Inclusion Is Not Just About Access: Why Relationships and Belonging Matter
By Sandra Buchan.
In recent years, there has been meaningful progress in improving workplace inclusion. Alongside the Equality Act 2010, changes introduced through the Employment Rights Act 2025 have strengthened protections around flexible working, family leave, workplace harassment and employee wellbeing. These developments recognise that inclusive workplaces matter not only ethically, but also organisationally and legally. However, while policy and legal protections are important foundations, inclusion is not experienced through policy alone. It is experienced in everyday interactions, relationships, cultural norms and opportunities for development. This recognises that inclusion is also relational.
Through my doctoral research which explores workplace relationships and career experiences, alongside my work as a Business Psychologist, I have become increasingly interested in the relational foundations of inclusion. Organisations often focus on structural inclusion through policies, representation, accessibility, and formal processes. While these are important, they do not automatically create a sense of belonging. Inclusion is also about whether employees feel trusted, valued and able to participate fully at work.
Access may enable someone to enter an organisation but belonging influences whether they feel safe enough to fully participate once they are there.
Why Access Does Not Always Create Belonging
For many employees, inclusion is not simply about getting through the door, it is also about how safe they feel once they are inside. This can be especially important for disabled employees, whose experience of workplace participation may involve ongoing relational and psychological pressures that are not always acknowledged by others.
For some people, particularly those with hidden disabilities, disclosure itself can feel emotionally difficult. Individuals may carefully consider whether to reveal their disability, in fear that it could alter how they are perceived professionally or lead others to question their competence and capability. Others may worry about being defined by their disability rather than recognised for their work.
Belonging can also be shaped by more subtle relational experiences within the workplace. Disabled people may feel that their request for reasonable adjustments, whilst supported in practice, could be used as a barrier to opportunities or progression. Others may question whether asking for support will affect how their ability or commitment is perceived, or whether showing vulnerability feels professionally safe. Informal workplace dynamics can also affect belonging. Feeling excluded from conversations, relationship networks or informal opportunities may reinforce feelings of difference, even where formal inclusion structures are in place.
Over time, these experiences can carry a real emotional and psychological cost. Some disabled employees may feel pressure to continuously prove their credibility, build relationships from a foundation of distrust, avoid behaviours that could reinforce stereotypes, or work harder to demonstrate their competence and worth. While these experiences are not always obvious to others, they can significantly influence whether individuals feel able to participate confidently and whether they feel like they truly belong within their role and the organisation.
Beyond Structural Inclusion
When organisations talk about inclusion, it is understandable that they often focus on visible and measurable actions, although these do not always fully capture how inclusion is experienced by employees (Romansky et al, 2021). In Business Psychology, we recognise the importance of organisational policies, accessibility initiatives, employee networks, reasonable adjustments and wellbeing strategies. These are all important components for creating fairer workplaces and helping organisations stay accountable. However, the difficulty is that there is sometimes an assumption that once structures are in place, inclusion has been achieved. In reality, inclusion is far more complex and relational.
This distinction between access and belonging matters. Our experiences at work are shaped not only by systems and processes, but also by the social and psychological interactions we experience every day. Research in this area has consistently shown how important psychological safety is in enabling individuals to contribute, collaborate, challenge ideas and ask for support without fear of negative consequences (Edmondson, 1999). When people do not feel psychologically safe, they often become more guarded and are likely to disengage.
Career progression is also shaped by these relational dynamics. Research on social capital has highlighted the importance of professional relationships, informal networks, sponsorship, and access to information in influencing career opportunities (Seibert, Kraimer & Liden, 2001). While organisations often emphasise performance and capability, opportunities are frequently enabled through social connection. Employees who feel disconnected from these informal relational structures may experience inclusion very differently from those who feel socially accepted and professionally supported.
Why This Matters for Organisations
Belonging is sometimes treated as a “soft” workplace issue, but its impact is real. Employees who feel they belong are more likely to contribute openly, collaborate effectively, engage with colleagues and stay in their jobs. When people feel isolated, scrutinised or excluded, the impact can be very different.
This is where Business Psychology has an important contribution to make. Business Psychologists are well placed to help organisations see that belonging is not simply a cultural aspiration, but an important indicator of whether inclusion is genuinely being experienced within the workplace. Through understanding workplace behaviour, team dynamics, leadership, organisational culture, and psychological safety, Business Psychologists can help organisations explore how inclusion is actually experienced by employees.
Conclusion
Inclusion is not only about whether people can access workplaces, it is also about whether they can build the relationships that help them to feel they belong. This means that creating genuinely inclusive workplace cultures requires organisations to think not only structurally, but relationally too. If people do not feel like they belong, inclusion may exist on paper but not be fully experienced in practice.
Belonging is not a ‘nice to have’ addition to inclusion. It is key to whether inclusion is truly experienced at work.
For ABP Members:
Not a member? We invite you to join us at The Association for Business Psychology!
About the Author
Sandra is Managing Director of Culture & Engagement Experts Ltd, a Certified Principal Business Psychologist, and Trustee of the Research Institute for Disabled Consumers. With over 24 years of senior leadership experience across health, social care and the public sector, she specialises in organisational culture, workforce strategy and inclusive leadership. Sandra has held board roles, led national workforce initiatives, and advised on cultural transformation for diverse organisations. A values-led leader and PhD candidate, under supervisors Professor Jeremy Dawson and Dr Sarah Brooks at the University of Sheffield, she is passionate about creating workplaces where people feel valued and enabled to thrive – especially those from underrepresented backgrounds.
References
Edmondson, A., (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative science quarterly, 44(2), pp.350-383.
Gov.Uk (2010). Equality Act 2010 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/contents [Accessed 15th May 2026]
Gov.Uk (2025). Employment Rights Act 2025
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2025/36 [Accessed 15th May 2026]
Romansky, L., Garrod, M., Brown, K., & Deo, K. (2021). How to measure inclusion in the workplace. Harvard Business Review.
Seibert, S.E., Kraimer, M.L. and Liden, R.C., (2001). A social capital theory of career success. Academy of management journal, 44(2), pp.219-237.