The Sneller Effect
- Emma Baker
- Jun 17
- 3 min read
Updated: Jun 22
Community, even community that purports to be inclusive, can often drive certain of its members away. This churn is effected by both the community actions as well as the personalities of those who choose to leave. I developed this theory in conversation with a friend, although it has been noted by many others before us. After this friend, I dub it 'the Sneller Effect.'
Consider the following hypothetical situation. A young person joins a native plant society and wants to get more involved with promoting sustainable landscaping. Most of the other members are older. The young person suggests promoting the group on TikTok, a platform other members aren't familiar with. Instead of expressing interest in learning about the suggestion or giving the new member tools to work on the project, they claim that they're too old to learn about social media, or politely put off any changes. Derision isn't a loud, public proclamation - it's more like 'side-eye'.
If this young person tends to be more introspective and self-critical, they are likely to wonder to themselves, "is this the right organization for me?" Maybe they don't want to cause conflict by demanding more inclusion, and they probably start to second-guess their own ability to contribute to the community.
However, if our hypothetical group member is very self-assured, not prone to self-reflection, or perhaps has less emotional intelligence, they are much less likely to consider leaving the group. This self-selection can ultimately lead to organizations with less overall diversity and sensitivity. This is the Sneller Effect.
It is easy to see how the Sneller Effect can interact with imposter syndrome. People who leave organizations due to feeling the imposter syndrome are a driver of the Effect. The pathway is; new member joins → existing members are perceived to act coldly toward the new member → new member questions whether they belong in the group → new member leaves the group. That questioning phase for the new member is where the imposter syndrome can arise and kill group participation.
It is also easy to see how a lack of cultural sensitivity from the existing group members can lead to microaggressions, dismissive comments, misunderstandings, or even overt hostility to new participants. Certain prejudiced group members can make hostile comments to a newbie as a private aside. This can create tension even where there is a broader consensus of support with the majority of membership.
The Sneller Effect can be seen in a variety of organizations and with a variety of marginalized groups. Other examples might include; a bisexual questions whether they are 'queer enough' for a LGBT+ community group, an academic questions whether they are intelligent enough for an academic society, the only person of color at a workplace feels left out.
What can be done to combat this effect? Leadership commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion is crucial. Listening and responding to member suggestions, concerns, and complaints is truly the only way organizations can grow and improve. This is true for many organizational pitfalls, but especially for the Sneller Effect. Speaking up as a new or marginalized group member is a courageous act which should be treated with gravitas by any organization leader who cares about the future of their group. Group leadership should consciously broadcast support for diverse membership, and provide pathways for anonymous and named concerns to be expressed.
As we in the sustainable landscape movement look out to the seventh generation, it will take serious and sustained effort to grow, change, and include as many people in this transformation as possible. I hope that the delineation of this effect provides another tool for us to do just that.
