Unseen, Unheard, Undervalued: What Invisibility at Work Feels Like for Women of Colour

By: Kaylin Baker-Fields

A 2023 study published in the Journal of Applied Psychology is reshaping our understanding of workplace inclusion and why, for many women of colour, the cost of visibility remains unacceptably high.

Conducted by Barnini Bhattacharyya, Assistant Professor of Organizational Behaviour at the Ivey Business School, Western University, and Jennifer Berdahl, Professor of Sociology at the University of British Columbia, the study explores the invisibility experienced by women of colour in traditionally white and male-dominated professions. Based on interviews with 65 women across Canada and the United States, the research reveals a painful truth: being physically present at work does not guarantee being truly seen. More than confirming the existence of invisibility, the study provides us with a language to understand how it functions and how it varies depending on identity and context.

Four patterns of invisibility

The study identifies four distinct and recurring patterns of invisibility experienced by women of colour: erasure, homogenization, exoticization, and whitening. These are not abstract concepts but specific, racialized dynamics shaped by factors like industry, seniority, and cultural background.

Nearly every woman interviewed—95%—experienced erasure in the workplace. They described being overlooked in meetings, interrupted mid-sentence, or excluded from important decisions. This form of invisibility was especially common among women of East and Southeast Asian descent, who often noted that even when they actively contributed, their ideas were dismissed or later repeated by someone else to greater recognition.

Homogenization was also widespread, with 86% of participants reporting they were treated as interchangeable with others from their racial or cultural background. While Black women were underrepresented in the overall sample, they were disproportionately affected by this particular pattern. Rather than being seen as individuals with unique experiences and perspectives, many were assumed to speak for or represent their entire group.

Exoticization appeared in 78% of the women’s stories. Participants spoke of being reduced to stereotypes through comments on their appearance, assumptions about their personality, or tokenizing praise that felt more performative than genuine. This response was especially common among younger women and those in junior positions, with nearly every Latina and Black participant describing experiences that left them feeling objectified or hyper-visible for the wrong reasons.

51% of participants shared experiences of what the researchers call “whitening.” This refers to situations where they were recognized or praised for adopting behaviours and communication styles that align with workplace expectations, often rooted in white cultural norms. While these moments might seem positive on the surface, many women described this as coming at the expense of their cultural identities and authentic selves. For example, one participant noted the pressure that Black women face to straighten their hair to meet narrow definitions of professionalism.

Who gets heard, and who doesn’t

The study also examined how women responded to these patterns of invisibility, and the results varied according to social and organizational power. Women with less power were more likely to internalize their experiences, engaging in withdrawal tactics such as remaining silent or minimizing their presence, actions that often reinforced their invisibility and marginalization.

In contrast, women with greater power reported experiencing less invisibility. They were more inclined to use approach tactics such as speaking up and challenging their exclusion, even at the risk of backlash or being labelled difficult.

Women who understood their invisibility to be rooted in structural causes, conversely, responded more pragmatically to invisibility, occasionally engaging in radical honesty to connect with others who treated them as invisible and to change their behaviour. This pragmatic response, although rare, suggests a powerful way to name invisibility differently as a means of breaking its cycle.

More than a DEI checkbox

This research raises an uncomfortable but necessary question: What kind of inclusion are we aiming for?

Many equity programs are designed with good intentions, but often are built on flattened identities. Women are treated as one group, people of colour as another. The result? Policies that technically include everyone but serve very few.

We’ve seen the limitations of one-size-fits-all DEI, and this study provides us with the blueprint to move beyond it. It invites us to recognize difference not as a challenge, but as a critical lens. One that makes our workplaces more thoughtful, more just, and more human.

What it means to be truly seen

A key takeaway from this study is that invisibility is not an isolated experience, but a systemic issue rooted in workplace culture. It demonstrates that surface-level inclusion efforts and merely ticking diversity checkboxes are insufficient to create meaningful change. True progress requires moving from awareness to accountability.

Leaders must look beyond who is simply present to ask who is genuinely heard and supported. This means paying attention to who is interrupted, who receives mentorship, and who advances. It means that being seen needs to be more than representation; it requires creating spaces where women of colour are recognized and valued for their full, authentic selves.

By giving language to these experiences, the study offers a clear path forward for organizations committed to genuine inclusion.

The question remains: Do you see me?

The answer depends on what we choose to do next.