On this page
During a coffee break, Amira is chatting naturally with a colleague in her first language. Maja is standing nearby and cannot understand a word.
— When you switch to your own language, I feel like I’m outside the team.
— And for me, it’s the first moment all morning when I don’t have to monitor every sentence.
For Amira, it is a break. For Maja, the same moment makes the boundary of the group suddenly visible.
How does Empatyzer help teams set inclusive language practices?
Empatyzer helps you see that talking in a language your friend doesn't understand can provide relief for one person and exclude another. This makes it easier to understand how to set good rules.
Features that can help:
- Organisational culture: Shows the preferred and actual organisational culture, which helps check whether the situation "With coffee your way" is related to the dominant norm of the company or team, and not solely to the character of the individuals.
- Talk to Em about your team: Allows you to discuss the "With coffee your way" issue with Em in the context of the entire team and establish a shared rule that prevents similar misunderstandings in the future.
- Comparison: Reveals the differences between you in areas such as native language, belonging and feeling of exclusion, so that in the situation "With coffee your way" you do not interpret the other party's behaviour solely through your own way of acting.
What really happened
Amira spends most of the day working in a language that is not her first language. During a break, switching to her native language with colleagues may simply feel restful: less effort, more spontaneity, jokes that work without translation. Maja is sitting next to them and cannot follow the conversation. Even if nobody intends to exclude her, she is physically with the group while being communicatively outside it. The same language switch can therefore give one person relief and make another person feel the edge of the group.
What the research says
Researchers use the term linguistic ostracism for situations in which colleagues use a language that a present coworker cannot understand and that person experiences exclusion, even when the conversation is not about them and no one intends harm. Fiset and Bhave showed that the choice of an incomprehensible language can itself be interpreted as distancing. A replication and extension published in 2026 revisited the same type of scenario, where a group switches during a break from a shared language to one spoken by only some members (Fiset & Bhave, 2021/2026). An important distinction is that impact does not prove intent. Amira may not be excluding anyone, while Maja can still genuinely feel left out.
How to handle it
The answer should not be to ban people from using their native languages during every break. That would be unnecessary and often unfair. What helps is paying attention to who is part of the moment. If someone at the table cannot understand the language and the conversation is meant to be shared, switching back to the common language—or briefly bringing that person into the topic—is a natural inclusive gesture. If two people are having a private conversation nearby, they can of course speak however they like. The general rule: language is both a source of ease and a boundary of access. Do not police people’s own language, but notice when its use unintentionally turns “our conversation” into “their conversation”.
How Empatyzer and Em can help
Empatyzer can help a team hold both real costs in view at the same time. For Amira, using her first language may reduce effort and let her speak more naturally; for the person beside her, a conversation in an incomprehensible language can create a sense of exclusion. The system should not guess anyone’s language proficiency or infer intent from country of origin. Em can instead help the team agree on a simple context-dependent norm: a private break can be genuinely private, but in a work conversation—or when someone present needs to participate—the team returns to a shared language. Culture-8 provides broader relational context, while micro-lessons help people distinguish the right to use their own language from the unintended exclusion of others.
Sources
- John Fiset; Devasheesh P. Bhave (2026). The effects of linguistic ostracism on job performance: A replication and an extension. Journal of Management Scientific Reports, 4(1), 72-100. https://doi.org/10.1177/27550311251399174 10.1177/27550311251399174
Find an article
Enter at least 2 characters. Minor typos are OK.