Inside the Clique: Why Workplace Groups Form — and How to Build More Inclusive Teams

From evolution to modern office politics, the desire to belong runs deep. Social Identity Theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979) tells us we categorise ourselves and others into groups to bolster our self-esteem. When we feel uncertain, anxious, or undervalued at work, we're more likely to seek safety in smaller, familiar subgroups.

But this isn’t just about psychology. Neuroimaging shows that being accepted by a group activates the brain's reward system — especially the ventral striatum and medial prefrontal cortex (Lieberman, 2013). We literally feel good when we're included.

Conversely, being excluded lights up the same brain regions associated with physical pain — notably the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex and anterior insula (Eisenberger et al., 2003). It’s not "just in your head" — exclusion hurts, both emotionally and neurologically.

So when people find connection and safety in a specific group at work — a clique — that bond becomes self-reinforcing. Social rewards (dopamine) encourage them to stay close to that group, while avoidance of pain (rejection) keeps outsiders at arm’s length.

A clique isn’t inherently toxic — but the behaviours it fosters can be. Subgroups that dominate conversations, subtly exclude others, or pass information through unofficial channels can damage trust, create silos, and lower engagement.

In a well-known case, Uber’s early hyper-competitive culture reportedly fostered internal cliques that contributed to harassment claims and poor psychological safety (Fowler, 2017). Similarly, research in NHS hospitals showed that fragmented subgroups within teams led to reduced collaboration and poorer patient care (West et al., 2014).

Even in more everyday settings — like a small consultancy or startup — the effects can show up in decreased morale, backchannel communication, or people holding back ideas in meetings.

Certain conditions make cliques more likely:

• Unclear leadership or communication: When leaders are inconsistent or fail to communicate clear expectations and direction, team members feel psychologically unsafe. This uncertainty drives people to form tight-knit alliances for clarity, validation, and a sense of control. A lack of structure increases social ambiguity, which heightens anxiety and, in turn, clique formation (Edmondson, 2019).
  
• Unmet psychological needs: Drawing on Self-Determination Theory (Deci & Ryan, 2000), we know people have three basic needs: autonomy, competence, and relatedness. When these are unmet — especially relatedness — employees may seek pseudo-family-like safety in small in-groups. The analogy here is helpful: in a safe family, all members feel heard, accepted, and valued. When workplaces fail to offer this kind of secure attachment, individuals often create their own 'mini families' or cliques to meet these relational needs.
  
• Lack of diversity and inclusion: Homogeneous teams can create echo chambers where conformity is the norm and difference is sidelined. Without proactive inclusion efforts, people who don't 'fit the mould' may be left out or encouraged to assimilate. This can lead to polarised subgroups forming along lines of age, ethnicity, background, or tenure — all of which are shown to impact team cohesion and psychological safety (Bourke & Dillon, 2018).
  
• Poor onboarding or team integration: New hires who aren’t actively supported and included in early team interactions often struggle to find their place. Left to fend for themselves, they may either drift toward forming their own cliques or remain on the outside looking in. Effective onboarding, mentoring, and buddy systems have been shown to reduce this risk and increase social integration (Klein et al., 2015).

1. Create Psychological Safety

Psychological safety — the belief that it’s safe to speak up without punishment — is essential to inclusive teams (Edmondson, 2019). When people feel secure, they’re less likely to retreat into exclusive subgroups. In practice, this means leaders openly admitting their own mistakes, encouraging differing views, and making it clear that all voices are welcome.

Neuroscience supports this: lower psychological safety correlates with higher cortisol (stress) levels and greater amygdala activity — both of which reduce openness to others (Zak, 2017).

2. Promote Cross-Team Connections

Design team structures and social opportunities that mix people across departments, seniority levels, and backgrounds. Consider initiatives like:

• Randomised coffee chats
• Mixed project teams
• Mentoring schemes
• Social events that discourage clumping by existing friendships
  

These interventions break the reward loop that keeps cliques intact, encouraging broader relational networks (Rock, 2009).

3. Model Inclusion as a Leader

Inclusive leadership means being aware of who speaks and who gets overlooked. It involves intentionally inviting contributions from quieter team members and calling out exclusionary behaviour.

Richard Branson is known for making time for employees at all levels, fostering a sense of connection that transcends hierarchy. At Google, Project Aristotle found psychological safety and balanced participation were key to high-performing teams.

4. Address Issues Early and Transparently

It’s tempting to avoid conflict, but when cliques become problematic, silence often signals complicity. Instead, address concerns early through facilitated discussions, feedback loops, or team reset sessions. Netflix, for example, maintains an open feedback culture that doesn’t tolerate exclusivity — and leaders model it daily (Hastings & Meyer, 2020).

Preventing cliques isn’t just about managing individuals — it’s about designing cultures. Environments where people feel respected, valued, and seen reduce the psychological drive for exclusivity. As a leader or HR professional, the real question isn’t "how do I get rid of cliques?" but rather "how do I create an environment where they don’t form in the first place?"

That’s about:

• Listening deeply: This means tuning into both what’s being said and what’s not being said. Leaders who listen deeply create environments where team members feel safe sharing concerns and ideas, reducing the need for side conversations or closed-off groups. Practical tools like active listening training, 360-degree feedback systems, or coaching supervision sessions can help develop this as a leadership skill.
  
• Building systems that foster connection: From peer mentoring to cross-functional initiatives, intentionally designed systems create consistent opportunities for bonding and understanding. These systemic designs ensure belonging isn’t left to chance. Organisations can implement regular team rotations, collaborative problem-solving sessions, or digital social platforms that encourage broad participation.
  
• Encouraging open communication: When communication is frequent, transparent, and values-driven, there’s less room for rumour, backchanneling, and the kind of uncertainty that breeds cliques. It also reinforces trust and clarity. Tools such as regular team check-ins, anonymous Q&A forums, and leadership briefings can create multiple communication channels that invite openness.
  
• Rewarding inclusive behaviours: Inclusion should be more than a buzzword — it should be baked into performance reviews, team rituals, and recognition programmes. Reward behaviours like collaboration, sharing credit, and helping others feel welcome. Leadership development programmes and team charters can set clear behavioural expectations, while peer-nominated awards for inclusive behaviour reinforce positive norms.

Ultimately, fostering an anti-clique culture means embedding inclusion into the way a company functions — not just its values, but its everyday interactions, structures, and leadership training.