Illustrative Image: Freepik 
On Wednesday, 16 July, Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr (CDH) hosted a webinar featuring a panel of experts – Yvonne Mkefa, director of employment law at CDH; Zakeera Docrat, a forensic and legal linguist; and Anli Bezuidenhout, director of employment law at CDH – who explored the evolving role of emojis in workplace communication, including their legal implications and the importance of cultural sensitivity.
This conversation was especially timely given how rapidly digital language is growing: every year, a fresh batch of nearly 60 emojis joins our digital space. What once seemed like harmless, playful icons are now shaping, and sometimes complicating, the fabric of workplace communication.
Read more: Thumbs up: good or passive aggressive? How emojis became the most confusing kind of online language
One careless thumbs-up or cheeky wink can set off a chain reaction of confusion, awkwardness or even HR intervention.
Decoding emojis at work
This raises the question: what do emojis really mean in the workplace – and why do they matter?
In the modern workplace, emojis can be loaded with unspoken meaning, risk of misinterpretation and even serve as evidence in sensitive investigations.
Decoding emoji etiquette in the workplace
Before you send that peach, thumbs-up or a red heart in a professional chat, this is what you need to keep in mind:
- Context is everything: The same emoji can mean very different things depending on the conversation, the relationship between participants, and the ongoing dynamics of the group;
- Volume matters: You can’t draw firm conclusions from just a handful of WhatsApp messages or emails. Analysing emoji use in workplace disputes often requires looking at a larger batch – think 10 to 20 messages in chats or several substantial emails – to properly gauge intent and pattern;
- Initiators influence meaning: Notice who first introduces emojis (especially personal ones like hearts or the peach) in a professional context. The shift from strictly work-related icons to more casual or suggestive ones can signal changing intentions or boundaries;
- Cultural and personal sensitivities: Something as trivial as a fruit emoji can be misconstrued. Even shades or choices of emoji (peach vs plum) can unintentionally raise complex issues, including perceived bias or exclusion;
- Patterns over single actions: It’s not just about one emoji. Frequency, timing (day or night) and engagement (full sentences vs single icons) all form part of the bigger picture and can signal anything from avoidance to inappropriate attention; and
- Evidence in investigations: Deleting messages or emojis to “cover tracks” can complicate or undermine workplace investigations, making context and record-keeping vital. Patterns in emoji use have been pivotal in sexual harassment and bullying cases.
Workplace complexities
“We are often confronted with WhatsApp chats as evidence of either a relationship or communication that may have been inappropriate,” Bezuidenhout said, highlighting the serious implications behind seemingly casual digital exchanges.
These factors can make or break the interpretation of emojis in workplace interactions.
“Sometimes, a peach emoji can spark more drama than a full paragraph,” said Mkefa.
These issues become even more critical in sensitive cases like sexual harassment or bullying. Mkefa noted that “even the time of day a message is sent can matter”.
While Docrat suggested that employers refer to websites like Emojipedia to provide employees with quick access to emoji meanings and consult forensic linguists for deeper insight, research shows that emoji meanings are heavily influenced by generational and cultural factors.
A smiley face might communicate sarcasm to Gen Z, but sincerity to older workers, illustrating why misunderstanding emojis can easily escalate workplace tensions.
Legal complexities
This discussion takes on greater urgency in light of the controversial case involving Eastern Cape Judge President Selby Mbenenge, who faces sexual harassment allegations after sending a series of texts that included suggestive emojis – including peeled bananas, eggplants, peaches and guavas – to a female employee, Andiswa Mengo.
During the tribunal hearings, Mbenenge acknowledged sending some of these emojis but denied that they were intended as explicit or harassing, describing their use as playful or flirtatious.
Read more: Mbenenge inquiry told of peeled bananas, a marinade, and men ‘muffing’
Beyond everyday misunderstandings, these digital nuances carry significant legal weight, demanding expert interpretation and carefully crafted policies.
“If we look, even at the colleagues interpreting the emojis, you have to have a background expertise in the semiotics of law,” said Docrat.
She further explained that cultural and linguistic context plays a crucial role, noting that analysing or interpreting emojis cannot be separated from the context in which they are used.
While it might seem logical to enforce a uniform policy on emoji use in the workplace, Docrat said that creating a “one-size-fits-all” rule simply isn’t practical.
Each organisation has its own unique culture, communication needs and sensitivities, which means any guidelines for digital communication – including emojis – should be tailored to its specific context and regularly reviewed to keep up with evolving language and team dynamics.
Navigating these complexities to foster respectful and clear workplace interactions requires more than just good intentions, it requires expert insight such as in the forensic and legal fields.
“We must also accept that things develop. New emojis are going to be introduced… We need to look at how we are going to deal with it,” Mkefa said. DM