The ROI of belonging
Every time someone asks me about the ROI of belonging, I want to ask them a different question:
When did you last feel excluded from a group? What did that do to you?
Because everyone has felt this once in their lifetime. Everyone knows what it does:
- You disengage
- You stop trying
- You don’t trust
- You look for the exit
- You do the minimum
Now imagine that’s not occasional but daily, for people in some organisations.
I understand why people ask. Budgets need justification. Stakeholders want data. Business cases require numbers.
But the question itself reveals something troubling about how we think about people at work.
If you really need the numbers
Research shows high belonging correlates with:
56% increase in job performance
50% reduction in turnover risk
75% reduction in sick days
167% increase in employer promoter score
Higher innovation rates, better collaboration, and faster change adoption
The business case is real. The numbers are compelling.
If that’s all you needed to hear, you can stop reading now.
But if you’re still here, let me tell you why those numbers completely miss the point.
What the numbers do not capture
The numbers don’t show:
The person who stops contributing ideas because they’ve been talked over one too many times. No metric captures the innovation lost. No spreadsheet tracks the insight that was never shared. ROI: Incalculable.
The employee who starts looking for a new job after being excluded from a key meeting. Turnover metrics might catch this eventually. But the trust broken? The signal sent to others watching? Not measured. ROI: Invisible until it’s too late.
The team member who does the minimum because they don’t feel they genuinely matter. Engagement scores might dip slightly. But the discretionary effort that disappears? The care they used to bring? Gone. ROI: Unquantifiable.
The new hire who never speaks up because the culture makes it clear whose voices count. Diversity metrics look good on paper. But the diverse perspectives that never get heard? That’s not in the dashboard. ROI: The whole point of diversity, lost.
The leader who burns out trying to create belonging in a system that doesn’t support it. Might show up as a single resignation. Doesn’t show the ripple effect, the others who leave after, the culture shift that follows. ROI: Catastrophic, but spread over time and invisible in metrics.
Why the question itself is the problem
When we ask “What’s the ROI of belonging?” we’re revealing something troubling.
We’re asking: “What do I get in return for treating you like you matter?”
Imagine asking:
- “What’s the ROI of not causing people pain?”
- “What’s the ROI of treating people with dignity?”
- “What’s the ROI of meeting fundamental human needs?”
The question itself is absurd. Because belonging is a fundamental human need we have a responsibility to meet.
What neuroscience tells us
Neuroscience research shows that social exclusion activates the same brain regions as physical pain (Eisenberger et al., 2003).
This means that: Our brains can’t distinguish between “I’m physically hurt” and “I’m socially excluded.” This is evolutionary. For humans, social exclusion historically meant death. Our brains still treat it as a survival threat.
So when we create workplaces where people feel excluded – even unintentionally, through poor communication or culture – we are causing measurable harm.
So what’s the ROI of not harming people?
I’d argue that’s the wrong question.
The right question is: Why would we need an ROI to justify not causing harm?
The performative belonging trap
What worries me most about the ROI question is that it leads to performative belonging – inclusion initiatives designed to capture the business benefits without doing the real work.
Performative belonging says:
- “We value you because you drive innovation”
- “You belong here because you help our bottom line”
- “We’re inclusive because it’s good for business”
Genuine belonging says:
- “You belong here, period”
- “Your voice matters because you’re human, not because you’re productive”
- “We create inclusion because people deserve dignity”
And people can actually tell the difference.
Research shows conditional belonging (you belong because you’re useful) doesn’t create the same outcomes as unconditional belonging (you belong because you’re human). When belonging is transactional, it doesn’t work.
So ironically, chasing the ROI of belonging through performative initiatives actually destroys the ROI.
You get the returns when belonging is genuine – which means doing it for the right reasons, not the business case.
What to measure instead
So shouldn’t we be measuring anything? And if we do, how?
Instead of asking “What’s the ROI?”
Ask:
- Do people feel their voice matters here?
- Can people bring their full selves to work?
- When someone speaks up, what happens?
- Do new people feel genuinely included, or like they need to assimilate?
- When we communicate about change, do people feel part of it or just informed about it?
- Can people disagree without fear?
- Do people from different backgrounds have equal access to opportunities?
Then track:
- Stories of people feeling seen and heard (qualitative data)
- Patterns of who speaks in meetings (behavioral observation)
- Whether diverse perspectives actually influence decisions (systemic analysis)
- How people describe their experience (narrative inquiry)
- Whether inclusion is conditional or unconditional (cultural assessment)
The numbers will follow. But they’re the consequence, not the goal.
The real return
The real ROI of belonging isn’t measured in percentages or dollars.
It’s measured in:
- People who stay because they want to, not because they have to
- Ideas shared that would have stayed silent
- Trust built that enables everything else
- Lives improved because work isn’t a daily experience of exclusion
- Organizations that do less harm and more good
- Cultures where people can actually be human
That’s the return.
And it’s worth far more than any spreadsheet can capture.#
References
- Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497-529.
- BetterUp. (2019). The value of belonging at work: The business case for investing in workplace inclusion.
- Eisenberger, N. I., Lieberman, M. D., & Williams, K. D. (2003). Does rejection hurt? An fMRI study of social exclusion. Science, 302(5643), 290-292.
- Holt-Lunstad, J., Smith, T. B., & Layton, J. B. (2010). Social relationships and mortality risk: A meta-analytic review. PLoS Medicine, 7(7).
