Clarity at work is often treated as a given. The evidence suggests otherwise.
A large scale meta analysis published in the Journal of Applied Psychology synthesised 60 years of research across 515 studies and nearly 800,000 employees to better understand role stress in organisations.
The study focuses on three common experiences at work: role ambiguity, role conflict, and role overload. While all three are harmful, one stands out.
Role ambiguity, not knowing what is expected, how success is defined, or how to prioritise, emerges as the most damaging across a wide range of outcomes. It is more strongly linked than other stressors to lower performance, reduced engagement, and weaker organisational commitment.
This matters for inclusion.
When expectations are unclear, participation becomes uneven. Some individuals feel confident navigating ambiguity, often those with greater access to informal networks or prior experience. Others are left second guessing, holding back, or overcompensating. Over time, this shapes who is heard, who progresses, and who feels they belong.
Importantly, the research highlights that role stress is not just an individual experience. It is shaped by organisational conditions. Poor communication, limited feedback, poor leadership, and low support all increase the likelihood that employees experience ambiguity, conflict, or overload.
The implication is clear. Inclusion is not only about behaviours, it is also about structure.
Leaders often focus on reducing workload or managing pressure. This study suggests that one of the most powerful levers may be far more fundamental: clarity.
Clear expectations, consistent communication, and accessible support systems do more than improve performance. They create the conditions for equitable contribution.
Inclusion is easier to achieve when people understand what is expected of them.
You can access the original article here.
