Abstract
Although organizations increasingly seek to communicate allyship with the Black community, their ally statements can receive vastly different responses from Black observers. We develop and test a theoretical model outlining key drivers of allyship evaluations among these perceivers. Drawing from signaling theory and integrating insights from the literature on identity safety, we reveal the costliness and consistency of ally statements as critical determinants of Black perceivers’ evaluations of organizations as allies. Two studies—the first leveraging statements released by Fortune 500 companies and the second a more controlled follow-up experiment—demonstrate the interactive effects of cost and consistency on these assessments. Specifically, the most positive allyship evaluations emerged for organizations whose statements conveyed both high cost and high consistency. Our findings have implications for organizations and business leaders who aim to communicate allyship. To be recognized as allies, devoting resources and incurring costs is not enough; organizations must also signal a consistent commitment to supporting marginalized communities.