The Phenomenon of Institutional Betrayal
Nika White • March 20, 2023
When you think of the word, “betrayal,” what comes to mind?
By definition, the term means “the violation of trust by someone close to you.” This can be an all too common feeling in the workplace. Institutions that promise safety, security, and belonging to workers who occupy marginalized identities may not have their actions and promises aligned. For some marginalized folks, the degrading trust they have for institutions is only worsening as the frequency of microaggressions and workplace trauma continue to impact their personal and professional lives.
But there’s a new term to describe the misalignment of words and actions and the ensuing feelings that come from it: institutional betrayal. First coined by psychologist, Jennifer Freyd, institutional betrayal is described as “wrongdoings perpetrated by an institution upon individuals dependent on that institution, including failure to prevent or respond supportively to wrongdoings by individuals committed within the context of the institution.”
As we work towards diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in organizations, we should ask ourselves: How might our organization be perpetrating wrongdoings in the workplace and not even know it? How does repeatedly dismissing the requests and needs of marginalized workers while showing little accountability for organizational mistakes, be exacerbating feelings of mistrust and betrayal?
What is institutional betrayal?
Even if you haven’t heard of the term institutional betrayal, you’ve probably witnessed it in the workplace. It’s much like the phenomenon of “workplace trauma,” a term used to describe when marginalized people experience the same trauma outside of the workplace as they do inside, for example, when marginalized folks experience colorism hierarchy, gaslighting, and microaggressions in their personal and professional lives.
I would argue institutional betrayal is a step further. It’s not just the replication of workplace trauma–it’s the overwhelming feeling of betrayal that a marginalized person can experience when institutions don’t follow through on their promises of safety or actively cause harm and wrongdoing without taking accountability. It’s the gut-wrenching reality check that occurs when organizations assure someone that they can feel authentic and safe in a space, but it turns out to be nothing more than empty promises.
“I thought this was a safe space”
These words reverberate from the mouths of marginalized workers all over the country. The idea of workplace safety or safe spaces can be a talking point for many businesses and organizations. Leaders might assure marginalized folks that a particular space is “safe” for them to “be themselves” and show up “authentically.” But when a marginalized person enters the space, they see right away that the supposed “safe mecca” that’s been touted by the organization has no teeth.
Organizations should be careful about promising more inclusive spaces without doing the work to ensure those spaces are truly welcoming and warm to all. Organizations should practice accountability by doing the work of strategically planning initiatives, funding safer spaces and their staff, seeking constructive feedback from marginalized folks, and even hiring a DEI consultant. Organizations and leaders should understand that even with all of these tools, actions, and commitments, the space will never be one hundred percent “safe,” but rather “safer.” And for some marginalized folks, the attempt at creating a safer space is enough to quell feelings of mistrust and hurt within the organization.
“Our doors are always open”
Organizations may say they offer DEI resources or tell their shareholders they have support groups for marginalized workers. But, if the individuals who need those resources don’t feel supported by them or don’t have an opportunity to express grievances about the workplace culture, those individuals may experience institutional betrayal. They can feel gaslit by an organization that claims the support groups they are a part of have an open door to discuss changes and grievances around DEI. However, the lack of followthrough and pathways for institutional change can cause some individuals to feel jaded and betrayed by the organization’s supposed “open door” policy.
Organizations that say they’re open to feedback from marginalized workers need to uphold that promise. An organization that claims to value DEI but doesn’t actually value hard feedback from their workers is failing to rebuild psychological safety and trust in the workplace. When actions and words don’t align around grievances and receiving feedback, how can we expect marginalized workers to able to show up and feel supported and confident in the organization?
“I can’t breathe”
Outside of the workplace, institutional betrayal has been felt by marginalized communities for decades. Scholars and activists who have studied the tragic killing of George Floyd and other folks of color have seen the connection between the overarching issue of police brutality and institutional betrayal. The promise of law enforcement institutions is that police officers and other enforcement bodies will protect all citizens equally and be free of biases. The result is decades of biased policing practices that disproportionately target marginalized people. Institutional betrayal, in this case, shows up as promises of honesty and equality but the result is a resounding mistrust in the word and intentions of law enforcement bodies within certain communities.
At this level, many activists and organizers are calling for a complete reform of law enforcement. But as we’ve seen around the nation, some communities are open to change and others are not. Due to long-standing historical issues, many communities may never feel real trust for law enforcement bodies, but the attempt from enforcement departments and local governments to try to rebuild that trust is a step in the right direction. An acknowledgment of the trauma caused in certain communities has to be made in order to remedy it. Action must be taken, and when it is, that’s a step in the right direction.
Institutional betrayal requires urgent action from organizations
When we hear the phrase workplace trauma, it leaves an impression. No one wants to intentionally cause trauma to another person. But some organizations may not know they are causing trauma to their employees by replicating microaggressions from the outside world and bringing them inside of the workplace. Organizations may misunderstand workplace trauma as a personal problem–not an institutional one. So when we use the word betrayal, the issue becomes more urgent and relevant to organizations. The issue transforms from someone else’s problem into an institutional problem of building trust and remedying repeated failed actions on the part of the organization. Leaders should see workplace trauma and institutional betrayal as related, but understand both terms require leaders to do something about the issues within their walls and to follow through with action. Leaders and executives should ask themselves: In what ways have our policies or practices retraumatized marginalized workers? How have our policies not protected those who needed it most? What can we do to listen deeper and find solutions for marginalized workers? These questions may lead organizations to find cooperative solutions to workplace safety and belonging.
Final thoughts
As more and more institutions implement DEI in the workplace, they may be missing a critical component: action. Saying a space is “safe” or “welcoming” is not enough–we need proof. Marginalized folks and allies need to see organizations dedicated to implementing their DEI initiatives and not perpetuating workplace trauma and institutional betrayal. Marginalized folks should genuinely feel safe in the institutions in which they work and live, and see that their policies and procedures around DEI are honest, transparent, and effective. Organizations should make sure their practices and policies are aligned with their actions, and if they’re not, be willing to do the work to change them. We all have a responsibility to tread lightly and not cause more trauma and betrayal in the pursuit of “business as usual.” We can all be more conscious of the ways we cause trauma to others and how we can remedy betrayals when they occur. Only through cooperation between marginalized folks and organizations will we be able to walk in the workplace with compassion, safety, and trust.
But there’s a new term to describe the misalignment of words and actions and the ensuing feelings that come from it: institutional betrayal. First coined by psychologist, Jennifer Freyd, institutional betrayal is described as “wrongdoings perpetrated by an institution upon individuals dependent on that institution, including failure to prevent or respond supportively to wrongdoings by individuals committed within the context of the institution.”
As we work towards diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in organizations, we should ask ourselves: How might our organization be perpetrating wrongdoings in the workplace and not even know it? How does repeatedly dismissing the requests and needs of marginalized workers while showing little accountability for organizational mistakes, be exacerbating feelings of mistrust and betrayal?
Today, we’ll further define institutional betrayal, see how it shows up in and outside of the workplace, and discuss what organizations can do to take ownership in order to curb this phenomenon.
Even if you haven’t heard of the term institutional betrayal, you’ve probably witnessed it in the workplace. It’s much like the phenomenon of “workplace trauma,” a term used to describe when marginalized people experience the same trauma outside of the workplace as they do inside, for example, when marginalized folks experience colorism hierarchy, gaslighting, and microaggressions in their personal and professional lives.
I would argue institutional betrayal is a step further. It’s not just the replication of workplace trauma–it’s the overwhelming feeling of betrayal that a marginalized person can experience when institutions don’t follow through on their promises of safety or actively cause harm and wrongdoing without taking accountability. It’s the gut-wrenching reality check that occurs when organizations assure someone that they can feel authentic and safe in a space, but it turns out to be nothing more than empty promises.
“I thought this was a safe space”
These words reverberate from the mouths of marginalized workers all over the country. The idea of workplace safety or safe spaces can be a talking point for many businesses and organizations. Leaders might assure marginalized folks that a particular space is “safe” for them to “be themselves” and show up “authentically.” But when a marginalized person enters the space, they see right away that the supposed “safe mecca” that’s been touted by the organization has no teeth.
Organizations should be careful about promising more inclusive spaces without doing the work to ensure those spaces are truly welcoming and warm to all. Organizations should practice accountability by doing the work of strategically planning initiatives, funding safer spaces and their staff, seeking constructive feedback from marginalized folks, and even hiring a DEI consultant. Organizations and leaders should understand that even with all of these tools, actions, and commitments, the space will never be one hundred percent “safe,” but rather “safer.” And for some marginalized folks, the attempt at creating a safer space is enough to quell feelings of mistrust and hurt within the organization.
“Our doors are always open”
Organizations may say they offer DEI resources or tell their shareholders they have support groups for marginalized workers. But, if the individuals who need those resources don’t feel supported by them or don’t have an opportunity to express grievances about the workplace culture, those individuals may experience institutional betrayal. They can feel gaslit by an organization that claims the support groups they are a part of have an open door to discuss changes and grievances around DEI. However, the lack of followthrough and pathways for institutional change can cause some individuals to feel jaded and betrayed by the organization’s supposed “open door” policy.
Organizations that say they’re open to feedback from marginalized workers need to uphold that promise. An organization that claims to value DEI but doesn’t actually value hard feedback from their workers is failing to rebuild psychological safety and trust in the workplace. When actions and words don’t align around grievances and receiving feedback, how can we expect marginalized workers to able to show up and feel supported and confident in the organization?
“I can’t breathe”
Outside of the workplace, institutional betrayal has been felt by marginalized communities for decades. Scholars and activists who have studied the tragic killing of George Floyd and other folks of color have seen the connection between the overarching issue of police brutality and institutional betrayal. The promise of law enforcement institutions is that police officers and other enforcement bodies will protect all citizens equally and be free of biases. The result is decades of biased policing practices that disproportionately target marginalized people. Institutional betrayal, in this case, shows up as promises of honesty and equality but the result is a resounding mistrust in the word and intentions of law enforcement bodies within certain communities.
At this level, many activists and organizers are calling for a complete reform of law enforcement. But as we’ve seen around the nation, some communities are open to change and others are not. Due to long-standing historical issues, many communities may never feel real trust for law enforcement bodies, but the attempt from enforcement departments and local governments to try to rebuild that trust is a step in the right direction. An acknowledgment of the trauma caused in certain communities has to be made in order to remedy it. Action must be taken, and when it is, that’s a step in the right direction.
Institutional betrayal requires urgent action from organizations
When we hear the phrase workplace trauma, it leaves an impression. No one wants to intentionally cause trauma to another person. But some organizations may not know they are causing trauma to their employees by replicating microaggressions from the outside world and bringing them inside of the workplace. Organizations may misunderstand workplace trauma as a personal problem–not an institutional one. So when we use the word betrayal, the issue becomes more urgent and relevant to organizations. The issue transforms from someone else’s problem into an institutional problem of building trust and remedying repeated failed actions on the part of the organization. Leaders should see workplace trauma and institutional betrayal as related, but understand both terms require leaders to do something about the issues within their walls and to follow through with action. Leaders and executives should ask themselves: In what ways have our policies or practices retraumatized marginalized workers? How have our policies not protected those who needed it most? What can we do to listen deeper and find solutions for marginalized workers? These questions may lead organizations to find cooperative solutions to workplace safety and belonging.
Final thoughts
As more and more institutions implement DEI in the workplace, they may be missing a critical component: action. Saying a space is “safe” or “welcoming” is not enough–we need proof. Marginalized folks and allies need to see organizations dedicated to implementing their DEI initiatives and not perpetuating workplace trauma and institutional betrayal. Marginalized folks should genuinely feel safe in the institutions in which they work and live, and see that their policies and procedures around DEI are honest, transparent, and effective. Organizations should make sure their practices and policies are aligned with their actions, and if they’re not, be willing to do the work to change them. We all have a responsibility to tread lightly and not cause more trauma and betrayal in the pursuit of “business as usual.” We can all be more conscious of the ways we cause trauma to others and how we can remedy betrayals when they occur. Only through cooperation between marginalized folks and organizations will we be able to walk in the workplace with compassion, safety, and trust.
Read more from The Human Shift on Substack, where I share long-form essays on leadership, culture, and how we work and live.
Share this Content:
Think about a leader who had a lasting impact on you. You probably remember a few things they said. You almost certainly remember how it felt to work with them. Maybe you felt trusted. Maybe you felt anxious every time they called. Maybe you felt challenged in a way that helped you grow. Maybe you felt like you were constantly trying to avoid disappointing them. That emotional memory stays with us much longer than most organizational moments. Earlier in The Human Shift, we explored the leadership aftermath and the emotional tone leaders leave behind. Over time, those individual experiences become something much larger. They become the stories people tell about what it was like to work there. That's one of the ways culture is built. Not through one memorable event. Through repeated emotional experiences. A Reframe People don't remember every interaction. They remember the pattern those interactions created. One Simple Practice Think about someone you lead. Complete this sentence: "When this person thinks about working with me, I hope they remember feeling..." Don't overthink it. Write the first word that comes to mind. Then ask yourself whether your daily interactions support that hope. What This Looks Like In Practice A leader asks several team members what they appreciate most about working together. None of them mention strategy. None of them mention goals. Every response describes an experience. "I know you'll listen." "I always leave our conversations feeling clearer." "I know where I stand." The leader realizes those experiences have become part of the team's culture. Question to Consider If someone reflected on working with you five years from now, what feeling would you hope they remember most? In the shift, Dr. Nika White P.S. When you think about the best leader you've ever worked with, what feeling comes to mind first?
Leaders often influence pace without realizing it. The speed of your responses. The urgency in your voice. How quickly you move from one meeting to the next. How often you say, "We need this right away." People notice. Then they adjust. Earlier in The Human Shift, we explored the tension between speed and clarity . Pace is different from productivity. Pace is the emotional rhythm people begin to adopt simply by working around you. If everything feels urgent to you, it eventually feels urgent to everyone else. A Reframe People don't just respond to your priorities. They respond to your pace. One Simple Practice Before beginning your next meeting, ask yourself, "What pace does this conversation actually need?" Not every discussion deserves urgency. Some deserve room to think. What This Looks Like In Practice A leader starts opening meetings with sixty seconds of quiet before diving into discussion. At first it feels unusual. Within a few weeks, people arrive more focused, interrupt each other less, and make decisions with greater confidence. The work isn't slower. It's steadier. Question to Consider If someone matched your pace every day, what would their work experience feel like? In the shift, Dr. Nika White P.S. What pace are you setting that others may be quietly adopting?
Every leader gets it wrong sometimes. A conversation comes across differently than intended. A decision has unintended consequences. Someone leaves feeling overlooked. The mistake itself isn't usually what determines trust. What happens next often does. Earlier in The Human Shift, we explored leadership aftermath and the emotional tone people carry after interactions. Repair is one of the most powerful ways to change that aftermath. It communicates something every healthy culture needs to hear. "We can acknowledge what happened without pretending it didn't." A Reframe Trust isn't built because mistakes never happen. It's built because people know they won't be ignored when they do. One Simple Practice Think about one recent interaction that doesn't sit quite right. Reach back out. A simple, "I've been thinking about our conversation, and I'd like to check in," can reopen trust. What This Looks Like In Practice A leader realizes she interrupted a team member several times during a meeting. The next morning she stops by his office. "I don't think I gave your perspective enough space yesterday. I'd like to hear the rest of your thoughts." The conversation lasts ten minutes. The impact lasts much longer. Question to Consider What conversation might be waiting for a repair instead of an explanation? In the shift, Dr. Nika White P.S. Has someone ever repaired a conversation with you in a way you'll never forget?
Many leaders feel pressure to have answers. It's understandable. People look to leaders for direction, especially when things feel uncertain. But some of the most influential leaders I've worked with ask better questions instead of giving faster answers. Questions create space. Answers often close it. Earlier in The Human Shift, we explored how people respond to a leader's presence before they respond to their words . Curiosity creates a different kind of presence. It tells people their perspective matters before a solution is ever offered. A Reframe The goal isn't to have the smartest answer. The goal is to create the kind of conversation where better thinking becomes possible. One Simple Practice The next time someone brings you a challenge, resist solving it immediately. Instead ask, "What do you think is most important for us to understand before we decide what to do?" Then listen. What This Looks Like In Practice A manager walks into a meeting ready to solve a recurring team issue. Instead of offering her recommendation first, she invites the team to share what they're noticing. The conversation uncovers a pattern no one had previously connected. The solution becomes stronger because more people helped build it. Question to Consider Do people leave conversations with you feeling like they contributed or simply received direction? In the shift, Dr. Nika White P.S. When was the last time a thoughtful question changed your perspective?
Leaders often wonder why their teams aren't doing more of something. Speaking up. Collaborating. Taking initiative. Thinking creatively. The answer is sometimes found in the everyday moments that seem unrelated. People pay attention to what leaders actually do. If a leader says they value reflection but never slows down, people learn that speed matters more. If a leader encourages honest feedback but becomes defensive when receiving it, people learn that honesty has limits. If a leader talks about work-life balance but sends emails late into the evening, people learn what the real expectation is. Earlier in The Human Shift, we explored unspoken expectations . Most cultures are shaped less by formal messages than by repeated observations. A Reframe Whether you realize it or not, you're always giving people permission. The question is what you're giving them permission to do. One Simple Practice Complete this sentence: "My team probably believes it's okay to..." Write down the first answer that comes to mind. Then ask yourself whether your behavior has been teaching that lesson intentionally. What This Looks Like In Practice A leader tells her team they don't need to respond after hours. Then she notices she's emailing at 10:30 every night. She schedules those messages to send the next morning instead. Nothing about the policy changes. Everything about the signal does. Question to Consider If people copied your leadership habits exactly, what kind of culture would they create? In the shift, Dr. Nika White P.S. What's one behavior of yours that may be communicating more loudly than your words?
People pay attention to what leaders celebrate. They pay even closer attention to what leaders react to. A frustrated sigh. A quick interruption. An impatient email. A defensive response to feedback. None of these moments seem particularly significant on their own. But people are always learning from them. They begin to understand which questions are welcome. Which mistakes feel risky. Which conversations require extra caution. Earlier in The Human Shift, we explored how silence often becomes a cultural signal. Silence rarely appears without first being taught what feels safe to say. Your reactions become part of that lesson. A Reframe People don't simply hear your expectations. They study your reactions. One Simple Practice The next time someone brings you unexpected news, resist the urge to respond immediately. Take one slow breath. Become curious before becoming corrective. That small pause often changes the entire conversation. What This Looks Like In Practice A team member admits she made an error that will delay a project. Instead of immediately asking how it happened, the leader asks, "Tell me what you've learned so far." The conversation shifts from self-protection to problem-solving. The mistake still gets addressed. The person doesn't leave feeling like the mistake defines them. Question to Consider What have your reactions been teaching people lately? In the shift, Dr. Nika White P.S. If someone made a mistake today, would they feel comfortable bringing it to you quickly?
Most leaders spend a lot of time thinking about what they're going to say. They prepare for difficult conversations. They organize their thoughts. They choose their words carefully. All of that matters. But long after people forget the details of the conversation, they usually remember something else. They remember how they felt. Did they leave feeling encouraged? Did they leave feeling smaller? Did they leave feeling trusted? Did they leave feeling like they had to be careful? Earlier in The Human Shift, we explored the idea of leadership aftermath. What people carry after interacting with you shapes culture in ways that are easy to overlook because they happen quietly. Most leaders don't intentionally create emotional tone. They create it anyway. A Reframe Every interaction leaves something behind. The question isn't whether you're shaping the emotional climate. It's what you're leaving in it. One Simple Practice At the end of your next one-on-one meeting, don't evaluate what you said first. Instead ask yourself: "If I were on the other side of that conversation, how would I describe how it felt?" Notice what comes to mind before you analyze it. What This Looks Like In Practice A leader finishes a performance conversation feeling relieved because she finally addressed a difficult issue. Later that day she asks herself how the conversation may have felt for the employee. She realizes she spent most of the meeting explaining expectations and very little time asking questions. The next conversation feels different because she changes the experience, not just the message. Question to Consider When people leave a conversation with you, what do you hope they carry with them? In the shift, Dr. Nika White P.S. Think about a leader you've never forgotten. What do you remember most: what they said or how they consistently made you feel?
Leaders often celebrate when complaints decrease. Concerns become less frequent. Questions slow down. Conflict seems to disappear. Sometimes that's a sign of growth. Sometimes it's a sign that people have stopped bringing things forward. Earlier in The Human Shift, When Teams Stop Telling You Things , we explored silence as a cultural signal. Silence is not always agreement. Sometimes it is adaptation. People learn what feels worth raising. What feels safe to discuss. What is likely to go nowhere. A Reframe A lack of problems does not automatically mean a healthy culture. One Simple Practice Ask someone you trust: "What is something people may be hesitant to tell me?" Listen without defending. What This Looks Like In Practice A leader notices fewer concerns being raised in meetings. Instead of assuming everything is fine, she creates space for honest conversation. What emerges isn't crisis. It's information that had simply been waiting for a safer place to surface. Question to Consider What information might be missing from the conversations you're having? In the shift, Dr. Nika White P.S. When people disagree with you, do they usually tell you?
Many people end the day feeling exhausted. Their calendar was full. Their inbox was active. Their attention was constantly moving. Yet when asked what mattered most about the day, they hesitate. Activity and engagement are not the same thing. One creates motion. The other creates meaning. Earlier in The Human Shift, The Subtle Drift Into Disconnection, we explored how disconnection often develops through small moments. One of those moments occurs when activity becomes so constant that reflection disappears. A Reframe Being busy answers the question, "What did I do?" Being engaged answers the question, "What mattered?" One Simple Practice At the end of the day, ask yourself: "What was the most meaningful moment today?" Write down the answer. What This Looks Like In Practice A leader begins ending each workday with a short reflection. After a few weeks, she notices that the moments she remembers most are rarely the busiest ones. They're the conversations. The insights. The moments of connection. Question to Consider If someone asked what mattered most about your day yesterday, what would you say? In the shift, Dr. Nika White P.S. What is one meaningful moment from this week that you don't want to forget?
Many leaders pride themselves on being available. Their door is open. Their inbox is monitored. Their phone is always nearby. The intention is usually good. But constant availability can create unintended consequences. People begin relying on immediate access instead of developing judgment. Leaders become increasingly interrupted. Everyone feels busy. Few people feel clear. Earlier in The Human Shift, When Responsibility Becomes Identity we explored how constant availability often grows from the belief that leadership means being accessible at all times. A Reframe Being available is not the same thing as being supportive. One Simple Practice Choose one part of your day where you are intentionally unavailable. Protect it. Use that time for thinking, reflection, or focused work. What This Looks Like In Practice A leader blocks ninety minutes each morning for uninterrupted work. Initially, people push back. Within a few weeks, team members begin solving more problems independently and bringing better questions when they do connect. Question to Consider What might your team learn if you were slightly less available? In the shift, Dr. Nika White P.S. What is one boundary you've been reluctant to establish?
