What Is Tokenism?
In today’s workplace, many organizations are trying to reflect the diversity of their teams and communities. However, without intentional and sustained action, diversity efforts can slip into tokenism. Tokenism creates the appearance of inclusion without the substance and often leads to negative outcomes for both employees and the organization.
What Does Tokenism Mean?
Tokenism is the practice of including a member from an underrepresented community to create the appearance of inclusion, inclusive practices, or acceptance, without making sure the individual has meaningful support and opportunities.
One of the earliest theories of tokenism was established by Rosabeth Kanter through her book, “Men and Women of the Corporation” (1977). Despite its age, it is still considered one of the most important works on tokenism, and though it is focused on gendered experiences, it can be applied across genders. Kanter believed that, due to the low numbers of women, they:
Become hyper-visible
Are more likely to be stereotyped
Often face increased pressure and scrutiny from colleagues and leadership
Tokenism can also occur when employees are included visually but not within decision-making processes, when they are hired but not supported, or when they feel pressure to represent or speak for an entire community. For example, a 2023 Harvard Business Review article found that employees who feel like the “only” one of their identity group in a room report higher stress levels, a greater pressure to perform, and more disengagement.
Four Examples of Tokenism in the Workplace
Tokenism shows up in many ways. Here are four examples of common patterns of tokenism seen in organizations today.
1. Misleading Branding
Organizations sometimes use images of diverse employees in marketing or public communications while the internal workforce remains largely homogeneous. This creates an external impression of diversity that does not reflect employee experiences.
Example: A company uses photos of employees of varied racial identities on its recruitment page, yet its leadership team remains entirely homogeneous.
2. Symbolic Hiring
Underrepresented employees may be hired into visible roles simply to demonstrate that the organization employs individuals from certain groups. These hires often receive little meaningful responsibility or advancement opportunities.
Example: Hiring a person of color for a high-profile role without giving them decision-making authority or resources to influence outcomes.
3. Lack of Support for New Roles
Sometimes organizations elevate individuals from underrepresented groups into new roles but fail to provide mentorship, staffing, or equitable access to information. This sets them up for avoidable challenges that are incorrectly attributed to performance rather than structural barriers.
Example: Hiring an employee into a leadership role without adapting workplace norms, expectations, or communication practices to support their success.
4. Misrepresentation of a Community
Employees from underrepresented groups are often expected to educate others, speak for their entire community, or lead cultural initiatives without compensation or recognition. This is a common form of unpaid labor.
Example: Relying on one employee to answer all questions related to cultural celebrations or societal events affecting their community.
While these examples are commonplace, they can be difficult to recognize, especially if you are not directly experiencing them.
How to Recognize Tokenism in the Workplace
Recognizing tokenism requires looking beyond diversity numbers and examining workplace experiences. Here are some red flags:
Diversity is visible in entry-level roles but not in management or leadership.
Higher turnover among underrepresented groups compared with the broader workforce.
Employees from underrepresented groups are contacted or highlighted only when diversity topics arise.
Public messaging about inclusion does not align with internal culture or policies.
Employee resource groups experience burnout due to lack of funding or leadership support.
Team meetings and decision-making spaces are dominated by the same voices.
How to Measure Tokenism
Tokenism can be identified utilizing Kanter’s representation ratios. While these are not a strict definition, they can be a useful tool to begin identifying tokenism across your organization.
With that said, Kanter classified four different groups according to numerical representation ratios:
1. Uniform Groups
A single social group holds 100% representation.
2. Skewed Groups
The dominant group holds approximately 85% representation, while the minority group holds 15% or less. These levels are where tokenism is more likely to occur.
3. Tilted Groups
A dominant group holds about 65% representation. Minority group members will likely still face challenges but can form coalitions.
4. Balanced Groups
Representation approaches 60:40 or even 50:50, allowing for more equitable influence.
But Is Representation Alone Enough?
The short answer is a resounding no. These numbers were established in the 70s, so we must look at modern ideas of representation, tokenism, and equity for a full measurement here. This includes:
Promotion and advancement rates
Pay equity data
Psychological safety survey results
Attrition rates across demographic groups
Access to mentorship and sponsorship
Participation in high-impact project
Additionally, organizations should measure decision-making authorities and accountability within leadership and management teams.
The Impact of Tokenism
Kanter identified three core processes that tokenized employees often experience:
1. Performance Pressures
Token individuals experience heightened visibility and often feel pressure to prove themselves. This can increase anxiety and self-doubt.
2. Social Isolation
Colleagues may unintentionally exclude tokenized employees from informal networks or collaborative opportunities.
3. Role Encapsulation
Token individuals are often stereotyped or assigned tasks that reinforce assumptions about their identity group.
Individuals who feel singled out because of their identity often experience higher stress, lower engagement, and an increased sense of pressure to perform. Workplaces that lack representation or peer support for underrepresented employees also tend to see more microaggressions and a reduced sense of belonging. These conditions can erode psychological safety, limit creativity, and contribute to higher turnover among affected groups.
Tokenism vs. Inclusion
In short: Tokenism focuses on appearances and inclusion focuses on systems.
American writer, activist, and essayist may have described it best, saying:
“Advocating the mere tolerance of difference between women is the grossest reformism. It is a total denial of the creative function of difference in our lives. Difference must be not merely tolerated, but seen as a fund of necessary polarities between which our creativity can spark like a dialectic. ”
To put it more simply, representing underrepresented groups without exploring the reasons why they are marginalized in your workplace (For example: what supports they may need, what barriers they may face, the opportunities they are denied, and much more.) is not just shallow, but futile.
The phrase “grossest reformism” is especially impactful, describing the act of tolerating underrepresented individuals without fully integrating them into systems. Full inclusion means creating conditions where employees of all backgrounds have access to opportunities, influence, and support. It requires behavioural change, accountability, and policies that ensure fairness.
Big differences:
Inclusion values diverse perspectives. Tokenism expects individuals to conform to existing norms.
Inclusion builds systems so everyone can succeed. Tokenism elevates individuals without that structural backing.
Inclusion creates belonging and psychological safety. Tokenism results in isolation.
Inclusion distributes power and decision-making authority. Tokenism keeps power in the dominant group.
Preventing Tokenism at Work
Preventing tokenism might begin with policy statements, but ultimately it requires intentional, ongoing practice. Here are a few strategies that organizations can use to create inclusion where there is tokenism:
Use equitable and bias-resistant hiring practices
Use different interview styles like panels and skills-based evaluations. Make sure job postings are inclusive and avoid relying fully on referrals from existing networks.
Create inclusive communication norms
Meetings, communication tools, and collaboration practices support equal participation. This includes accessible technology, agenda-setting, and facilitation techniques that elevate all voices.
Build workplaces that support diverse needs
Create physical and virtual environments where everyone can participate. This can include spaces for prayer, gender-inclusive washrooms, quiet rooms, hybrid meeting standards, or flexible scheduling practices.
Implement fair and transparent policies
Implement fair compensation structures, promotion pathways, and performance evaluations that are communicated clearly and applied consistently.
Respect cultural and religious needs
Provide flexibility around observances and recognize that employees may participate in cultural practices that require accommodation.
Protect employees through reporting systems
Establish safe, confidential pathways for reporting discrimination or concerns. Use neutral third-party support whenever possible to reduce bias.
Integrate inclusion into learning and development
Offer training on unconscious bias, inclusive leadership, and cultural competency. Have follow-up training on an ongoing basis to reinforce ideas.
Invest in leadership and sponsorship programs
Underrepresented employees benefit significantly from access to mentors and sponsors. Programs that support advancement directly help reduce tokenism.
Final Thoughts
Tokenism is more than a misstep in representation. It creates real barriers that limit trust, belonging, and performance across an organization.
Avoiding tokenism requires more than hiring targets, curated statements, and even policy changes. It calls for intentional work that supports diverse talents within a structure that empowers employees from all backgrounds and doesn’t limit their growth. This is the groundwork that moves organizations from performative gestures to progress.
Frequently Asked Questions
-
Yes. Tokenism is not only about numbers. It can exist even in workplaces with diverse teams if underrepresented employees are excluded from decision-making, overlooked for advancement, or relied on primarily for their identity rather than their skills. Many organizations unintentionally create tokenizing conditions when representation increases faster than internal systems and policies evolve.
-
Leaders can prevent tokenism by implementing equitable hiring and promotion practices, offering mentorship and sponsorship opportunities, distributing high-impact work fairly, and ensuring team meetings allow everyone to participate fully. Regular check-ins, transparent policies, and ongoing inclusion-focused learning also help create conditions where tokenism is less likely to occur.
-
An important part of reducing tokenism is strengthening a manager’s ability to understand, support, and work effectively with people from different backgrounds.
Cultural competence helps leaders communicate more inclusively, recognize barriers, respond to bias, and create environments where diverse employees can thrive. You can explore practical strategies and skills in our Cultural Competence for Managers training.
