defensiveness. When belonging is present, people stop scanning for threat and start scanning for possibility.

Questions to ask when designing for belonging:

• Who speaks in meetings? Who gets interrupted?

• Who gets feedback and how often?

• Are identity-based ERGs seen as central or peripheral to the business?

• Do new hires feel connected within their first 30 days?

• Is inclusion seen as a shared skill or a DEI department responsibility?

Belonging is not a sentiment to chase, it is a system to build. When we move from intention to design, inclusion becomes less about what people feel and more about what they experience. That’s when it starts to change outcomes.

References

• BetterUp. (2019). “The Value of Belonging at Work.”

• Edmondson, A. (1999). “Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–383.

• Harvard Business Review. (2021). “Advancing Diversity: Why More Mentoring Isn’t Enough.”

• Catmull, E. (2014). Creativity, Inc.: Random House.

• Salesforce. (2023). “Ohana Culture and Onboarding.”