Organisations often claim to value diverse perspectives, yet those perspectives are welcomed only as long as they conform to existing norms. When they challenge established patterns of communication, hierarchy, pace, or decision-making, they are frequently labelled as confrontational, difficult, or disruptive. Through the lens of Pierre Bourdieu's concept of cultural capital, this is unsurprising. The same behaviours that are rewarded in those who already embody the dominant culture are often penalised in those whose ways of speaking, leading, or contributing fall outside it. I think what is framed as innovation in one person becomes disruption in another, not because the behaviour differs, but because the social value attached to the person expressing it does.
Understanding cultural capital
One perspective that I find particularly useful comes from the French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu and his concept of cultural capital. Bourdieu argued that society is not a level playing field. Instead, we operate within different social and professional "fields", each with its own unwritten rules. Success is influenced not only by competence but also by possessing the forms of knowledge, behaviour, communication style, educational background, and social networks that a particular environment values. In other words, cultural capital functions as a type of currency.
I think that in many organisations, success depends on understanding rules that are rarely written down. Knowing how to communicate with senior leaders, when to challenge an idea, how visible to make your achievements, or which behaviours are rewarded can become just as important as technical expertise. The challenge is that these expectations often feel natural to those who already possess the dominant form of cultural capital. For everyone else, they remain invisible and this is where performative inclusion often reveals itself.