Beyond confronting: Cultivating inclusion through proactive Allyship

Abstract

Historically marginalized group members encounter barriers to belonging and inclusion, even when instances of interpersonal bias are rare. While allyship (ongoing behaviors in support of those with less societal status; De Souza & Schmader, 2025) includes confronting bias when one sees it, we sought to establish the unique benefits of proactive allyship for those who have gained access to certain domains but remain underrepresented (Flam, 1991; Walton et al., 2015). Across five studies, we apply a novel framework ( The Typology of Allyship Action ; De Souza & Schmader, 2025) to empirically differentiate and compare inclusion-related benefits unique to proactive action. Study 1 uses newly developed scenario-based materials to validate theoretical distinctions between proactive and reactive action, i.e., proactive action's greater flexibility in time, focus on disadvantaged group members, and aim of fostering positive outcomes. Applying these scenarios, Studies 2–3 used experimental methods to assess perceptions of proactive action's (compared to reactive action's and inaction's) impact on both gender and race-based inclusion. Moving beyond hypothetical scenarios, Study 4 tested how proactive (compared to reactive) action predicts actual workplace experiences amongst women in STEM. Across studies, preregistered hypotheses were supported: proactive allyship was consistently perceived and experienced as particularly beneficial in promoting workplace inclusion, feelings of fit, and success for disadvantaged group members. These findings broaden theoretical conceptions and practical applications of allyship, demonstrating the importance of allyship beyond confrontation.