Neurodiverse Talent and the Inclusion Gap: Where Employers Go Wrong on Workplace Diversity
As organisations like Amazon and Meta axe their their diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programmes, the box-ticking nature of such initiatives becomes clear.
DEI has become a ‘charged’ term, as Meta put it, citing a ‘shifting legal and policy landscape’. Amazon justified their move with a shift in focus to ‘programs with proven outcomes… aiming for a more truly inclusive culture.’
Ironically, this sums up where employers go wrong with diversity initiatives. By focusing on external appearances of inclusivity, everybody misses out. Inclusion cannot be quantified and utilised as a marketing tool – it is not a trend.
The benefits of a diverse and inclusive workforce are obvious – greater innovation, representation, engagement, loyalty, and cohesiveness. However, employers are going wrong by assuming this can be manufactured with external facing initiatives, rather than a genuine intention to change the status quo.
Neuro-inclusion demonstrates the potential and challenges of this approach more than any other area – here’s how:
- We are all neurodiverse
Ironically, the fundamental challenge with many DEI initiatives is exclusion, as we all share certain human traits. For example, we are all neurodiverse, as we all think differently from one another, with unique strengths and weaknesses. The ‘neuronormative’ expectations of our society attempts to implement collective unwritten rules, such as what is considered to be ‘professional’.A neurodivergent person’s neurology may diverge away from these standards, making it difficult for them to meet the same expectations as ‘most’ people. However, the threshold for this is unclear. For example, while most people may find interviews stressful, a neurodivergent person may experience severe panic attacks. Minor adaptations, such as being permitted to take notes, can help to avoid this from happening.
However, this is highly personal – neurodivergence manifests differently in everybody. This makes standardising this threshold within bureaucracy virtually impossible, requiring trust and vulnerability above all.
- Neurodiversity is natural – checkboxes are not
As a result of our natural variations in brain structure and wiring, 1 in 7 people are considered neurodivergent.However, a formal medical diagnosis of a neurodevelopmental condition, such as ADHD, doesn’t make a person neurodivergent – it just confirms this. This is why the test for disability is legal, not medical, which is especially relevant given the years-long waiting lists for assessments.
This further exacerbates challenges in ‘measuring’ outcomes of diversity initiatives, if it’s unclear what can be measured in the first place. Medical information is highly sensitive, and individuals may understandably feel uncomfortable to disclose this to their employer, as the potential risks outweigh the benefits.
In addition, employees may not even realise that they’re disabled. For example, 9 out of 10 autistic adults over age 50 are thought to be undiagnosed1, and ADHD has only been diagnosable in UK adults since 2012.
Nevertheless, the law imposes a duty on employers to make adjustments if they ‘should have’ realised that the person is disabled – disclosure is not always required.
- The law should be the floor – not the ceiling
As neurodevelopmental conditions such as ADHD and autism can be disabilities safeguarded by equality law, this means inclusion isn’t a choice for employers – it’s the law.The duty to make reasonable adjustments to the workplace to remove or reduce any substantial disadvantage a disabled person may experience due to their disability levels the playing field between colleagues.
However, by ‘accommodating’ only for those who are legally protected, paradoxes can arise. For example, employees who may be unable to access a formal diagnosis may feel unable to seek help, and managers may feel uncomfortable implementing reasonable adjustments out of fear around confidentiality and legalities.Gatekeeping support at work behind the law brings a sense of fear for everybody, resulting in a lack of psychological safety. If an adjustment can support other people, then why not make this available to everybody?
- Neuro-inclusion is not just for ‘HR’ or ‘DEI’ – it’s for life
Well intentioned companies may pay money to join public pledges of neuro-inclusion, such as hiring a certain number of neurodivergent people. However, neurodivergence cannot be cordoned off in this way – it fundamentally impacts who a person is and how they experience the world.Recruiting a neurodivergent individual is very different to genuinely supporting them. Checkbox initiatives do not account for the reality behind genuine inclusion, which often necessitates an organisation-wide culture shift.
If managers are not trained in neurodivergence, they may unintentionally break the law, such as by discriminating against an individual’s performance. Colleagues could unwittingly harass others by commenting on politicised headlines such as the increase in neurodiversity awareness, unaware of another’s neurodivergence.
Ultimately, genuine inclusion requires co-ordinated efforts across an organisation. Even the best intentioned initiatives, such as paying for a private assessment for an employee, may backfire without appropriate support such as disclosure policies and reasonable adjustments processes to back this up.
Neurodivergence must be considered properly for an employee throughout their lifecycle with an employer, including within career progression and promotions. It cannot be separated from who they are, but it also doesn’t define them either.
- Neuro-inclusion is not a ‘one size fits all’ – it’s personal
A common challenge that DEI initiatives may encounter relates to difficulty in maintaining a coherent narrative. By definition, protected characteristics such as disability makes someone vulnerable, but outdated language and concepts may contribute to confusion around narratives.For example, neurodevelopmental conditions such as ADHD and autism use deficit-based criteria, although individuals may not consider themselves different, as opposed to ‘disordered’. Employers who attempt to frame this highly personal experience into an overarching narrative, such as a ‘superpower’, may find that this causes offence. Contrastingly, some individuals may prefer this description – it’s a personal choice.
This is why, as Amazon noted, ‘individual groups [building] programs’ doesn’t work. Each individual’s experience is unique to them, and cannot be commodified into a general package – especially if it’s not their job in the first place.
Ultimately, when the intentions behind measuring inclusion initiatives are to manage them, they are doomed to fail.
Here’s how employers can get it right:
- Trust employees
As a very fast-moving, sensitive, and politically charged concept, inclusion can feel uncomfortable for employers to navigate. Fear of getting things ‘wrong’ can prevent important conversations from happening at all, leaving employees feeling unable to contribute their full talents at work or disengaged.Disney demonstrated how to release control and trust employees, by training 250 of their mental health first aiders as ADHD Champions. This support backed up their medical insurance providing assessments, enabling employees to confidentially discuss their experiences with specifically trained colleagues.
This can feel far safer than formal disclosure to a manager or HR, resulting in specialist peer support and fostering connection.
- Train everybody
Instead of focusing voluntary diversity initiatives on certain groups, which could result in resentment or discomfort from others, employers can include everybody. Equipping all employees with skills such as emotional intelligence, conflict navigation, and empathy is key to fostering truly diverse environments.For example, Neuro-Affirmative training enables employees to move beyond labels to identify and understand theirs and others’ own neuro-differences. By adapting their own working environment to suit their needs, they can support others to do the same.
Making such training mandatory, and fostering genuinely open environments where people feel safe, heard, valued, and appreciated, involves everybody in the process.
- Focus on what cannot be measured
This may sound counter-productive, but if employers move away from SMART outputs and towards intangible concepts such as engagement, satisfaction, and belonging, they will see immeasurable benefits.By creating environments where everybody can thrive and play to their unique strengths, employers will see the benefits in the outputs. This means working cultures that celebrate all differences, not just those that can be packaged and presented, allowing the results of a happy, loyal, and cohesive workforce to do the talking.
- Embrace vulnerability
Corporate norms such as ‘professionalism’ keep the office clear of emotions and vulnerability, but employees are humans – not robots. This also includes the leadership team, who experience differences and challenges just like everybody else.By leading from the top, and empowering leaders to share their vulnerabilities and experiences, trust can be built within an organisation. Importantly, this also means openly and honestly addressing the challenges in shifting the status quo, and changing the culture of an organisation, despite the best of intentions.
Vulnerability requires honest conversations, enabling us to collaboratively embrace the unknown, with the knowledge that there is no ‘end point’ for a box to be checked. It’s the acceptance of continuous growth and learning, but the safety of knowing that although things might change, the support we receive will not.
Written by Leanne Maskell.
Bring the best of the CEOWORLD magazine's global journalism to audiences in the United States and around the world. - Add CEOWORLD magazine to your Google News feed.
Follow CEOWORLD magazine headlines on: Google News, LinkedIn, Twitter, and Facebook.
Copyright 2025 The CEOWORLD magazine. All rights reserved. This material (and any extract from it) must not be copied, redistributed or placed on any website, without CEOWORLD magazine' prior written consent. For media queries, please contact: info@ceoworld.biz
