University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Workplace neurodiverse equity

(USC Thesis Other)

Workplace neurodiverse equity

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Workplace Neurodiverse Equity
by
Zachary Yarde
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education
May 2024

ii
ii
© Copyright by Zachary Yarde 2024
All Rights Reserved

iii
iii
The Committee for Zachary Yarde certifies the approval of this Dissertation.
Don Trahan, Jr.
Taqueena Quintana
Marsha Riggio, Committee Chair
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2024

iv
iv
Abstract
This study applies social cognitive theory (SCT) to better understand workplace equity
for neurodivergent employees. The purpose of this study was to learn more about the best
practices and barriers to implementing increased workplace neurodiverse equity recruiting and
retaining neurodivergent individuals. This included interviews with nine leaders, executives, and
consultants who have implemented or facilitated neurodiversity equity programs or supported
neurodiverse equity within the workforce. Each of the nine research participants were identified
as neurodivergent, so the current interviews provide insight from multiple experience levels. The
transcripts from these interviews were studied through Thematic Content Analysis (Braun &
Clarke, 2006) and juxtaposed with descriptive analysis from a demographic survey. This
analysis, considered in context with an exhaustive literature review, indicated six themes
surrounding the hiring and ongoing support of neurodivergent job candidates and employees.
This concluded by emphasizing the importance of individualized support, employee resource
groups, and leadership representation of neurodiversity. This study provides lived experiences
from those who have started implementing change for neurodivergent individuals within the
workforce. The primary range of past studies has only included capturing the lived experience of
neurodivergent employees. Hence, the hope is that this study will continue past research, so the
future is filled with further workplace transformation and inclusion for neurodiversity.
Keywords: neurodiversity, neurodivergent, human capital, equity, workplace inclusion,
employee resource groups, universal design interventions, social cognitive theory,

v
v
Acknowledgments
First, to my best friend, adventure partner, and spouse, Stephanie, you were endlessly
supportive during this and previous academic pursuits in which I have engaged. The grace and
encouragement you conveyed were invaluable within all the days spent completing coursework,
research, and writing. Thank you. I would not be at this threshold without your support during
this entire experience. To my parents and family, those here and those who are not, you have
always encouraged me before this process, during, and after. I am grateful that you all often
believe in me more than I do in myself. I am here only with your support.
Second, from assisting at the very beginning through writing letters of recommendation
to ongoing support and flexibility, I am grateful to my various supervisors at work. You often
asked for updates, extended encouragement, and allowed me to vent. Thank you!
To my fellow USC OCL Cohort 22 members, I must admit that I did not prioritize
looking at cohort models when looking at doctoral programs…because of this, the support,
comradery, joy, authenticity, and forever friendships were a surprise during this journey. I am
here because of the various check-in’s, affirmations, and commiserations we shared. The
experience of sharing this journey was life-changing, and I consider it one of the greatest honors.
I wish you all the absolute best and look forward to more years of random updates, genuine
encouragement, and otherwise journeying through life together!
Next, I want to thank my dissertation committee members Dr. Don Trahan, Jr. and
Dr. Taqueena Quintana, thank you for the advice, directives, and feedback on how to bring this
to fruition! To my chair, Dr. Marsha Riggio, your experience allowed me to be more thorough,
and the normalization of my anxieties during this process encouraged me to persevere when the
future seemed uncertain. Thank you to my APA editor, Dr. Pamela Minet-Lucid; your expertise

vi
vi
and attention to detail were exceptionally beneficial. To my USC Dissertation Review Associate,
Dr. Larry Hausner, thank you, too, for your keen eye and suggestions. Furthermore, I sincerely
thank Dr. Ayesha Madni, Dr. Erika Taylor Page, and Dave Thompson for reviewing these pages.
I am so grateful for your time, encouragement, and insight. To all listed here, your revisions,
recommendations, and resources were relied upon heavily on this journey!
During the start of my academic journey through USC, I was assigned a student support
specialist, Reginald Ryder, whose consistent touchpoints, jovial temperament, intentionality
about my self-care, and never-ending encouragement got me through the initial section of my
dissertation journey. Regrettably, this form of support was suspended against my wishes in an
unfortunate restructuring of care given to the Organizational Change and Leadership (OCL)
program. I am grateful to Reginald and consider our shortened time together a foundational
benefit of my program completion.
Last, I want to send a statement of gratitude to the neurodivergent community. This
journey was only possible because of you. To the courageous neurodiversity experts interviewed
as a part of this study, I thank each of you again for taking time to authentically share your
experiences personally and professionally about neurodiversity equity within the workforce. I
also share that all who have come before this work of exploring neurodiverse equity, the books,
journals, social media posts, and conversations have all informed, inspired, and invoked this
work. I continue to be humbled and by the courage of neurodivergent individuals who have
shared their lived experiences for it is this vulnerability that allowed me to share my own
neurodivergence openly and finish this study. Thank you for this example of how to boldly
model the disclosure of needs, preferences, and dreams. This is how we move forward, together.
And even though my words here are still overshadowed by your resolution, thank you.

vii
vii
Dedication
This section is purposely the last thing for me to author largely because I feared
completing this the most. So, this prompt is for those who go unseen. Whether due to a conscious
or unconscious acts to mask who you are to fit in with what is considered normal, please know
my desire is for you to feel seen. My reality is that I cannot create for you a space of equity, of
psychological safety, or of comfort within your home, employment, or community. I wish I
could. Personally, I have felt moments of exclusion, alienation, or of being ostracized because of
who I am with my own neurodivergent identity. Nevertheless, my neurodivergence is only one of
the elements of marginalization I hold and the rest of my intersectional being is comprised of
positions of privilege. I have been benefited by my upbringing and have received
accommodations at home, work, and in life simply by luck, birth, or a positionality of power.
And, regardless of the determination needed to complete the current dissertation, this cannot be
recognized without the acknowledgement of privilege. I also highlight this as I am aware as I
have experienced several of the hardships of neurodivergence mentioned later but I also know I
have been incredibly fortunate. So, I extend empathy to all neurodivergent persons as I can relate
to and share a snapshot of your lived experience, but your own journey is unique. You are the
reason that this focus was decided upon. I hope that these pages will serve to bring about
increased awareness, advocacy, and action for the neurodivergent community we are a part of.
Please also know that you deserve a workspace, environment, and home where you can feel that
you belong, are desired, and truly seen for yourself. You are unique. You are strong. Your
neurodivergence is a part of who you are so may you have the environment, empowerment, and
encouragement to courageously celebrate who you are. May you be seen. This is my hope for
this work. That we all might be seen, supported, and, ultimately, celebrated.

viii
viii
Table of Contents
Abstract iv
Acknowledgments v
Dedication vii
Table of Contents viii
List of Tables xii
List of Figures xiii
List of Abbreviations xiv
Chapter One: Introduction to the Study 1
Context and Background of the Problem 1
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions 6
Importance of the Study 8
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology 11
Definition of Terms 12
Assumptions, Limitations, Delimitations, and Positionality 16
Conclusion 19
Organization of the Dissertation 20
Chapter Two: Literature Review 21
Search Description Overview 21
Conceptual & Theoretical Framework 22
Review of Research 23

ix
ix
Understanding Workplace Equity 24
Understanding Neurodiversity 25
Challenges of Neurodivergent Equity 26
Best Practices for Neurodivergent Equity 30
Best Practices for Recruiting Neurodivergent Employees 31
Best Practices for Retaining Neurodivergent Employees 31
Workplace Neurodivergent Equity Models 34
Summary 35
Chapter Three: Methodology 37
Research Design 37
Research Setting 38
Participants 38
Target and Accessible Population 39
Sample 39
Sampling Method 39
Recruitment 40
Data Collection 41
Demographic Survey 42
Interview Protocol 43
Procedures 44

x
x
Confidentiality Parameters 46
Data Management – Encryption 46
Dissemination of Findings 47
Data Analysis 47
Descriptive Analysis 48
Thematic Content Analysis 49
Reliability 50
Validity 51
Ethics 53
Conclusion 54
Chapter Four: Findings 55
Demographic Data 55
Findings 59
Analysis of Research Question 1 60
Analysis of Research Question 2 69
Analysis of Research Question 3 81
Summary & Conclusion 95
Chapter Five: Recommendations 97
Summary of Findings 98
Research Question 1 98

xi
xi
Research Question 2 100
Research Question 3 103
Recommendations for Practice 107
Recommendation 1: Informed individualization of neurodivergent support 109
Recommendation 2: Neurodivergent-focused employee resource groups 114
Recommendation 3: Leadership neurodiversity awareness, support, and representation 119
Discussion 128
Suggestions for Future Research 131
Conclusion 138
References 140
Appendix A 158
Appendix B 160
Appendix C 164
Appendix D 165
Appendix E 168
Appendix F 169

xii
xii
List of Tables
Table 1: Data Sources & Collection Methods ............................................................................. 42
Table 2: Procedural progression of protocols to analysis then conclusions ................................ 45
Table 3: Type of analysis linked to instruments.......................................................................... 48
Table 4: Phases of thematic analysis by Braun & Clarke (2006) ................................................ 49
Table 5: Participant Demographic & Neurodiversity Summary.................................................. 58
Table 6: Identified Codes and Themes by Research Question .................................................... 59
Table 7: Recommendations & Components of Effective Implementation ................................ 108
Table 8: Areas of need to expand research on neurodiversity ................................................... 132
Table 9: Survey on demographic information ........................................................................... 160
Table 10: Interview questions.................................................................................................... 164
Table 11: Supplemental Interview Questions A – Equity Program Participants....................... 165
Table 12: Supplemental Interview Questions B – Equity Program Facilitators........................ 166

xiii
xiii
List of Figures
Figure 1: Reciprocal Interactions in social cognitive theory as a theoretical framework............ 11
Figure 2: Pervasive workplace inclusion as a conceptual framework ......................................... 23
Figure 3: Participants’ neurodiverse identification...................................................................... 57

xiv
xiv
List of Abbreviations
ADHD/ADD……………….…Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder/Attention-deficit disorder
ASD…………………...…………………………………………...……Autism spectrum disorder
ERG……………………………………………………………………..Employee resource group
DEI…………………………….……………………………………Diversity, equity & inclusion
IFL…………………………………………………………………………..Identity first language
ND………………………………………………………………Neurodivergent/Neurodivergence
PFL……………………...……………………………………………………Person first language
TCA…………………………………………………..…………………Thematic content analysis
SCT…………………….…………………………………………………..Social cognitive theory
UDIs……..……………………………..…………………………..Universal design interventions

1
Chapter One: Introduction to the Study
Neurodivergent (see Definition of Terms) individuals, including autism spectrum
disorder (ASD, see Definition of Terms) and similar diagnoses, represent 10%-15% of the
population, and yet only one in ten neurodivergent individuals are a part of the workforce
(Narenthiran et al., 2022; Szulc et al., 2021). The umbrella term of neurodivergence includes
those who learn differently, including individuals who identify as autistic, have attentiondeficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD, see Definition of Terms), dyslexia (see Definition of
Terms), and other conditions (Narenthiran et al., 2022). The common neurodivergent
symptomatology (see Definition of Terms) is commonly associated with sensory overload,
unique interpersonal traits, and other characteristics, often resulting in receiving workplace
negative attitudes or misunderstandings (Flower et al., 2019). Because of this, the current study
examines neurodivergent individuals who identify as autistic, having ADHD, or dyslexia. For
example, of autistic (see Definition of Terms) adults, 80% are unemployed, with over 30% never
being a part of the workforce, which exhibits workplace neurodivergent marginalization
(Griffiths et al., 2020, see Definition of Terms). These disproportional ratios indicate that
neurodiverse marginalization has contributed to negative responses to this workforce population.
Thus, these sources lead to the lack of neurodiverse equity (see Definition of Terms) within
hiring practices and ongoing support for remote, office, and hybrid neurodivergent employees
(see Definition of Terms).
Context and Background of the Problem
There is a distinction between the past medical model that saw neurodivergence as
requiring a cure juxtaposed with the current view of seeing value in individual neurodivergent
staff and workplace equity (Dwyer, 2022). The previous model contributed to how the

2
neurodivergent community often fears disclosing their needs due to negative stereotypes
(Priscott & Allen, 2021). Within qualitative research, if neurodivergent individuals join the
workforce, they have reported experiencing negative experiences due to disclosing their
diagnoses, such as suicidal thoughts, mental breakdowns, feelings of being trapped,
discrimination, and a lack of understanding (Djela, 2021). Likewise, neurodivergent individuals
may face intensified stigmatization if they choose to utilize the accommodations provided by
their employer (O’Brolcháin & Gordijn, 2018). Additional misconceptions towards
neurodivergence include misunderstanding about the origin of neurodivergence and
neurodivergent individuals not being able to have empathy as well as not being able to express or
feel different emotions (Chown, 2020).
One barrier is the lack of qualitative analysis measuring personal accounts about the
anxiety neurodivergent individuals feel when debating disclosing their diagnosis (Whelpley et
al., 2021). For example, neurodivergent tendencies are often invisible, so accommodations (see
Definition of Terms) can seem unnecessary to coworkers, supervisors, and companies
(Waisman-Nitzan et al., 2019). Despite this, companies require this vulnerability to provide
accommodations, and this aid may cause disintegration between neurodivergent employees and
their coworkers (Spoor et al., 2021). The lack of this psychological safety within the workplace
can increase neurodivergent employee silence, isolation, and fear of punishment (Vogus &
Taylor, 2018). Because of these factors, neurodivergent individuals ‘mask’ their traits, which
requires increased effort, making regular job duties more difficult (Kidwell et al., 2023).
Workplace challenges have led to how only 25-69% of neurodivergent individuals chose to
disclose their disability to their company due to the fear of continued discrimination and a lack of
awareness (Lindsay et al., 2021). This dilemma to bring equity without knowing a diagnosis

3
highlights the necessity of psychological safety, equity, and inclusion for neurodivergent job
candidates during hiring and those employees at an office or working remotely.
If this persists, organizations will miss the unique emotional dimensions of
neurodivergent employees, leading to disengagement, social challenges, and blaming
neurodiverse staff (Bury et al., 2021). Equity for neurodivergence involves legal areas of
required accommodations and Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI, see Definition of terms)
advocacy, so this becomes a necessary area of focus for companies to avoid legal repercussions
(Doyle & McDowall, 2022). Therefore, it is essential to understand the lack of equity for
neurodivergent candidates within the hiring process and how organizations can increase
inclusivity, psychological safety, and belonging for remote, office, and hybrid-based
neurodivergent employees. For example, from a recent PRNewswire (2022), about a third of
neurodivergent employees have experienced hardship within hiring and advancement, with about
two-thirds experiencing workplace discrimination. Moreover, this and subsequent sections of this
research, will view hybrid work settings as also including areas that are relevant for
neurodivergent staff who are remote and office based. Overall, future sections will include two
primary focus areas of recruiting neurodivergent talent and how best to retain neurodivergent
employees working at the office, remotely, or within hybrid settings.
Recruiting Neurodivergent Employees
Within hiring practices, neurodivergent candidates feel that meeting job standards will be
challenging and doubt they will be supported or valued, based on neurotypical (see Definition of
terms) expectations (Ezerins et al., 2023). Traditional recruitment tends to lean heavily on
gauging ability per an individual’s propensity for verbal communication, which tends to be a
barrier for neurodivergent individuals (Carrero et al., 2019). Because of these traditional hiring

4
practices, neurodivergent staff report uncertainty about disclosing their diagnosis, lack of clear
information, inflexible expectations, and increased emphasis on social skills and environmental
issues (Davies et al., 2023). Therefore, the lack of equity for neurodivergent job candidates
within traditional hiring practices bars them from the workforce.
Retaining Neurodivergent Employees
For hired neurodivergent individuals, the primary area of required equity is how to
support these employees due to the additional hardship they face upon joining organizations.
Empowering recruitment includes understanding the unique characteristics of each primary work
setting of those working at the office, remotely, or in a hybrid setting. Future sections follow this
layout of how best to retain neurodivergent employees and explore what equitable needs are
present within each work environment.
Remote-based Neurodivergent Employees
Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been an influx of remote job
opportunities, which provide significant opportunities for neurodivergent individuals to avoid
factors that have led to the lack of ability to change their physical office environment. However,
neurodivergent staff also report burdens when working from home, being easily distracted, being
overwhelmed by forms of communication, and having to spend extra time advocating for
accommodations (Das et al., 2021). The neurodivergent community faces unique challenges
from remote work positions, such as decreased supportive interactions and less ability to learn
from others while facing barriers of reliance on electronic communication and poor work-life
balance (Tomczak et al., 2022). Remote-based burdens like these illustrate how even when
neurodivergent employees can avoid office-based overstimulation or inflexibility of traditional
jobs, they can still face a lack of equity in the home-based setting.

5
Office-based Neurodivergent Employees
When neurodivergent individuals face difficulties when hired by experiencing sensory
overload, interpersonal challenges, and a lack of awareness of their diagnosis or other negative
attitudes from coworkers and supervisors (Flower et al., 2019). Another measure of note is that
neurodivergent interns report higher levels of miscommunication, past negative experiences, and
increased anxiety or depression (Remington et al., 2022). The chaotic work environment
bringing unpredictable lighting, sound, and social interactions contribute to stress, the lack of
meeting job expectations, or coworkers viewing neurodivergent staff as antisocial (Whelpley &
Woznyj, 2023). Overall, these prevalent repercussions faced by neurodivergent employees at the
office illustrate the core concept of the current study.
Hybrid-based Neurodivergent Employees
Since neurodivergent tendencies can be invisible to coworkers and supervisors,
accommodations can seem unnecessary to workplace colleagues (Waisman-Nitzan et al., 2019).
Further, since accommodations are uninformed by not considering the uniqueness of individual
neurodivergent employees, these contribute to more harm, decreased employment metrics, or
decreased self-worth (Doyle & McDowall, 2022). Recently, there has been an influx of
neurodivergent individuals attempting to join the workforce to achieve a higher quality of life,
autonomy, and less reliance on external support (Whelpley et al., 2021). Nevertheless,
neurodivergent employees continue to face hardship in the workplace (Whelpley et al., 2021).
Such workplace difficulties highlight the lack of neurodivergent equity and inclusion from hiring
through ongoing employment for office-based employees and those working from home.

6
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions
The goal of this research is to learn more about, and give recommendations to improve,
the level of equity experienced by neurodivergent individuals within the recruitment and
retention efforts of organizations. This increased understanding of neurodivergent equity within
the workforce will allow for robust recommendations to be given on how organizations can
intentionally be more inclusive for this population.
Recruiting Neurodivergent Employees
Equitable hiring practices are required for neurodivergent candidates to increase
psychological safety while decreasing discrimination and protecting organizations from legal
repercussions (Carrero et al., 2019). Furthermore, the emphasis on neurodivergent equity
throughout the employment process highlights the need for individualized assistance within
hiring and ongoing supervisory support to aid company outcomes (Khan et al., 2022). Employers
have utilized psychometric testing and other appraisal methods as part of the recruitment process
based only on neurotypical individuals, so they fail to identify the strengths, abilities, or skills of
neurodivergent individuals (Djela, 2021). Also, neurodivergent individuals may have difficulty
in the interview process by misreading social cues and nonverbal behavior and face challenges in
advocating for themselves (Flower et al., 2019). Thus, best practices are essential in recruitment
to cultivate workplace neurodiversity equity and inclusion.
Retaining Neurodivergent Employees
This section will show the unique challenges that neurodivergent individuals face once
they join the workforce. For example, the current study focuses on increasing awareness and
understanding of the unique qualities of neurodiverse employees working within different
settings. The workplace environments that have been studied include remote, office, and hybrid.

7
Overall, this framework provides the ability to learn more about neurodiverse equity across
workplace environments.
Remote-based Neurodivergent Employees
The current study aims to bring new insight for remote-based neurodivergent staff
specifically since this has been less studied and is now more necessary due to the Covid-19
pandemic. Most previous studies on workplace-equity practices for neurodivergence are on
office-based autistic staff, so there is a need to expand to remote settings for the broader
spectrum of neurodivergence (Weber et al., 2022). Paradoxically, the Covid-19 pandemic did
create more remote opportunities for neurodiverse staff (Jashinsky et al., 2021). However, these
positions may bring additional hardship for neurodivergent employees due to inequitable
utilization of digital resources or other technology-related barriers (Jashinsky et al., 2021). These
factors lead the current study to prioritize the specific isolated variables of remote working
equity for neurodivergent employees.
Office-based Neurodivergent Employees
For office-based neurodivergent employees, the current study identifies best workplace
equity practices. When examining workplace equity, it becomes necessary to isolate why it is
often difficult for employees and managers to identify staffs’ unique needs, negotiate
expectations, and agree on accommodations (Whelpley & Woznyj, 2023). Likewise, the current
study examines the impact of environmental and social barriers that the neurodivergent
population faces within the office setting, such as managing differences in social interactions,
preferences for sensory stimulation, and other unique challenges (Russo et al., 2023). Overall,
this provides a necessary core area by focusing on bringing neurodivergent equity to this
traditional workplace setting.

8
Hybrid-based Neurodivergent Employees
Currently, there is pressure for neurodivergent individuals to self-identify, self-disclose,
and self-advocate for accommodations at work, which leads to not feeling comfortable coming
forward or that they are a burden, problem, or invalidated (Davies et al., 2022). Furthermore, the
current study is founded upon these questions to aid in learning the best practices, potential
barriers, and core concepts of workplace neurodivergent equity. Likewise, including hybrid as a
setting is necessary as this focus also provides how to understand the barriers faced by
neurodiverse employees who will cycle between traditional office environments and working
from their home or remote areas.
Research Questions
1. What does neurodivergent equity look like in the workplace?
2. What are the challenges of neurodivergent equity in the workplace?
3. How can neurodivergent workplace equity be improved?
Importance of the Study
This study aims to identify current equitable environments created by companies that
recruit and support neurodivergent employees, understand the challenges, and how to train other
organizations on these best practices. This understanding will allow recommendations to be
developed to provide a model for companies to optimize equity for neurodiverse employees. This
is vital for recruiting to retaining neurodiverse employees. There is a gap in how corporations
educate leaders on stigmas and a need to create an inclusive space through changes to
onboarding, training, and policy reform (Mellifont, 2021; Solomon, 2020). Companies can use
these strategies to cultivate neurodivergent equity, inclusion, and well-being, from hiring to ongoing support for their office, hybrid, and work-from-home based neurodivergent employees.

9
Recruiting Neurodivergent Employees
Neurodivergent individuals report the fear of disclosing their diagnosis, masking of traits,
and increased anxiety within hiring practices (Davies et al., 2023). Furthermore, when there are
misunderstandings of the unique behaviors of neurodivergent individuals, especially regarding
autism, this tends to lead to not being hired due to a lack of being a good fit or being seen as a
poor communicator (Patton, 2019). This lack of emphasis on job-specific skills within interviews
holds a similar risk to companies that they would face if they rejected a candidate based on race,
age, or gender (Rosales et al., 2023). Because of this, companies who decide to take no action on
increasing neurodivergent inclusion within recruitment risk perpetuating inequity,
neurodivergent stigmas, and untapped human capital potential (Morehouse, 2023). Hence, there
is a significant need for an increased understanding of the barriers that neurodiverse talent faces
when attempting to join the workforce.
Retaining Neurodivergent Employees
Managing neurodiverse talent is also necessary as these individuals can overcome these
barriers within the hiring process. The following sections will highlight the unique issues that
neurodiverse employees face across the primary employment environments of working at the
office, remotely, and a hybrid combination of those. Examining these area-specific needs
illustrates how the importance of neurodiverse workplace equity can be seen distinctly within
each employment situation.
Remote-based Neurodivergent Employees
Furthermore, there often needs to be accommodations for neurodivergent staff who work
remotely, as seen by inflexibility, scheduling barriers, and the lack of communication (Das et al.,
2021). When the Covid-19 pandemic occurred, neurodivergent persons began working from

10
home, resulting in “zoom fatigue,” disruption of routines, and more significant sensory overload
when returning to the office (Mellifont, 2022). Moreover, since communication and social
interaction might be more unpredictable when working virtually, this may cause neurodivergent
individuals to be overwhelmed (Kalmanovich-Cohen & Stanton, 2023). These findings illustrate
that remote neurodivergent employees still experience emotional turmoil due to inflexibility,
inconsistency, and inequity in this work setting.
Office-based Neurodivergent Employees
Research consistently shows an absence of companies adapting the work environment for
neurodivergent staff and only providing general management, leading to isolation, deficient
performance, and a lack of advancement (Martin et al., 2022; Patton, 2019; Tomczak, 2022). The
lack of an adjustable workplace coincides with thirty-six studies on workplace interventions
indicating how the lack of environmental factors, workplace relationships, and functional
accommodations can result in missing the strengths that each neurodivergent employee possesses
(Scott et al., 2018). Additionally, accommodations without proper training on the nuanced needs
of neurodivergent employees generate auxiliary exhaustion or decreased well-being (Richards et
al., 2019). Thus, neurodivergent employees face professional stagnation, disconnection, and
stigmatization when accommodations are ineffective, inappropriate, or incomplete.
Hybrid-based Neurodivergent Employees
Research illustrates how workplaces often do not have equity by providing insufficient
training, supervisor knowledge, and managers’ ability to provide individualized support to
neurodiverse employees (Cooper & Kennady, 2021; Krzeminska et al., 2019; Narenthiran et al.,
2022). If coworkers feel that tasks are not getting done or have issues communicating with peers,
these can lead to recurring negative workplace interactions, frustrations, and group hate (Coplan

11
et al., 2021). Additionally, hybrid-based neurodivergent employees also may suffer the inequities
faced by those who are either remote or office-based as they often transition between both
settings. Therefore, the current problem of practice is necessary to ensure the safety, well-being,
and equity of neurodivergent employees when working remotely, at the office, or in a hybrid
combination of environments.
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology
Social cognitive theory (SCT) emphasizes how individuals, and their environments have
a reciprocal relationship that influences each area as time progresses (Bandura, 2000). Due to
this interplay, SCT illustrates the benefits that equity at the workplace would bring for that
environment and all individuals residing within it, as seen below in Figure 1.
Figure 1
Reciprocal Interactions in social cognitive theory as a theoretical framework
Note. The current figure has been recreated from its original form to maintain image quality and
clarity. The figure illustrates how an individual’s beliefs, behaviors, and background interact to
emphasize the importance of support for each domain. Adapted from “Social Cognitive Theory

12
and Motivation,” by Schunk, U., & Usher, E. L., 2019, The Oxford Handbook of Human
Motivation (2nd ed.), p. 3 (https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190666453.013.2). Copyright
2019 by the Oxford University Press.
The theoretical framework of SCT illustrates how best practices for the hiring, support,
and retention of neurodivergent individuals could work to decrease discrimination while
increasing individualized interventions, psychological safety, and levels of inclusion for all
employees (Austin & Pisano, 2017; Chapman, 2021; Ezerins et al., 2023 ). There are similar
theories on neurodiversity specifically, such as Enactivism, which similarly argue for the
bidirectional element between neurodivergent individuals’ actions and their environment
(Jurgens, 2020). This perspective on social cognition as it relates to neurodivergence stress how
there is a joint responsibility when it comes to interactions between neurotypes (Hipolito et al.,
2020). Therefore, reinforcing organizational best practices focused on employee safety, support,
and supervision can influence equity for neurodivergent employees (Hogstedt et al., 2022).
Because of this, the current dissertation has utilized a qualitative approach to examine
neurodiversity equity and inclusion within the workforce. The qualitative approach will include
gathering initial data via a survey and juxtaposing this with interviews of employees involved
with workplace neurodivergent initiatives. This will provide insight into the best practices so
companies can bring increased neurodivergent support from hiring to ongoing employment for
staff working from home or at the office.
Definition of Terms
To intentionally capture these focus areas, the following section will briefly explain the
primary core concepts recurring in this text. Defining these concepts will be a practical semantic
approach as the following terms could be understood distinctly based on context, industry, or

13
organization so that this process will provide consistency. Note to organizations, leaders, and
individuals, if you have encountered alternative definitions for these terms this is understandable
as the area of neurodiversity is new and evolving. Because of this, please be sure to learn the
preference of those you interact with and honor their choice of how they identify. Likewise, there
are additional terms not defined here which you may hear such as being atypical, neuro-distinct,
neuro-independent, and others. The definitions which follow are those I have seen most often
and simply provide a consistent language for this study of neurodiversity. Stay curious, ask
preferences, and honor the identity definition terms of those you connect with. Thank you.
Employee Engagement
When employees are engaged in their company, this is an increase in a persistent positive
mindset as seen by more incredible energy, enthusiasm, and commitment to meet job
expectations (De-la-Calle-Durán & Rodríguez-Sánchez, 2021).
Employee Health & Well-Being
When staff can report increased levels of positive mental health, self-esteem, social
relationships, and healthy behaviors with decreased stigmatization within the workplace, this
indicates employee health and well-being (Joyce et al., 2022). Employee health is defined by
how the workplace impacts physical safety, protection from hazards, and each worker’s life at
work and home (Tamers et al., 2020).
Employee Psychological Safety
Within the workplace, psychological safety is when employees report that they feel a
sense of acceptance, engagement, and security so that they can speak up, form quality
relationships, and take other interpersonal risks (Vogus & Taylor, 2018).
Employee Productivity & Performance

14
The level of output that employees can achieve in organizational metrics is each staff
member's ability to consistently meet the expectations of their position by exhibiting expected
behaviors over time (Grant, 2008).
Hybrid-based Work
The employees at an organization can choose when or have a preset schedule to work
from home and in an office-based setting on different days throughout a typical workweek
(Narenthiran et al., 2022).
Remote Work/Work from Home
When employees have a work-from-home position, such as being described as remote,
telework, or telecommuting, these roles require minimal physical interaction with coworkers
throughout a typical workweek (Tomczak et al., 2022). These positions often include the ability
to work from anywhere or utilize various synchronous audio/visual tools such as Zoom or
Microsoft Teams and other collaborative technologies (Das et al., 2021).
Masking/To Mask
Masking is when an autistic/neurodivergent individual, consciously or unconsciously,
puts on a face, persona, or a set of behaviors, that are neurotypical to fit in with, seem, and meet
standards— being neurotypical often bringing a high energy cost (Wharmby, 2022, p. 30-35).
Neurodivergent/Neurodivergence/Neurominority
Neurodivergent individuals represent characteristics most associated with mental health
conditions of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), autism spectrum disorder (ASD),
Dyslexia, and others; likewise, these tendencies represent a spectrum of unique approaches to
receiving, processing, learning, and expressing information which may change or be distinct
across time, setting, and individual (Komarow & Hector, 2020; Narenthiran et al., 2022).

15
Neurodiversity/Neurodiverse
Neurodiversity is the plural concept for the greater population which includes both
neurodivergent and neurotypical individuals. So, a neurodiverse workforce includes both
neurodivergent and neurotypical employees (Chapman, 2020).
Neurotypical/Neuronormative/Neuromajority
Neurotypical individuals are the portion of the population that does not identify with any
of the conditions associated with neurodivergence. Another synonym is individuals who identify
as neuronormative or are a part of the neuromajority of the larger population (Chapman, 2020).
Office-based Work
When employees must have primarily an in-person job presence, this might include an
office, specific physical location, or otherwise mandatory integration with either coworkers or
those receiving their services, such as patients, customers, or other interaction recipients.
Person- or Identity-First Language
The options of person-first language (PFL) and identity-first language (IFL) represent the
two primary routes to discussing neurodiverse and other conditions; an example of this ordering
of terms to individuals would be the options of an autistic person or a person with autism,
respectively (Ladau, 2021, p. 13-14).
Universal Design Interventions
Universal Design Interventions (UDIs) often include implementing frameworks across
various domains such as accommodations for all staff which might include support for social,
emotional, physical, sensory, or other routes of customization (Narenthiran et al., 2022).

16
Workplace Equity
Equity within the workforce focuses on the organization and the intentional righting of
systemic issues by bringing justice, equality, and opportunity across employees of various
positions of power, privilege, and marginalization (Bernstein et al., 2020).
Workplace Inclusion
Inclusion for neurodivergent employees must include evidenced-based practices
integrated into employment and HR policies to actively work against workplace exclusion
(Doyle & McDowall, 2022). Also, workplace inclusion is when an individual feels that they are a
valued member of their workgroup and their need for belonging is satisfied (Shore et al., 2011).
Assumptions, Limitations, Delimitations, and Positionality
There is importance in identifying foundational influencing factors which could impact
the outcome of the current study. The following subsections will detail four distinct influences
on the outcome of the current research study. Later, within Chapter Three, each of these will be
revisited, along with what precautions, adjustments, and responses the researcher has taken to
account for these influences. Likewise, the following considerations will relate directly to the
reflections within Chapter Five, as seen by reviewing areas for future research on neurodivergent
equity and inclusion within the workforce.
Assumptions
Within the current study, there are foundational assumptions, and later in Chapter Three,
additional assumptions specifically related to the utilized methodology will be discussed in
detail. Specifically, the current study utilizes a qualitative approach. The current qualitative
approach includes a survey to gather demographic information and initially identify future
interviewee possibilities, but this brings the assumption that respondents will be honest,

17
informed, and able to provide accurate information (Creswell & Cresswell, 2018). Another
assumption is that the focus on Autism, ADHD, and Dyslexia primarily will generate
information that will be generalizable to the larger neurodivergent community. This dissertation
also assumes that those neurodivergent individuals have a right to claim neurodivergence as an
identity, state of being, and that this is also a legitimate minority group (Bovell, 2020). Likewise,
this assumes that semi-structured interviews gather valuable data despite the researcher and
interviewee's inherent biases (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). These assumptions are all present
within the current study and will be accounted for by intentionally selected preventative
measures in future sections.
Limitations
The current study contains limitations and weaknesses which are noted here and in later
sections so that future research can avoid these problems (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). One
limitation of this study is that the interview methods are self-reported data, which assumes the
participants are honest and can speak accurately of the subject. For example, the current study
cannot verify if participants have received a formal diagnosis associated with neurodivergence
nor if they have facilitated increased neurodivergent equity programs. Similarly, another
limitation is that these neurodivergent stereotypes could have influenced participants when
answering questions due to the prevalence of stigma and biases towards neurodivergence. Also,
since the term of neurodivergence is new and often being redefined, this study utilized a
definition which could eventually, or quickly, become outdated. These limitations must be
acknowledged as they represent areas for future research, as will be detailed later.

18
Delimitations
The researcher has added specific parameters of the current study containing
delimitations to isolate the desired focus area (Cresswell & Creswell, 2018). For example, the
current study inquiries about staff who work remotely, hybrid, or office-based, but this does not
include staff who might be in transportation, transit logistics, or working in other people’s
homes. This intentional isolation will allow the results to pertain specifically to those employees
who work at a company office, their own home, or other remote locations and those with a
combination of these settings. Also, since this study focused exclusively on workplace settings, it
is isolated from studying neurodivergent equity within academia, healthcare, and other
nonprofessional areas. Likewise, this study is only looking at self-identified members of the
neurodiverse community, such as diagnoses of ADHD, Autism, and dyslexia, so it omits
research on other mental health conditions which are sometimes put under the neurodivergent
umbrella. Furthermore, this study aims to assist the constant evolution of the terms associated
with neurodivergence since this category has been ever expanding to encompass additional
disorders, conditions, or other traits. These refining criteria aid the current study by narrowing
the focus of research questions, methods, and conclusions.
Positionality
The researcher possesses positionalities, experiences, and convictions about the current
study. Specifically, the researcher’s positionality parallels and paraphrases Villaverde (2008),
emphasizing how positionality is their placement considering the accumulation of each life
domain, such as their “gender, race, class, sexuality, ethnicity, culture, language, and other social
factors” (p. 10). For example, the researcher does exhibit neurodivergent tendencies, including
those that are occasionally visible. Specifically, the researcher identifies as having ADHD along

19
with additional neurodivergent characteristics and tendencies. Additionally, the researcher has
appreciated perspectives on how one’s positionality is not simply a static state but involves a
sense of identity that possesses fluidity across time (Douglas & Nganga, 2013, p. 60). The
fluidity of positionality can be seen by the researcher’s previous and current academic and
professional experience in mental health services working directly with neurodivergent
individuals. Therefore, the researcher identifies as a White Cis-man, married, middle-aged,
European-dissident, post-secondary educated, US citizen, English-speaking, and employed
neurodivergent male.
Within this description, the researcher holds multiple privileges, as seen by these
elements, placing them in the majority and a place of power within Bauer’s (2021) illustration of
intersectionality. Additionally, the researcher has witnessed continued microaggressions,
assumptions, and negative portrayals of neurodivergent individuals within society, media, work,
and professional forums. The accumulation of these experiences has awakened both inspiration
and indignation to increase awareness, equity, and inclusion in the neurodivergent community.
This drive for justice leads the researcher to believe that neurodiversity equity is an absolute
aspiration for organizations, supervisors, and society. Thus, the researcher hopes their
multidimensionality, defined by Bauer (2021) to be where my positionalities of power and
marginalization intersect, will provide insight into how companies can prioritize, by creating a
supportive professional environment, the aspirations of their neurodivergent employees.
Conclusion
The previous sections detail the foundation of this study on neurodivergent workplace
equity from hiring practices through ongoing support for staff working remotely or at the office.
These focus areas illustrate the need for corporations to find new ways to obtain the significantly

20
untapped human capital available in neurodivergent candidates and derive intentional plans for
creating an equitable workplace of psychological safety, engagement, and well-being. Thus,
these themes surround hiring neurodiverse staff and how to provide equity at the office, working
remotely, or within hybrid settings.
Organization of the Dissertation
Following this overview of the problem of practice, Chapter One, the remainder of the
dissertation uses this as a foundation. Chapter Two begins with a historical literature review of
the current studies surrounding workplace neurodivergent equity, inclusion, and psychological
safety. Within Chapter Three, a qualitative study will detail how the current dissertation gathered
data from neurodivergent employees and interviewed leaders implementing neurodivergent
equity programs. Next, Chapter Four analyzes this interview data to highlight themes and
investigate the research questions around workplace neurodivergent equity. Last, Chapter Five
will provide recommendations for companies to implement best practices of neurodivergent
equity, highlight areas for future research, and make other recommendations.

21
Chapter Two: Literature Review
This chapter provides the search description steps taken, the theoretical and conceptual
framework, and the review of relevant research. The search description includes how the
researcher found cited articles by filtering a university-hosted journal database search engine for
peer-reviewed neurodiverse diagnoses-related articles recently published. The current chapter
also provides insight into SCT as the theoretical framework of the current study and the
foundation of the conceptual framework. Furthermore, this chapter details a review of research
surrounding the current problem of practice of workplace neurodiverse equity. This research
synthesis will also provide increased comprehension of workplace equity, neurodiversity, and
challenges faced by the neurodivergent community of employees juxtaposed with the barriers
organizations face when initiating inclusion interventions. In response to these challenges, the
review will provide a compilation of best practices for each core area of hiring practices and how
best to support remote, office, and hybrid-based neurodiverse employees. Finally, this review
will detail companies, collaborations, and conferences that bring awareness, advocacy, and
action steps for increased neurodiverse equity within the workplace.
Search Description Overview
The current study utilized the search criteria of “Neurodiver*” to gather critical terms of
neurodiverse, neurodivergent, and neurodiversity. Additionally, the current study searched for
recently published articles, from 2018 through 2024 that were peer-reviewed, articles available
online, and printed in English. Other keywords used included the typical diagnostic criteria
associated with neurodiversity, such as autism spectrum disorder (ASD), attentiondeficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and dyslexia. Additional search criteria were utilized to
zone into other applicable areas such as, but not limited to, hiring, recruitment, human resources,

22
management, accommodations, employment, retention, equity, inclusion, workplace, and other
factors. These additional criteria were utilized to refine search results further to relate to the
current problem of practice, specifically. Overall, the current research-review search strategy
only utilized recently published peer-reviewed articles on neurodiversity and elements of
workplace equity. However, the researcher notes here that the concept of neurodiversity was first
used in the 1990s but has been used sparingly within research until more recent years. Because
of that, there is no significant historical data on this term, so the current study relies entirely on
journal articles from the more recent past from 2018 to recently published articles in 2024.
Conceptual & Theoretical Framework
The reciprocal interaction from the theoretical framework of social cognitive theory
(SCT) provides the foundation for the conceptual framework by drawing connections between
neurodivergent equity and an inclusive workplace that benefits all employees. At the onset of the
hiring process, companies must be aware of how an overemphasis on social skills could further
exclude neurodivergent candidates (Davies et al., 2023). This decrease in neurodivergent
discrimination by identifying the unique qualities of each staff as cultural contributions to the
workplace could increase psychological safety, individualized support, and inclusion across all
employees (Austin & Pisano, 2017; Ezerins et al., 2023).
Emphasis on neurodivergent equity throughout the employment process aligns with
Khan et al. (2022), who highlighted how this support aids organizational goals. For example, this
is the implementation of a Universal Design (UD) intervention within the workplace by
emphasizing a culture of inclusion that all employees develop differently, providing support to
neurodivergent and neurotypical employees (Doyle & McDowall, 2022; Shmulsky et al., 2022;
Silver et al., 2023). Within Figure 2, the conceptual framework of Pervasive Workplace

23
Inclusion illustrates the circular impacts of prioritizing individualized assistance. Thus, this
shows the impact of workplace neurodivergent equity from inclusive hiring to the individualized
workplace through how to support any staff, including those at the office or working remotely.
Figure 2
Pervasive workplace inclusion as a conceptual framework
Note. This model uses a circular progression of workplace equity focused on bringing inclusion
across neurotypes. The central nexus where each section could intersect exemplifies how each
piece is reciprocal. The interaction of elements illustrates how workplace equity involves hiring
and onboarding, through retention such as individualized support and aid for staff to prioritize
neurodivergent employee safety, equity, and engagement.
Review of Research
The following literature review explores the five primary areas of workplace equity,
neurodiversity, challenges, best practices, and models. The review will continue to address the
problem of workplace neurodiverse equity and the core focus areas of hiring neurodivergent
Equitable
Environment
Individualized
Support
Aid for
Remote &
Office Staff
Inclusive
Hiring
Practice

24
employees and how to support these staff located at remote, office, or hybrid-based locations.
The conceptual framework is mirrored throughout this progression by highlighting best practices
at each stage of the employment journey. The narrative will be completed by initially providing a
general understanding of workplace equity and neurodiversity, then becoming more specific by
providing organizations applying these neurodiverse equity models.
Understanding Workplace Equity
When examining workplace equity, it becomes essential to have beyond a single
definition to ensure that future measures have the same goal. Within the organizational context,
equity requires correcting structural, systemic, and specific injustices to aid a marginalized group
(Bernstein et al., 2020). Workplace equity is also integral to employees' well-being, mental
vitality, and physical health by intersecting with their job experience, expectations, and
empowerment (Joyce et al., 2022; Wilcox & Koontz, 2022). Furthermore, employee
psychological safety can also significantly predict their well-being and job performance,
highlighting the connection to justice and support (Sasaki et al., 2022). When a company claims
to support equity, this must be genuine, as seen by avoiding advertising things like “pink
washing” regarding gender equality (Chiru et al., 2022, p. 609). An additional requirement for
organizations to increase equity includes increasing awareness, advocacy, and adoption of
equality for marginalized positionalities, disadvantaged groups, and intersections between these
categories (Fletcher & Beauregard, 2022). These studies show how workplace equity
consistently requires pervasive implementation of justice through an organization for all
employees, especially those marginalized.

25
Understanding Neurodiversity
Due to the requirement of equity explicitly aiding different populations, understanding
neurodiversity is essential. Neurodiversity has evolved from a foundation of a social model of
disability by Shakespeare and Watson (1997) and arguments for representation within policy
agendas (Winters, 2012). The term neurodiversity, coined initially by Singer (1999), has also had
a variety of inclusions over time but most often includes mental health conditions and allows for
a range of symptomology from Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), autism
spectrum disorder (ASD), and Dyslexia along with similar diagnoses (Doyle, 2020; Narenthiran
et al., 2022). However, neurodiversity has also been juxtaposed with biodiversity to highlight
how neurodivergent individuals represent a portion of human evolution by thinking, learning,
and expressing ideas differently through distinct neurocognitive functioning (Komarrow &
Hector, 2020; Walker, 2014). When looking beyond the common conditions of neurodivergence,
there are inconsistently other conditions included such as Tourette syndrome, learning
disabilities, Dyspraxia/developmental coordination disorder (DCD), Post-Traumatic Stress
Disorder (PTSD), along with anxiety, mood, or personality related disorders (Doyle, 2022;
Komarow & Hector, 2020; Mellifont, 2023). There have also been arguments used to advocate
the distinction between neurodiversity and neurodivergent as terms to highlight how the former
is inclusive versus the latter being exclusive (Legault et al., 2021). However, as mentioned
previously, these terms are constantly evolving, and everyone may have their preference or word
choice they identify most with. Likewise, this research will utilize neurodivergence to signify
those who identify as neurodivergent and neurodiversity as the larger population which also
includes neurotypical individuals. Overall, neurodivergence contains individuals who identify or

26
have received a formal diagnosis indicating that they internalize, process, and articulate their life
experience outside of what is often considered neuronormative.
Challenges of Neurodivergent Equity
These differences have resulted in various difficulties for neurodivergent individuals
historically, especially within the workforce. There have been challenges for individual
neurodivergent employees and difficulties that companies must overcome to bring about
neurodivergent equity. The multilayered barriers here cause repercussions for neurodivergent
staff and companies attempting to navigate the ever-changing definition of neurodivergence.
Neurodivergence, from a historical perspective, includes the difficulties faced by
individuals who have previously been labeled as disabled and possess a condition with a range of
need visibility (Beatty et al., 2019). There is also known ableism within the workforce leading to
the development of advocacy for equity and theoretical frameworks such as Disability Critical
Race Theory (DisCrit), which highlights the need for further research on the intersection of
disability and other positionalities (Annamma et al., 2013). Another adjacent theoretical
perspective is the social model which denies that the cognitive, emotional, or social differences
of neurodivergent individuals need to be fixed, changed, or otherwise corrected so requires
society to then be more accommodating (Jurgens, 2020). Likewise, there is a prevalence of
stereotypes of neurodivergent folks by considering them less then human or incapable of
morality, identity, introspection, empathy, and various other negative biases (Stenning, 2020).
Limited research has also been gathered on intersections between neurodiversity and
employee burnout, limiting how much is known about this unique population (Wolbring &
Lillywhite, 2023). Also, most research utilizes the previous medical paradigm by only noticing
the perceived deficits of neurodivergent employees and ignoring their unique needs,

27
contributions, and strengths (Pellicano & Houting, 2022). This medicalization of
neurodivergence has largely been rejected by the neurodivergent community due to having this
pathologization has resulted in these individuals being seen as less than the normal population or
facing other misunderstanding, stigmatization, stigmatization, and pressures to change (Bovell,
2020). Likewise, the medical model perspective of neurodivergence requires that individuals of
this identification are objectively dysfunctional, but this perspective becomes problematic due to
this view as it becomes challenging to establish a true mental normal value (Chapman, 2020).
These bring attention to the narrow scope of how neurodivergent individuals are studied, which
creates barriers to bringing equity to this community.
An additional challenge for neurodivergent individuals is the presence of positive
stereotypes of this population. Positive stereotypes occur when a statement is made which
attributes a positive attribute unilaterally to all members of a social group such as all women are
compassionate, or all Asians are good at math (Siy & Cheryan, 2013). These positive stereotypes
have been seen to lead to the group experiencing adverse effects such as elevated expectations of
performance and then suffering increased repercussions when they fall short of these exaggerated
standards as seen by a study focusing on the ‘model minority’ of Asian-American women
(Cheryan & Bodenhausen, 2000). These positive stereotypes can be dangerous as they can seem
like a compliment but also run the risk of bringing about workplace harassment and alienation, in
addition to unrealistic expectations (Czopp et al., 2015).
A specific example of this for the neurodivergent community is how there are often
harmful elevated depictions in media such as how all autistic individuals are savants (Draaisma,
2009). There was also a research study which examined the positive aspects of ADHD and found
themes of this diagnosis being correlated with positive attributes of high energy, adventurous,

28
nonconformist, and other positive attributes (Sedgwick et al., 2018). Whereas there does not
seem much of a barrier with this latter intent the error arises when we over transpose these
qualities to every individual within that group. This example could be seen by the following
quotation about how research must be intentional to avoid positive stereotypes of neurodivergent
employees:
The very fact that researchers are defining the strengths of autistic people to employers
poses a question of ethics. Usually, people present themselves to potential employers in
their CVs, free to assert their strengths. Nobody would think to recommend wheelchair
users for jobs because they have strong arms. (Djela, 2021, p. 94)
There needs to be more clarity when examining the barriers companies must navigate to
bring equity to neurodiverse employees. For example, diagnoses within neurodivergence, such as
autism, are covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and similar legal policies
exist in Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom, among other countries (Patton, 2019).
However, these policies are inconsistent across scope, adding ambiguity to what companies must
provide. These various legal acts have also changed across recent history further leading to
confusion within organizations and neurodivergent employees seeking assistance.
For the United States (U.S.), the first movement here can be seen through the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, specifically section 504, protecting persons with disabilities from
workplace discrimination and requiring employers to provide reasonable accommodations to
those who receive federal funds (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2006).
Likewise, the ADA increases this if organizations do not receive federal funds to prevent
workplace discrimination (U.S. Department of Education, 2022). This was further adapted within
the ADA Amendments Act (ADAAA) in 2008 which increased the specificity and breadth of the

29
criteria for accommodations so that it became easier to determined who qualifies (U.S. Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission, 2011). These summarize how the U.S. alone has had
three significant law changes that impacts the accessibility of workplace accommodations.
Moreover, suppose companies claim they are implementing equity for neurodivergent
folks for financial gain or other business advantage as the primary gain. In that case, they may
face unanticipated public backlash, notably for the neurodiverse community (Silver et al., 2023).
The Covid-19 pandemic led to increased stress among workers unequally distributed to those
with multiple underrepresented positionalities, such as mental health diagnoses, which bring
further unique needs that companies need to identify, analyze, and respond to for aiding their
neurodivergent employees and applicants (Jashinsky et al., 2021). Because of these various
areas, companies must navigate the legal, social, and individual needs when formulating how
best to support their neurodiverse employees.
The challenges that neurodivergent individuals have faced over time, and those their
employers must overcome, further emphasize the necessity of neurodiversity equity within the
workplace. The history detailed within this section highlights how neurodivergent individuals
were labeled as needing to be fixed or as disabled and underrepresented within workplace
research indicates a past of significant inequity. Likewise, when companies desire to bring equity
to these populations, each organization must navigate ambiguously evolving legal
accommodation requirements, potential public misconceptions, and significant world events.
Overall, initiating increased workplace neurodivergent equity requires the navigation of
individual and organizational nuances.

30
Best Practices for Neurodivergent Equity
These challenges juxtapose the best practices that enable neurodiverse equity within the
workspace. Additionally, this progression focuses on the benefits to neurodivergent employees,
and the action steps a company can take to respond to the previous challenges. The critical action
steps follow the conceptual framework by emphasizing each element of the employment journey
to create a more inclusive workplace. For example, this will highlight the necessity of
intentionally creating HR policies and inclusive recruitment practices and how neurodivergent
employees need support within remote, office, and hybrid settings. Overall, these best practices
inform the current study by supplying a foundational response to the problem of practice and
outlining potential equitable practices explored in the methodology within Chapter Three.
When examining best practices for creating workplace neurodiverse equity, foundational
stakeholders to facilitate these organizational changes are Human Resource Managers (HRMs).
Initially, HRMs can alter hiring practices for neurodivergent candidates through inclusive
marketing, survey employees on belonging, use consultants for best practices, and train HR
accordingly (Morehouse, 2023; Rosales et al., 2023). HRMs can also provide training, such as
how staff can identify their support needs, understand personal motivations, and express their
desired support at work (Hogstedt et al., 2022; Patton, 2019). Additional training can include
empowering supervisors to identify the specific skill sets, different thinking styles, and unique
needs of all employees to bring flexibility, understanding, and acceptance (Grandin, 2023;
Hogstedt et al., 2022). HRMs can provide education on decreasing stigma through inclusive
workspaces, understanding neurodiversity, and employee well-being (Mellifont et al., 2022;
Narenthiran et al., 2022). Last, HRMs can normalize utilizing accessibility benefits and how to
request accommodations by not requiring disclosing a disability, prioritizing employee mental

31
health, and providing support options (Das et al., 2021; Patton, 2019). Therefore, HR
management provides foundational training for increased neurodivergent equity by educating
employees, supervisors, and hiring managers.
Best Practices for Recruiting Neurodivergent Employees
Achieving neurodiverse equity requires optimizing the inclusive nature of recruitment
practices, representing the initial step within the current conceptual framework. Specifically,
hiring managers should prioritize information transparency with the clarity of position
expectations and the required skills of desired candidates (Davies et al., 2023; Russo et al.,
2023). Once a candidate is selected, the interview should avoid focusing on social or personality
skills to accentuate the required skills for a particular role (Davies et al., 2023; Doyle &
McDowall, 2022; Morehouse, 2023). These interviews should also be adaptable, allowing for
customization of the hiring process to meet the needs of each applicant, such as offering virtual
and face-to-face options (Davies et al., 2023; Mellifont et al., 2022; Patton, 2019). Hiring
managers ought to strive to cultivate an inclusive interviewing environment by being aware of
the impact of social and sensory elements (Davies et al., 2023). Last, since these alterations
might require a range of adjustments, it becomes essential to cultivate executive-level support for
neurodivergent hiring practices for alignment with the organizational mission, necessary funding,
and prioritization within the company (Morehouse, 2023). These equitably informed hiring
practices represent the foundation for obtaining a neurodiverse workforce.
Best Practices for Retaining Neurodivergent Employees
As neurodivergent employees are recruited, the following essential elements of
workplace equity are required to empower remote, office, and hybrid-based talent. The shift to
support current staff will break down the environmentally specific support techniques for

32
neurodivergent employees. Also, the third category of hybrid-based talent will include
empowerment strategies that provide foundational support for staff in either setting or those who
shift between working remotely or at the office. This section provides an overview of the
primary routes to achieving workplace equity for neurodivergent talent.
Support Remote Neurodivergent Staff
Initially, remote-based neurodivergent employees benefit from alternative structures with
customization for how best to interact with colleagues inside and outside formal meetings
(Tomczak, 2022). Specifically, critical adjustments include speech-to-text functions, closed
captioning, control over notifications, and text readers (Das et al., 2021). Likewise, accessibility
options to all remote employees, such as modifying the facilitation of virtual meetings, can bring
elevated equity. Modifications include providing the agenda in advance and then sending out the
transcript, to-do items, one-on-one options, meeting recording, closed captions, and other notes
(Das et al., 2021; 2022; Kalmanovich-Cohen & Stanton, 2023; Mellifont et al.). Second,
meetings should allow increased control and flexibility by providing a consistent structure of
‘turn-taking’ or ‘hand-raising’ while allowing control over video or audio feeds (Das et al.,
2021). Last, education should be provided on the advantages and disadvantages of remote work,
such as a decrease in stress while increasing zoom fatigue and overworking (Mellifont et al.,
2022). These best practices provide equitable adjustments for neurodiverse employees working
from home or within remote settings.
Support Office-Based Neurodivergent Staff
Neurodiverse staff primarily based within an office setting deserve support through
adjustments to facilitate workspace equity. Likely, one of the most recommended
accommodations for neurodivergent employees includes allowing adaptations to the physical

33
environment to be aware of sensory needs, with customization of location, light, sound, layout,
decoration, temperature, or social interaction (Hogstedt et al., 2022; Narenthiran et al., 2022;
Tomczak & Ziemiański, 2023; Weber et al., 2022). Likewise, the customization of floor plans
and the availability of alternative workspaces, such as quiet rooms or open spaces, is highly
recommended (Kidwell et al., 2023; Mellifont et al., 2022; Narenthiran et al., 2022). When
looking beyond the physical, implementing peer-level coaching through programs for
neurodivergent staff focused on connecting colleagues to provide mentoring reinforces a positive
company culture (Scott et al., 2018; Patton, 2019; Rosales et al., 2023). These adjustments could
be adapted through negotiation opportunities about job duties to be more customized for each
neurodivergent employee (Whelpley & Woznyj, 2023). For office-based neurodivergent staff,
these adjustments highlight how their physical, social, and position impact workplace equity.
Support Hybrid Neurodivergent Staff
When considering hybrid-based staff, these best practices are selected because they can
equally apply to neurodivergent staff working remotely or within an office setting. For example,
these recommendations, and succeeding ones, will require executives to create elevated levels of
neurodiversity inclusion within the organization and policies through intentional change,
funding, accountability, and employee incentives (Mellifont et al., 2022; Morehouse, 2023).
Implementing universal design interventions will allow for personalizing accommodations for all
staff, such as position structure, scheduled work hours, communication method, work setting, or
location (Kalmanovich-Cohen & Stanton, 2023; Narenthiran et al., 2022; Tomczak &
Ziemiański, 2023). Another aid is specific expectations through clarity on job responsibilities,
task descriptions, project deadlines, and checklists or other ways to minimize ambiguity in each
position (Hogstedt et al., 2022). Organizations must likewise support employee well-being,

34
psychological safety, comfortable working conditions, increased independence, and a sense of
belonging (Mellifont et al., 2022; Narenthiran et al., 2022; Vogus & Taylor, 2018). An example
would be virtually accessing all conferences, meetings, or other social events (Mellifont et al.,
2022). Last, to ensure these interventions are supported, it becomes essential for the creation of
neurodiverse-specific policies, employee task forces, and audits of available accommodations
(Doyle & McDowall, 2022; Mellifont et al., 2022; Rosales et al., 2023). These foundational areas
of organizational support for staff based remotely or at the office provide further universal best
practices to increase neurodiverse workplace equity.
Overall, the best practices detailed above for HR, hiring managers, and employees
working remotely, in the office, or hybrid settings provide a foundation for increased
neurodivergent equity. Initially, HRMs should support workplace equity through inclusive
policies, training, and executive involvement. Action items for hiring managers further provided
how creating neurodiverse-informed interview marketing, environmental, and required skills
focus all aid in creating equitable recruitment practices. Finally, this articulated how each
workplace setting of remote, office, or a combination needs to be adapted to the unique needs of
neurodiverse employees to prioritize workplace equity.
Workplace Neurodivergent Equity Models
When examining how companies can provide increased neurodiverse equity, another
route to learn from the models of organizations actively pursuing this aspiration as companies
have disclosed to create neurodiverse inclusion practices for hiring and staff support such as, but
not limited to, Microsoft, AT&T, IBM, Gartner, Westpac, Dell, JPMorgan Chase, Bank of
America, Walgreens, and Salesforce, among others (Williams, 2021). There have also been
programs such as Rise@DHHS, which focused on empowering neurodivergent individuals to be

35
more prepared for the workforce by learning relevant skills and being exposed to workplace
atmospheres (Flower et al., 2019). Similarly, the Stanford Neurodiversity Project facilitates the
annual Community Conference on Neurodiversity Employment and the Stanford Neurodiversity
Summit (About the Stanford Neurodiversity Project, n.d.). Additionally, there is now the
Employer Assistance and Resource Network on Disability Inclusion (EARN) which provides
resources for organizations to recruit and retain neurodiverse individuals (U.S. Department of
Labor, n.d.). Also, within Dave Thompson’s (2024) recent TEDTalk that advocates for a
paradigm shift for how we think about neurodistinct individuals at work and bring this
population into the workforce with psychological safety.
The Neurodiversity @ Work Employer Roundtable (n.d.) is a compilation of
organizations collaborating on how best to support and obtain neurodiversity. This roundtable,
facilitated by Disability:IN and Dr. Annabi, collaborated with various experts and organizations
to create a guide to implementing increased workplace neurodiverse equity (Autism @ Work
Playbook, 2021). This model provides a comprehensive walkthrough of practical planning,
stakeholder engagement, recruiting talent, and retention strategies for neurodiverse employees,
along with additional experts for educating and coaching (Annabi et al., 2021). This collection of
organizations, conferences, and collaborations provides the current models for bringing increased
neurodiversity equity to the workforce.
Summary
Therefore, the current literature review concluded with key companies implementing
workplace neurodiversity equity models founded upon best practices and an understanding of
these initiatives. Initially, this included articulating the theoretical and conceptual frameworks of
the current dissertation, which underlines the reciprocal interaction between individual

36
employees, the larger company, and equity initiatives. This emphasis on universally designed
interventions illustrates the importance of support throughout the employment cycle to increase
employee equity for neurodiverse staff. The literature review then considered understanding the
historical challenges for neurodiverse staff and barriers faced by companies attempting to initiate
equity. As a response, this review provided a comprehensive synthesis of the best practices for
HR management, recruitment teams, and organizational support for remote, office, and hybridbased employees. This emphasis on individualizing support for neurodiverse staff concluded by
detailing which companies, collaborations, and conferences focus on this vital work.

37
Chapter Three: Methodology
The current dissertation used a qualitative methodology to obtain information about
workplace neurodivergent equity. The following section will provide specifics on study design
by providing procedural insight regarding the identification, selection, and administration of
methods to the sample. Additionally, this chapter will provide foundational dialogue on how this
instrumentation is valid, dependable, and ethical. The data will also be briefly discussed,
including how this information was assessed and protected within the current study. Overall, this
chapter provides details on the methodology of how the dissertation gathered best practices
surrounding workplace neurodivergent equity.
Research Design
The method of gathering qualitative information from larger companies implementing
programs for neurodiverse employees provided tools for other leaders and organizations.
Specifically, the current study utilized the qualitative design of Phenomenology by measuring
lived experiences. Phenomenology is based on the unique phenomenon as experienced by study
participants who are able to provide insight from their lived experience on this occurrence or
accumulation of happenings (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Furthermore, the application of
phenomenology requires researchers to set aside their own biases or prejudices to intentionally
review and analyze a specific phenomenon (Gibbs, 2018). This phenomenological approach
allowed the researcher to closely examine the lived experiences shared by research participants.
In particular, the focus is on those who have assisted in bringing neurodiverse equity programs
within the workplace. Likewise, Phenomenology provides a valid route as this includes a
synthesis and examination of neurodiverse workplace equity practices (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). This specific research design allowed the researcher to gather relatable experiences to

38
outline best practices for workplace equity for neurodiverse employees from those who have
worked to help workplaces be more inclusive.
Research Questions
1. What does neurodivergent equity look like in the workplace?
2. What are the challenges of neurodivergent equity in the Workplace?
3. How can neurodivergent workplace equity be improved?
Research Setting
The research setting included semi-structured interviews (see Data Collection section),
which were conducted over the Zoom (Version 5.17.10, Zoom Video Communications Inc.,
2023) web-based video call platform as videotaping interviews has been seen useful for
gathering accurate information (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The ability to record interviews via
Zoom allowed the researcher to ensure all audio was fully captured, which was superior to
relying on written notes during or after the interview (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Additionally,
utilizing web-based video call software has been acknowledged as a viable route for interviews
as it provides the researcher with increased control of the interview environment (Creswell &
Creswell, 2018). For the most optimized and authentic experience, the researcher encouraged
participants to join these private Zoom calls so that there were decreased distractions and the
ability to speak openly which also helped maintain audio recording quality (Gibbs, 2018).
Participants
This section discusses the target and accessible population, sample, sampling method,
and recruitment, of the participants. Specifically, this outlines how the study is further founded
upon the neurodivergence by incorporating the perspectives of experts who have worked to

39
improve neurodivergent equity within the workforce. Additionally, this section will dialogue
how these participants were contacted, filtered, and ultimately recruited to participate.
Target and Accessible Population
The target population was leaders or consultants who had worked to aid neurodivergent
employees in the United States (U.S.). The accessible population was neurodiversity leaders or
consultants who have worked to aid neurodivergent employees in the United States (U.S.) and
used social media platforms in the U.S.
Sample
The sample was nine neurodiversity leaders or consultants who have worked to aid
neurodivergent equity in the U.S. The sample met specific criteria (see Sample section).
Specifically, these nine respondents were selected to participate due to acknowledging they had
experience working to bring about neurodiverse equity at work. They listed themselves wanting
to participate further in the study. They were each given a copy of the study Survey Information
& Informed Consent (see Appendix A) and the Demographic Survey (see Appendix B) and
participated in a semi-structured interview using the Interview Protocol (see Appendix C) with
the Interview Script and Supplemental Questions (see Appendix D).
Sampling Method
As respondents completed the initial Demographic Survey (see Appendix B), the
researcher utilized a unique sampling criterion by picking those individuals who have aided in
bringing about neurodiverse equity programs within the workforce being identified. The desired
focus for the sample were individuals who had assisted neurodiverse equity programs within the
workforce. Specifically, these were direct supervisors who had implemented change, consultants
who have provided programs, or other positions that have facilitated neurodivergent workplace

40
equity. This included asking individuals if they had direct involvement with these equity
programs, were adults, and were willing to be interviewed. Therefore, the utilized sample
provided the lived experience of the effectiveness of neurodiversity equity programs and insight
into collecting best practices for facilitating these programs within the workforce. Thus, this was
the ideal sample as it allowed for gathering data on geographic, industry, and other factors,
allowing for increased reliability.
The unique sampling technique is a subtype of purposeful sampling and allows the
researcher to intentionally select those employees who best speak to the problem of practice
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Additionally, the researcher utilized a Snowball sampling technique
to gather referrals for additional research participants to interview so sufficient data was
collected. Nine individuals were ultimately selected by using quota sampling. This allowed the
researcher to select the first nine individuals that met the required criterion (Martinez-Mesa et al.,
2016). Quota sampling is a valid method because the required criterion and total participant
count are intentionally decided upon prior to conducting sampling. Overall, this technique of
quota sampling allowed for the current study to have the required quantity of research
participants that had the unique shared experience of being experts on neurodivergent equity.
Recruitment
This recruitment process provides an overview of how research participants were
recruited to gather the data for the current study. The Demographic Survey (see Appendix B)
was sent via published content on LinkedIn's (LinkedIn, 2024) social media platform and
included a request for redistribution by network connections which was the Recruitment Social
Media Post for LinkedIn (see Appendix E). This survey included the Survey Information &
Informed Consent information (see Appendix A). This information included that the current

41
study will not compensate any research participant. Potential participants were then identified by
those who met the criteria. This identification included selecting nine qualified interview
participants from the initial demographic survey respondents and then contacting them to
schedule interviews. The sample size of nine was chosen because each had the shared
background experience of improving neurodivergent equity within the workforce. Also, data
saturation with nine was found based on when the phenomenon being studied begins supplying
no new information (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Specifically, this saturation was achieved within
the current study as themes were formed and reinforced within the interviews which were
conducted (see Chapter Four). Additionally, a phenomenological approach, which this study
utilized, will often require anywhere between three and ten participants to achieve saturation
(Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Data saturation is important to have the findings of the study
actually reflect what is true of the target population and of the desired phenomenon being studied
which the researcher accounted for (see Validity section). However, future research should
consider a larger sample size to determine if the findings from the current study can be
transposed over additional positionalities and demographics (see Chapter Five).
Data Collection
Data collection involved two sources of data through the implementation of a
Demographic Survey (see Appendix B) and an Interview Protocol (see Appendix C) to answer
the research questions (see Table 1). This section will provide a justification for each of these
two collection methods including how they relate to each research question, what supports this
choice of methodology, and supply the research that aided in their creation. Overall, this section
details an overview of how the data was collected for the current study and how this
methodology was chosen to address the research questions.

42
Table 1
Data Sources & Collection Methods
Research Question Demographic Survey Interview Protocol
Question
RQ1: What does neurodivergent equity look
like in the workplace?
x
(Questions 1, 4 & 5)
RQ2: What are the challenges of
Neurodivergent Equity in the Workplace? (Questions 2 & 3)
RQ3: How can organizations improve
neurodivergent workplace equity? (Question 6)
Demographic Survey
The Demographic Survey (see Appendix B) inquired about whether participants identify
as neurodivergent, their lived experience as it relates to the current conceptual framework and
their intersectionality. The sampling of respondents were given a Demographic Survey (see
Appendix B) created through Qualtrics (Qualtrics, 2024) and distributed via LinkedIn (LinkedIn,
2024) as a route of variation sampling to capture potential study participants (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). Also, the demographic survey is supported by being founded upon previous research that
utilized similar questions enabling reliability for this protocol (see Reliability section).
Specifically, the current demographic study was influenced by similar studies on neurodivergent
equity (Narenthiran et al., 2022; Das et al., 2021; Rosenberg, 2017). This survey allowed the
researcher to ensure that the participant met the inclusion criterion while also measuring the
positionality information from participants. The participant positionality information allows data
to be understood through the context of what populations are represented within the current
sample and to what extent findings can be transposed across population groups. Thus, the

43
Demographic Survey (see Appendix B) allowed the researcher to measure the required criteria,
gather essential elements of positionality, and confirm willingness to participate.
Interview Protocol
The Interview Protocol (see Appendix C) included using semi-structured questions as a
valid route to maximize consistency and customization across all interviews by providing
structure while being adaptable to each unique participant (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Additionally, a mix of closed and open-ended inquiries added consistency balanced with
flexibility per the needs of each interviewee. For example, all semi-structured interviews used
primary interview questions, as participants are individuals with experience with neurodiverse
equity programs. The Interview Script and Supplemental Interview Questions (see Appendix D)
were then used as required by each interview. Overall, this semi-structured interview approach of
core questions, an interview script, and preselected supplemental options provided foundational
consistency and flexibility per the needs of each participant. All interview questions listed within
the Primary Interview Protocol (see Appendix C) and Interview Script & Supplemental
Questions (see Appendix D) are taken directly from the corresponding citations. This approach
of using interview questions directly from past studies maximizes the reliability of the current
interview protocol while still allowing flexibility in the participant’s background. Specifically,
the Primary Interview Protocol (see Appendix C) was composed of questions utilized in a
previous study focused on neurodivergence with some additional prompts added by the current
researcher (Coplan et a., 2021). Likewise, the additional question within the Interview Script &
Supplemental Questions (see Appendix D) were derived from studies surrounding equity and
neurodivergence (Flower et al., 2019; Dreaver et al., 2021). Because of these studies were
focused on neurodivergent equity their questions were utilized this studies research questions.

44
This summary of the interview instrumentation describes how the interviews gathered data and
reinforced consistency, truthfulness, and ethical practice for these protocols.
Procedures
The following procedures were taken after receiving approval from the University of
Southern California’s (USC’s) Institutional Review Board (IRB) which can be seen in Appendix
F and successfully recruiting the sample (see Sample section). Initially, the sample was
confirmed to meet requirements through answering the Demographic Survey which was included
within the recruitment social media post (see Recruitment section). The Recruitment Social
Media Post for LinkedIn (see Appendix E) was used for this distribution. The survey also
included the “Information Sheet & Informed Consent Form” (see Appendix A) to provide a
description of the study, participant requirements, contact information, and asked for the
acknowledgement of consent to move to the remainder of the survey (see Appendix B). The
researcher then contacted potential participants via email or LinkedIn messaging to schedule
Zoom video calls with each participant. Once scheduled, each participant was emailed a Zoom
join link within a Google Calendar appointment invitation with the time of the scheduled
interview with access information. During the recruitment process it was stated that the
interviews would be 30-45 minutes. However, each of these semi-structured interviews were
approximately 45–60 minutes to allow for a balance of consistency of approach and fluidity of
each participant's unique experience. Also, even though the consent was gathered within the
initial demographic survey, I asked again before each Zoom call to reaffirm each participants’
willingness to participate and be recorded. Before analysis, I reviewed the transcripts to ensure
accuracy and that each transcript reflected the true nature of the semi-structured interviews and
fixed any spelling or other errors. Therefore, the interviews were conducted to ensure

45
confidentiality while maintaining accuracy by recording, transcribing, and double-checking for
mistakes.
To highlight the sequence of these conducted procedures, along with future analysis and
ultimate conclusions, please see the following table on protocol progression so this study could
potentially be replicated or expanded at a future juncture.
Table 2
Procedural progression of protocols to analysis then conclusions
Step # Description Reference
1 Send application with all protocols to university
IRB to receive approval to conduct study.
See Appendix F for “IRB
Approval Form Notification”
2 Begin recruiting sample via social media post while
providing basic information on the study.
See the Sample section and
Appendix E
3 Have respondents complete the interest measure
and consent form to inform and affirm study
participant requirements.
See Appendix A for the
“Information Sheet &
Informed Consent Form”
4 Have respondents complete the initial demographic
survey to gather information on their positionality,
contact information and experience with workplace
neurodivergent equity. Participants were then
selected based on who had the most relevant
experience improving neurodivergent equity.
See Appendix B for the
“Demographic Survey
Protocol”
5 Contact participants to schedule interviews See Recruitment section
6 Conduct semi-structured interviews via Zoom by
using the prepared questions then recording these
sessions to ensure constancy and accuracy.
See Procedures section and
Appendix C “Primary
Interview Protocol” and
Appendix D “Interview Script
& Supplemental Questions”
7 Transcribe and double-check transcriptions by
comparing to notes and recording.
See Procedures section
8 Complete descriptive analysis of demographic
survey data to begin creation of findings
See Chapter Four section of
Demographic Data through
Analysis of Research
Question 1
9 Complete Thematic Content Analysis to identify
and review codes then finalize ultimate themes
from the interview transcript data
See Chapter Four section of
Findings including analysis of
all three Research Questions
10 Provide a synthesis of all literature, demographic,
and transcription data
See Chapter Five section of
Summary of Findings

46
11 Provide conclusions including suggestions for
implementing change within future studies and
practically within organizations.
See Chapter Five section for
Recommendations
12 Provide analysis, findings, and recommendations to
the public to aid neurodivergent equity
See Dissemination of
Findings section
Confidentiality Parameters
As ethical considerations, the research participants received explanations for Informed
Consent (see Appendix A) for being participants and recorded while on the Zoom call (Merriam
& Tisdell, 2016). Likewise, letters were assigned to each participant (see Table 7) to keep results
anonymous, and no Private Health Information (PHI) data was gathered, such as the participant’s
date of birth, social security number, or other identifiable details. The researcher requested that
participants intentionally choose a private place for the interviews so that their interviews remain
as private as possible. Furthermore, once the current dissertation no longer requires the
recordings and transcripts, all files will be permanently deleted. These are the preventative
actions utilized to protect every participant and their confidential information.
Data Management – Encryption
The current researcher took additional preventative measures to ensure that the data from
the current interviews, such as the transcripts, recordings, and analysis, are thoroughly protected.
Preventative measures included, but were not limited to, utilizing a personal computer that has
automatic Windows Updates enabled, password protection, and Microsoft Windows Security
(version 1000.25873.0.9001) operating with virus and threat protection, account protection, and
firewall protection. Likewise, the personal computer had a Virtual Private Network (VPN)
provided by NordVPN (version 7.19.4.0), supplying further anonymity and web, file, and threat
protection. A university-hosted Microsoft OneDrive (version 24.020.0128.0003) server account
will store all research data, providing a secure backup while requiring the researcher’s specific

47
login credentials, which include a strong password and two-factor authentication through the
Duo Mobile (version 4.57.0) cellular phone app. The second form of required authentication
includes the researcher’s personal phone’s password, and this phone has independent security
and VPN software. These precautions of limited access, file encryption, security protocols,
software, and settings protected the research data.
Dissemination of Findings
After the current study, this dissertation was uploaded into the USC dissertation database
to be accessible to university faculty and students. This study will also provide a summary via
the social media platform LinkedIn to disseminate findings (Ross-Hellauer, 2020). This will
allow for continuation of the initial sharing of the demographic survey via the same platform
before the interviews. Moreover, the researcher will utilize visual representations of the data
analysis when spreading findings via LinkedIn to maximize the distribution and understanding of
findings. Likewise, the current researcher will summarize the data to research participants.
Eventually, the researcher would consider it a privilege to continue advocating for neurodiversity
through the form of a published book which would provide an additional route of dissemination.
Last, as the researcher's professional network within their organization and LinkedIn profile is
composed of a variety of experts within equity work, this data will be provided to vital known
stakeholders who are interested in developments within neurodiversity.
Data Analysis
The current dissertation includes two types of analysis to provide a more thorough
understanding of neurodiversity equity within the workplace. First, this included examining the
demographic information from the Demographic Survey to complete a descriptive analysis of the
positionality of all participants. Second, this included completing Thematic Content Analysis

48
(TCA) to intentionally assess the content of the semi-structured interviews and provide
additional insight into the participants. These two data analysis routes are summarized within the
following table, which specifies how they intersect with each study protocol.
Table 3
Type of analysis linked to instruments
Descriptive Analysis
The current study created a foundation of contrast of information about participants using
demographic survey data. This analysis included the range, average, and quantity of each
measured area for survey and interview participants (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Additionally,
this analysis identified how these elements are interrelated and connected to the research
questions, core concepts, and future thematic content analysis of interview data (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). This demographic exploration included the participants’ backgrounds,
neurodiversity equity experience, personal neurodivergence, and elements of positionality.
Demographic data
The current study's initial Demographic Survey (see Appendix B) gathered information
via Qualtrics from adult participants regarding their background, connection to neurodivergent
equity, and interviewing willingness. Additionally, the current study supplies a description,
within Chapter 4, which defines the demographic information for the gathered areas of gender,
ethnicity, employment status, remote work, occupation, income, neurodivergence, and
Demographic Survey Interview Protocol
Descriptive Analysis x x
Thematic Content Analysis x

49
participation within a neurodivergent equity program. Qualtrics reporting functions were used to
assess these demographic elements and identify the prevalence, correlations, means, and other
variations across the focus areas within the Demographic Survey. Overall, this specific
demographic data allowed the researcher to draw connections between these assessed areas and
the thematic assessment of interview transcript material, see Chapter Four.
Thematic Content Analysis
The current study assessed the qualitative data gathered through the semi-structured
interviews by utilizing Thematic Content Analysis (TCA). Specifically, the key process steps
included reviewing interview transcript content, coding, and identifying, assessing, and
clarifying themes leading to a final summative description (Caulfield, 2023). This TCA approach
included the six-step process, which required the researcher to become familiar with the
transcripts, generate codes, identify initial themes, evaluate themes, name final themes, and write
a descriptive narrative (Braun & Clarke, 2006). For increased understanding, Braun and Clarke
(2006) created the following table to further outline this form of analysis:
Table 4
Phases of thematic analysis by Braun & Clarke (2006)
Phase Description of the process
1 Familiarizing yourself
with your data:
Transcribing data (if necessary), reading and re-reading the
data, noting down initial ideas.
2 Generating initial codes: Coding interesting features of the data in a systematic fashion
across the entire data set, collating data relevant to each code.
3 Searching for themes: Collating codes into potential themes, gathering all data
relevant to each potential theme.
4 Reviewing themes: Checking if the themes work in relation to the coded extracts
(Level 1) and the entire data set (Level 2), generating a
thematic ‘map’ of the analysis.
5 Defining and naming
themes:
Ongoing analysis to refine the specifics of each theme, and the
overall story the analysis tells, generating clear definitions and
names for each theme.
6 Producing the report: The final opportunity for analysis. Selection of vivid,
compelling extract examples, final analysis of selected extracts,

50
relating back of the analysis to the research question and
literature, producing a scholarly report of the analysis.
Note. This table was, to maintain authenticity, recreated entirely from the original source of
“Using thematic analysis in psychology” by Braun, V. & Clarke, V., 2006, Qualitative Research
in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101, https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
NVivo 14 (Lumivero, 2023), a transcription and qualitative software, was used to import
the Zoom transcripts of the semi-structured interviews to articulate codes, reflect, and evaluate
qualitative data. Following this TCA-based inquiry into interview data, the researcher used the
NVivo 14 software to generate codes and create visual representations of common themes to
increase the comprehension of findings. Last, the researcher utilized this TCA approach by
focusing primarily on the study’s three research questions, leading to six distinct themes from the
interview data (see Chapter 4).
Reliability
The foundation of the study is understanding how this reliability has evolved from simply
replicating past findings to now including recognition of individual human experience and
supporting results with gathered data (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The current study achieved
reliability by separating this quality into dependability and confirmability. These alternative
terms allowed for a more thorough understanding of reliability, allowing readers and future
researchers to evaluate to what degree the study represents the participants' lived experiences.
This accountability validated the current study and optimized the analysis to be relevant for
identifying best practices of workplace neurodivergent equity.
Dependability
The current researcher utilized data triangulation to increase the dependability of
findings, as evidenced by cross-checking identified themes across multiple demographic areas

51
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This triangulation of multiple data sources allowed for the
confirmation of the lived experiences of neurodivergent individuals and the implementation of
equity programs, which can be transposed across industries, positionalities, and neurotypes.
Likewise, dependability was achieved within the current study, as seen by how all methodology,
survey and interview protocols are within appendices and documented accordingly to be assessed
and utilized by future researchers (Moon et al., 2016). Overall, these prioritized elements of
dependability support the current study's reliability.
Confirmability
Another route to further achieve reliability is increasing the levels of confirmability
within the current methodology. For example, ensuring the confirmability of the current study
required the researcher to ensure that the conclusions drawn are from the participants' viewpoints
and not from the researcher (Moon et al., 2016). In particular, the current study provided
thematic analysis and synthesis from research participants to highlight their authentic disclosure.
Additionally, the current researcher further assisted confirmability by mirroring research by
Cypress (2017) with introspectively reflecting before and after interviews, then immediately
reviewing each transcript following interviews to ensure they correctly reflect the content of the
interaction. These deliberate routes of mindfulness surrounding the researcher's positionality and
the necessity of correctly representing the participants’ lived experience, increased dependability,
and confirmability maintained reliability for this study.
Validity
The purposes of the current research study’s validity was separated under Internal and
External and renamed Credibility and Transferability, respectively (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Renaming these quality attributes illustrates these standards' importance more clearly for modern

52
studies. Likewise, the current researcher accounted for maintaining credibility and transferability
by intentionally creating the interview methodology. The researcher integrated the strategy of
reflexivity (see the section on positionality within Chapter One) and the strategy of maximum
variation (see Recruitment section). Overall, these strategies aid the current study by increasing
validity through the ability to transpose findings across workplace settings and industries.
Credibility
To increase credibility, the current researcher utilized the strategy of Reflexivity. For
example, reflexivity requires the current researcher to intentionally dialogue and account for
what perspectives, history, and intersectionality they bring to the research process, which aids in
ensuring credibility (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This intentional reflection process is illustrated
in the previous Positionality section within Chapter Two and integrated through regular
reflection during data gathering. Furthermore, the current dissertation evaluated the methodology
to ensure a deliberate link to the research problem, core concepts, and questions (Moon et al.,
2016). Overall, these strategies of reflexivity and clear connection to purpose increased the
credibility and validity of the current study.
Transferability
Likewise, Maximum Variation, a way to increase Transferability, required the researcher
to set up a selection process for participants that will span the most significant quantity of
applicable areas, optimizing the ability to transpose gathered data (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
The current study included participants with generational, industry, and other positionality
differences, which allows for the expansion of findings. The current study indicated areas for
future studies by concluding with recommendations and limitations of present findings as seen
within the Suggestions for Future Research section in Chapter Five (Moon et al., 2016).

53
However, both clarifications increased appropriate transferability (Moon et al., 2016). So, the
current study initially involved a breadth of participants while providing the specific avenues of
future application of conclusions provided increased transferability. Thus, achieving validity is
produced by increasing the credibility and the transferability of the current research study
through the two strategies of reflexivity and maximum variation.
Ethics
The current study is primarily focused on bringing equity to the neurodivergent
employees; nevertheless, research suggests that increasing individualized support for employees
will benefit the other employees (Austin & Pisano, 2017). Research reinforced that increased
workplace inclusivity for neurodivergent employees leads to increased sustainability, creativity,
productivity, and community (Hogsetedt et al., 2022; Narenthiran et al., 2022). However,
education programs regarding neurodivergence have generated increased alienation of
neurodivergent employees and feelings that accommodations are special treatment due to
neurodiverse characteristics being unseen (Spoor et al., 2021; Waisman-Nitzan et al., 2019).
These highlight the necessity of further research so that organizations and supervisors can
have increased knowledge to generate unilateral company benefits while mitigating any
discrimination towards neurodivergent staff. Furthermore, the current study met multiple review
standards, including consultation from a doctoral review committee, peer assessment, and
meeting all IRB standards. These assessment elements provided accountability to ensure all
methods and data analysis prioritized any recruited participant's privacy, well-being, and safety.
In future chapters, the study will provide recommendations, through the multilayered perspective
of SCT and a conceptual framework, for increased workplace neurodiversity equity.

54
Conclusion
The overview of this methodology provided a foundational understanding of how the
research questions and core concepts were informed from the demographic survey and semistructured interviews. This route is founded upon techniques to support the study's ethics,
validity, and reliability while deliberately considering the researcher’s positionality, sample,
analysis, instrumentation, and data management strategies. This data management included
software and other systems to gather, analyze, and protect information from relevant participants.
Overall, this illustrated the means the current dissertation utilized to understand workplace
neurodivergent equity better.

55
Chapter Four: Findings
The chapter provides a report on all information gathered from the Demographic Survey
and Interview Protocol. Initially, this encompasses reviewing the positionality of each
interviewee as they reported upon the demographic survey including highlighting key areas
about their experience with neurodivergent workplace equity. Second, this chapter provides a
Thematic Content Analysis (TCA) approach to understanding the interview information. For
example, this will include exploring the interview transcripts, organized by the three research
questions, which produced six distinct themes surrounding neurodivergent workplace equity. The
current chapter highlights all key findings from the survey and semi-structured interviews
conducted with the selection of neurodivergent equity experts. Overall, this report and analysis
provides insight into the best practices for understanding, overcoming barriers to, and improving
workplace inclusion for recruiting and retaining neurodivergent employees.
Demographic Data
From the initial Demographic Survey there were sixteen total respondents of which nine
were selected to participate in the semi-structured interviews. Of these nine participants, eight
identified as White/Caucasian and one as Asian for race; additionally, for gender, respondents
were composed of four female, three male, and two nonbinary identifications. For age, the
participants’ largest group was five within the 25-34 years age range, two within 45-54 years,
and one respondent in the 18-24 and 35-44 age ranges. These represent a brief breakdown of the
basic intersectionality of each of the nine interview participants (see Table 6).
When examining each participant’s disclosed employment background, all nine listed
themselves as being full-time employees. Three participants reported being SelfEmployed/Entrepreneurs, two as working DEI Advocacy, and one each in Education, Social

56
Services, Information Security/Technology, and one “other” industry. All other potential
occupations that respondents could have chosen are available in the copy of the Demographic
Survey (see Appendix B). The annual income of participants, along with other demographic
information is highlighted within Table 7 later within this chapter. The respondents also provided
their typical work location with six who work from home or remote daily and three who work
more than once a week from home or remote with no participants who are 100% office based.
This information provides background information on each interview participant’s work setting,
industry, and income from (see Table 6).
The respondents were also asked basic demographic information about their
identification within neurodiversity and experience with neurodiverse equity. In addition to every
respondent affirming their experience developing workplace neurodivergent equity all
participants also self-disclosed that they identify as neurodiverse themselves. Identification as
being neurodivergent was not a requirement for selection, so this occurrence was coincidental.
However, it does speak to the expertise of each participant further since they each have lived
experience as neurodivergent employees. The following figure illustrates how the nine interview
participants identified in neurodiverse characteristics and multiple choices were allowed:

57
Figure 3
Participants’ Neurodiverse Identification
Additional notes are important when examining the current figure for further
understanding of the participants’ demographics. First, this figure, and the survey data, states that
no respondents identified as having Dyslexia, but one respondent did mention during scheduling
that they accidentally omitted that they do have Dyscalculia which is not represented within
Figure 3. Second, of those that selected “other” they provided additional information which
included conditions of Bipolar II, OCD, CPTSD, Anxiety, and Visual Processing Disorder.
Third, even though Figure 1 implies that there is overlap between those that identify as autistic
and those with ADHD/ADD it becomes important to note that every participant picked one of
these two conditions. For clarity, every interview participant reported being autistic, identifying
with ADHD/ADD or with both conditions of neurodiversity. Additionally, eight of participants
stated that they feel their organization currently supports neurodiverse equity. And every
interview participant stated that they had experience facilitating a neurodiverse support program
or have aided in bringing about neurodiverse equity at a workplace. These primary elements of

58
positionality can be seen in the following table which summarizes the participants, their assigned
ID for reference to future narratives, and their demographic information:
Table 5
Participant Demographic & Neurodiversity Summary
ID Industry Salary Age Gender Neurodiversity
A Social Services $40,000-
$59,999
18-24 Male ASD, ADHD/ADD
B Education $100,000-
$119,999
35-44 Male ASD
C Self-Employed /
Entrepreneur
$20,000-
$39,999
45-54 Female ADHD/ADD, Other
D DEI Advocacy $60,000-
$79,999
25-34 Female ADHD/ADD
E Information
Security/Technology
$80,000-
$99,999
25-34 Nonbinary ASD, ADHD/ADD,
Other
F Self-Employed /
Entrepreneur
$160,000-
$179,999
45-54 Female ASD
G DEI Advocacy $100,000-
$119,999
25-34 Nonbinary ASD
H Self-Employed /
Entrepreneur
$140,000-
$159,999
25-34 Male ASD
I Other $60,000-
$79,999
25-34 Female ASD, ADHD/ADD,
Dyscalculia, Other
These factors around experience illustrate how all nine of the interview participants have
experience as neurodivergent individuals while concurrently aiding in the development of
workplace neurodiverse equity improvements. Furthermore, this summary of the demographic
data of the research participants provides an overview of the positionalities represented within
this sample. For example, this includes their age range, salary range, work setting, gender, race,
industry, and their experience with neurodiversity within the workplace. Overall, this descriptive
synthesis speaks to how the findings provide insight across these elements of intersectionality
and emphasize how each participant has experience as a neurodiverse person and as someone
who has aided in bringing about neurodiverse equity within the workplace.

59
Findings
Following the demographic overview of the research participants, the following section
will detail the Thematic Content Analysis (TCA) of the semi-structured interviews. This
included progressing through the six-steps of TCA as outlined by Braun and Clarke (2006)
in which the researcher maintained an objective perspective. In particular, the researcher read
becoming familiar with the interviews, generated codes, explored themes, assessed themes,
named the themes, and then generated a narrative with extractions from the transcripts.
Additionally, since Research Question 1 is focused on a foundational understanding of
workplace neurodiversity equity, this is informed by the demographic survey as this provides
vital context for the participants’ lived experience on this topic. This process led to the following
codes and themes divided by the research questions and then focus areas of the current study:
Table 6
Identified Codes and Themes by Research Question
Initial Codes Research Question Recruiting or Retaining
Neurodivergent Talent
Final Themes
Interview RQ1: What does
neurodivergent equity
look like in the
workplace?
Recruiting Equitable Hiring &
Hiring Onboarding Practices
Remote Retaining Inclusive Workplace
Space Characteristics
Environment
Support RQ2: What are the
challenges of
Neurodivergent
Equity in the
Workplace?
Recruiting Barriers faced by
Manager Neurodiverse Candidates
Community Retaining Hardships experienced by
Neurodiver* Neurodivergent Staff
Group
Work RQ3: How can
organizations
improve
neurodivergent
workplace equity?
Recruiting Optimizing Neurodiverse –
Equity Focused Hiring
Training Retaining Empowering Neurodiverse
Individual – Inclusive Environments
Diversity

60
Organizationally, this section will divide this analysis by each of the three-research
questions, then further distinction between hiring and supporting neurodivergent talent within the
workforce. This will parallel the layout of the literature review within Chapter Two which used
the same subsections to discuss the relevance and recent research on neurodiverse workplace
equity. Finally, for both retaining and recruiting neurodivergent talent there will be a theme
explored within each research question for the total of six distinct areas of analysis. Overall, this
section will summarize the key findings from the semi structured interviews.
Analysis of Research Question 1
This section details the findings from the interviews as they relate to the research question of:
What does neurodivergent equity look like in the workplace?
When considering what neurodivergent equity looks like in the workplace it becomes
necessary to highlight how we define this occurrence. In particular, the current section will draw
information from the semi-structured interviews for how these neurodiversity experts define
workplace equity. First, this explores the first theme identified of equitable hiring and
onboarding practices as illustrated by interview excerpts. Second, quotations from interviews
will also show the second theme of inclusive workplace characteristics. Specifically, this
includes examining these two themes for what to look for within equitable practices for the
recruitment and retention of neurodivergent talent along with any differences for remote, office
or hybrid employees. This understanding of how neurodiversity equity can be understood is
further developed when considering the demographic survey data, so is referenced within this
exploration. Specifically, the neurodivergence of each participant will be referenced as a route to
reinforce the legitimacy of each quotation by the reminder of the experts’ personal and
professional lived experiences of workplace equity. Overall, this section highlights the

61
definitional elements of Research Question 1 and provides a foundation of what neurodivergent
equity looks like within the employment cycle.
Equitable Hiring & Onboarding Practices (Recruiting Neurodivergent Talent)
When examining the employment cycle of neurodivergent individuals, the need is to
understand what equitable hiring and onboarding practices look like for neurodivergent staff.
This section will reference interview quotes that specifically speak to this theme of equitable
hiring and onboarding practices. For example, these highlight the intentionality that is needed by
recruiters, interviewers, and hiring managers. However, this also requires the examination of
each element of onboarding such as the job posting, interview, and hiring process. For example,
when creating an equitable experience, it is vital to know how neurodivergent individuals might
experience the job posting itself. Participant D, autistic female with ADHD and a DEI advocate,
iterates this focus on what equitable hiring can look like when she said:
As well as thinking before you even get to the interview process, which is the job
description look like? Is it clear? Do you include that you don't have to fit 100% of these
requirements, right? I see. So often, so many people self-select out, because they might
not fit one small, tiny requirement, whereas other folks might just fit three of the 10 and
apply anyway, right? So being clear with a statement or something in that job description
that encourages people to apply, including neurodivergence in that equal opportunity
statement, right, these little things that signal that we are an inclusive employer.
This highlights how neurodivergent-inclusive hiring needs to be transparent, reference
neurodiversity, and clarify job requirements during the job posting phase. Because of this
evidence, there is indication that inclusive hiring practices start at the neurodivergent candidates
first experience of the company which is the job posting itself.

62
Similarly, equitable hiring practices require an emphasis placed on the first staff a
neurodivergent job seeker will meet. Specifically, recruiters need to be aware of neurodiversity,
accommodations that can be offered, and simply maintain a mindset of approachable personality
and communication style. This was described by Interviewee H, an autistic male, as follows:
And interviewers and recruiters are the first people that folks see in the interview process.
So those people really need to be held to was held to the same equitable standard of
listening to people, making sure that they feel respected and heard. And that if someone
needs accommodations, whenever they say so or whenever it becomes apparent or
obvious that someone needs accommodations over, they say so I think interviewers and
recruiters needs to have that level of awareness. And that also applies generally people
disabilities. And neurodivergent people fall into a similar category of just being on a
lookout for that and being ready for those questions to be asked, and then just know what
to do with that information if it ends up in your lap.
Moreover, this evidence emphasizes that an organization’s employees and managers on
the frontlines set the foundation for creating an equitable onboarding experience for
neurodivergent job candidates. Likewise, a hiring team’s ability to model awareness,
understanding, and curiosity toward neurodivergent candidates is vital. To take this further, these
hiring managers can deepen the feeling of an equitable onboarding process by listening for what
will help the candidate succeed during interviewing and beyond. Interviewee C, an autistic
female with ADHD, details this by describing what this transition can look like for the
betterment of neurodivergent folks:
…so, when it when it comes to hiring it the seeking to understand the curiosity and all of
that is the same to me. But with the hiring process is interesting that you asked this

63
because somebody just tagged me in something wanting my opinion for my eclectic like,
background when I was doing the staffing and hiring and then also the ongoing, you
know, performance management and leadership. The hiring process is finite if you will.
So, you put them through, you bring them in, you get them started and then you hand
them over to that ongoing. So, but you also still want to empower make them feel
comfortable and included and inclusive and listened to and heard.
The emphasis within this quotation adds clarity to the emotional and experiential
elements of the onboarding experience. Since so many difficulties could potentially arise during
the hiring, interviewing, and onboarding process this can aid in creating a seamless transition
during this initial section of the neurodivergent employee’s employment cycle. Another factor
that provides insight into what creates an equitable space for neurodivergent candidates is the
awareness of other intersectionality factors and safety. This space for safety would require open
communication throughout the employment cycle, providing additional insight on what inclusion
during onboarding looks like. For example, Interviewee G, who identifies as nonbinary and
autistic, describes how to create this type of equitable environment:
So, you start by, by creating that culture of a feedback loop of I don't know everything,
I'm not always going to get it right. If anyone disagrees with me, please, I want to hear
your dissent. You guys are on the front lines of this. So, you tell me what's working,
what's not working. You start there, that is a foundational piece that has to be in place for
any neurodiverse person to join a team effectively, where they have psychological safety.
And this is what psychological safety actually is. There's a lot of misconceptions about
what it is. But it basically, in the simplest terms, is just a, I guess you could call it like a

64
cultural description or a cultural aspect, where it is safe to learn, safe to contribute, and
safe to challenge the status quo.
Overall, this quote stresses the importance of this safety when a new neurodivergent job
candidate enters a company’s organization and how this foundation of equity starts at these
initial transition points. So, within the theme of equitable hiring and onboarding processes, this
evidence highlights a need for companies to intentionally consider during the first part of the
employment cycle. Specifically, the quotations emphasize the need for clarity of expectations,
open communication, psychological safety, and awareness of frontline staff for the creation of a
neuro-inclusive onboarding experience. Furthermore, this detailed how even this initial segment
of the employment cycle should be seen as separate parts by building equitable practices into job
postings, interviews, and the onboarding process. Therefore, this summarizes what equitable
hiring and onboarding practices can provide an answer for what neurodiverse workplace equity
looks like.
Inclusive Workplace Characteristics (Retaining Neurodivergent Talent)
Once a neurodivergent individual moves from simply being a job candidate to an
employee, it becomes necessary to understand what workplace neurodivergent equity looks like
within ongoing support. The current interviews provide insight into this idea of what are
inclusive workplace characteristics which are especially relevant for neurodivergent employees.
Additionally, this will include excerpts detailing expert opinions on how this can look for
remote, office, and hybrid-based neurodivergent employees. In particular, the descriptions of
what neurodivergent workplace equity looks like includes emphasis on continued themes of
flexibility, awareness, safety, and individualizing support.

65
First, when considering the potentiality of remote work options, it allows for a variety of
employees to be able to meet job expectations since it removes barriers to getting to the office.
This flexibility of job location is especially relevant for neurodivergent individuals as this
provides increased access to enter employment. This is reflected upon by Interviewee A, an
autistic male with ADHD/ADD, who details what this access means for the neurodivergent and
other communities:
I feel like it's important to offer the option for people to work remotely and the reason I
say this is because a lot of disabled people might feel uncomfortable and might not have a
means of transportation to get to an office, so it makes work and employment a lot more
accessible and employment, applications, disabled employment and hiring will go up. If
there's alternate means of, like, accessibility, if people can work remotely, then people
will apply for jobs rather than jobs in which you have a car because disabled people
might not have a driver's license. A lot of autistic people might not feel comfortable
riding the metro public transportation because of the sensory aspects. So, offering
different alternative ways to complete a task or complete a job or to be employed is really
important.
This excerpt iterates how the possibility of remote work opens doors for neurodivergent,
among other populations, to join inclusively minded organizations. Furthermore, the evidence
from this expert details how neurodivergent workplace equity manifests as remote work settings
by allowing employees to work from the safety of their own space mitigating concerns of social,
sensory, transportation, or safety-related needs they might have. Due to this wide range of
potential benefits of inclusive workplace practices, this would provide benefits to neurodivergent

66
individuals along with neurotypical individuals who might require assistance with any of those
other aforementioned areas of need.
Additionally, when examining the office-based setting for neurodivergent individuals,
there needs to be further emphasis on how to continue these characteristics of inclusion. For
example, when an employee is required to work at a physical location sometimes this brings
requirements for the organization if they want an equitable atmosphere. For what a physical
definition of workplace neurodivergent equity can look like Interviewee H, an autistic male,
emphasized how corporations need to focus on the following:
I think one of the biggest things that I have found as a leader and someone who's been
managed by leaders, is I think just building emotional safety, building a culture of having
tough conversations, just listening, and trying to kind of check your bias at the door. I
think one thing that is very easy to fall into is to ostracize or isolate neurodivergent team
members from neurotypical team members, which can that's have sort of the opposite
effect of helping people it will hurt them. You want to create an equitable space for
everybody to thrive, such that the neurodivergent people don't feel ostracized or out of
the loop or otherwise alienated.
Therefore, companies who want to implement inclusive workplace characteristics within
their physical offices must prioritize community, integration, and safety between neurotypes.
This expert articulation provides insight into what neurodivergent workplace equity looks like,
such as a strong manifestation of emotional unity, open communication, and authentic
experiences between neurodivergent and neurotypical employees. Overall, this continuation of
the theme of inclusive workplace characteristics illustrates the need for office space with a

67
shared sense of community where differences are celebrated, discussed, and welcomed
juxtaposed to problematic ostracization, exclusion, or isolation.
Neurodivergent workplace equity also requires additional elements that transcend the
workspace so organizations can build these factors in remote or office environments. Initially,
this awareness of neurodiversity and neurodivergence requires corporations to have a vocabulary
and knowledge of what conditions are included here. This aids organizations in the ability to
create inclusive workplaces by having an increased understanding of what can be associated with
neurodivergence to make educated intentional actions to cultivate increased equity. Interviewee
E, who identifies as nonbinary and with autism and ADHD/ADD, detailed how organizations
can focus on developing these inclusive characteristics within their workforce:
So, if you're interested in creating an equitable environment, you definitely need to work
with neurodivergent people. And that does mean a variety of neurodivergent people.
neurodiversity is an umbrella term, right. So, it like includes autistic, it includes
dyspraxia, dyscalculia, dyslexia, ADHD, OCD, it includes personality, these are disorders
and mental health conditions. And everybody, um, at different intersections of those
conditions, and also different manifestations of those conditions like autism spectrum
disorder is, of course, a huge, enormous spectrum are going to have very different
presentation of needs in the workplace.
This emphasis on grasping all the conditions, tendencies, and diagnoses associated with
neurodivergence empowers organizations to have increased ability to understand all their
employees. Due to this variance of internal representation under the term of neurodivergence, it
can be overwhelming but can be seen as a route to place the emphasis on learning what each
employee needs. This would be true for both neurodivergent and neurotypical employees as

68
increased awareness of unique qualities can lead to the recognition of every employee’s needs,
strengths, and traits. This can be utilized to increase employee productivity and engagement as
detailed by Interviewee D, an autistic female with ADHD/ADD, who discussed what this means
for workplace equity:
What makes them productive, what makes them engaged and work? And then you tailor
to that. So, my number one recommendation is always just this individualized approach
to management that if you take with all of your team members is going to benefit
everyone, but very specifically is going to benefit your neurodivergent employees who
might not fit into the average management technique that you're taught, which really
works for no one, right? But like, specifically, you might see motivations being different,
or areas of interest being different ways of going about things being different for people
whose brains work outside of that box.
Therefore, another characteristic of an inclusive workplace includes intentionality in
individualizing support for every employee, neurodivergent or neurotypical. Likewise, this
quotation illustrates how this paradigm shift in learning more about each employee will provide
insight into motivating, engaging, and managing all employees. Additionally, being flexible
when seeing each employee as having distinct characteristics from others force managers to
practice curiosity and build a space of openness and safety. Overall, these factors provide a
narrative focused on how workplace neurodivergent equity requires awareness of what
neurodiversity is and how this impacts ongoing support for all employees.
Therefore, when examining neurodivergent workplace equity workplace characteristics,
this requires seeing how this looks within each stage of the employment cycle. First, this analysis
of the first research question details how there must be inclusive hiring and onboarding practices

69
including clarity, understanding, and safety throughout the job posting, interview, and whole
onboarding experience. Second, inclusive workplace characteristics were seen to be necessary
for ongoing employee support through the implementation of awareness of neurodiversity,
formation of community, and the empowerment within the office or remote settings. Each of
these questions was also prefaced with a reminder of the positionality of every interviewee. This
provides a reminder to have the demographic information from the initial survey continue to
inform this understanding of Research Question 1. Furthermore, the reiteration of the
neurodivergence of each participant further reinforces how these excerpts exemplify professional
observations and personal lived experiences from each study participant. Thus, these thematic
articulations from expert interviews provide a picture of what neurodivergent equity looks like
within the workplace informed by professional and personal experiences.
Analysis of Research Question 2
This section details the findings from the interviews as they relate to the research question of:
What are the challenges of Neurodivergent Equity in the Workplace?
To fully capture the needs of the neurodivergent community within the workplace the
current findings explore what neurodiversity equity experts feel are the most significant issues
facing this population at work. First, this section will provide insight into the theme of the unique
barriers faced by neurodivergent applicants to illustrate what primarily keeps this population
from joining the workforce. Second, if a neurodivergent individual obtains employment, they
may experience the next theme of the varying hardships experienced by neurodivergent
employees. Overall, the findings within the current section will address the Research Question 2
focused on the challenges for neurodivergent equity within the workplace.

70
Barriers Faced by Neurodivergent Applicants (Recruiting Neurodivergent Talent)
When examining what barriers are faced by neurodivergent applicants, the first step is
capturing an understanding of how these may manifest within the onboarding process. First,
these findings from neurodiversity experts will highlight the negative impact of unideal online
hiring portals plagued with vague language, adverse visuals, and presence of bias. Second, the
findings on the hiring process being inflexible, focused on neurotypical minds, and an
unfortunate emphasis placed on charisma all being inequitable for neurodivergent candidates.
Third, social complexities, lack of emphasis on skill competencies, and an overreliance on social
mannerism will be shown to impact neurodivergent individuals through this focus on
neurotypical personalities. Last, the barrier of corporations viewing neurodivergent candidates as
being a liability for their company indicates an additional challenge for this population. Overall,
quotations from neurodiversity experts will highlight these elements to provide an understanding
of the theme of the barriers faced by neurodivergent applicants.
Initially, to understand what keeps neurodivergent individuals from even initiating a job
application is to look at what they see on a job description. For example, the first interaction
anyone has with the employment cycle is not an interview but rather the employer’s careers or
job hosting page, so this is where equity must first be focused for neurodivergent candidates.
However, organizations do not focus on this area of the employment process which creates
unique barriers especially for neurodivergent individuals. These barriers can appear in a variety
of ways which impact neurodivergent individuals as described by Interviewee I here:
There's a lot of deterrence in the hiring process as it stands. So, if we're looking at, let's
say, a hiring portal, for example, if the colors are too bright, if the website is clunky, if
you upload your resume, and it doesn't populate in the system, and you have to enter in

71
your information all over again, that's a deterrent. There's other stuff like gendered
language that can get in the way, there's vague and incomplete job descriptions that might
be out there that are confusing for people to understand. So, things like that during the
recruitment process can be frustrating. And then during the interviewing process, I feel
like that is where most of the problems kind of come from. And from personal
experience, and from my own research, I personally believe that unconscious bias has
probably the number one problematic cause to neurodivergent people not being hired.
This excerpt details how the prevalence of the lack of intentionally curating job hosting
sites, position descriptions, and hiring portals causes undue barriers for neurodivergent
individuals looking to join an organization. Likewise, unnecessary duplication of fields, bulk
text, biased language, and overbearing visuals can all lead to neurodivergent individuals
experiencing additional stress and frustration. These experiential elements create unique barriers
for neurodivergent individuals who often more highly experience these visuals or may face
challenges from navigating text fields due to dyslexia or similar conditions. Overall, the lack of
intentionally created job portals, descriptions, or other elements of the application process poses
challenges to neurodivergent individuals likely before they talk to anyone in the organization.
Additionally, assuming a neurodivergent individual completes the application for a
position, their challenges are likely to only increase. Interviewing within the hiring process tends
to place an overemphasis on social skills such as charisma or social constructs like eye contact
which might lead to energy-draining masking from neurodivergent candidates. Because of this,
the hiring process tends to further alienate and push neurodivergent individuals out of the
employment cycle even prior to joining. The ways the hiring process is catered to neurotypical
individuals was described by Interviewee G through the following transcript excerpt:

72
…the hiring process I always describe as like, it's like the worst of all worlds, like all the
worst things about a non-inclusive or non-expansive organization manifests at their worst
in the hiring process, generally speaking, so if you're gonna have a hard time on a team as
a neurodivergent person, you're going to have an extremely hard time in the hiring
process for that team. For other people, like if you want to go someone extremely
neurotypical who's really good at playing politics, and has a lot of charisma, and they can
talk circles around anybody. The interview processes are easy, the hiring process is the
easy part. Being on a team is the hard part. And this is what companies are mostly
focused on, they want to make sure no one can game the hiring process, and then end up
being really poor on the job. And what ends up happening is neurodivergent people have
the inverse experience where all of the scrutiny, all of these intangibles, all of this stuff
around culture fit and I really enjoyed talking to him, or there's just something off about
him. And all this nonsense that comes up in the interview and debrief process just serves
to further marginalize people who are different from the existing core, there's also a big
part of it related to unspoken rules.
This extensive quotation emphasizes how the hiring process is so focused on neurotypical
individuals that the result is an inequitable experience for neurodivergent applicants.
Additionally, this description highlights how the interviewing process seems to place a reliance
on only assessing areas that are often difficult for neurodivergent individuals to do such as
charisma, social constructs, and social ability. Likewise, this emphasis on social performance
seems to decrease the ability for neurodivergent individuals to demonstrate the skills required for
a given position. These factors create barriers for neurodivergent candidates through the creation

73
of exclusive expectations for the interview process. These examples are also indicated by
Interviewee D who details these barriers as follows:
Yeah, so when I think about the hiring process, many of the barriers are really just around
the neurotypical social constructs that are built into it. You know, typical eye contact,
what's the exact right amount of time to answer a question? How much detail do you
want me to go into? You're right, it's all these really unknown complexities that you have
to navigate in an interview. So, I think within the interview process, the more we can lean
towards skill-based assessment of are you actually a good fit for the job? Versus how
well can you tell me that you wouldn't be a good fit for the job, the more successful
individuals and companies will be across the board.
This quotation describes further typical social constructs neurodivergent applicants face
within the hiring process. Analytically, this information also suggests traditional interview
questions such as, “tell us one of your greatest weaknesses?” or “why did you leave your
previous employer?” could be especially problematic for neurodivergent candidates due to how a
more literal response could provide a negative perception to the applicant. Since the elements of
eye contact, sentence cadence, and other social cues are so prevalent within these interviews,
these provide unnecessary elements to navigate outside of simply advertising one’s ability to
complete the desired skills set.
Furthermore, companies may further hinder neurodivergent applicants due to the
prevalence of misconceptions about neurodiversity. Also, despite potential legal repercussions
for corporations who make decisions to exclude individuals due to their neurodivergence there is
little ability for the individual to ever know this is what occurred. This dilemma of disclosing a
neurodivergent condition was described by Interviewee E as follows:

74
A lot of them are concerned that they will be by hiring neurodivergent people and other
disabled disabilities not just limited to neurodiversity. They are opening themselves up to
being sued, which is a really limiting belief, because at the end of the day, not opening
themselves up to hiring neurodivergent candidates is really opening themselves up to
being sued. Um, but there are definitely organizations out there, although I don't, it's
impossible to identify who they are…But there are plenty of organizations that are just
like okay, that's a liability. We don't want to deal with that. and they just say they went
with a different candidate, the candidate would never make it to the interview phase, they
would never have any way rhyme or reason to know that they were declined based on
their disability. And so there would be no consequence for them turning down the
candidate for that motive without that candidate knowing…
The unseen barrier illustrated here as the company not moving forward with an applicant
due to their neurodivergence illustrates how these candidates face challenges for reasons of
which they are unaware. A neurodivergent candidate may suspect that they were discriminated
against due to their neurodivergence but likely there will not be hard proof of this, as why
someone was declined could come with only limited information. Nevertheless, this barrier, per
this expert interview, occurs and little can be done legally without unmistakable evidence that
this discrimination occurred. This barrier, then, is evidence of the lack of understanding of
neurodiversity and the pervasive misrepresentation, stereotyped, and biased perception of how
neurodivergent individuals pose only a liability for organizations.
Overall, these quotations have illustrated the primary barriers which neurodivergent
individuals face when attempting to enter the workforce. First, this highlighted how the
application process is fraught with exclusive design elements such as bulky text, overbearing

75
visuals, confusing descriptions, and unnecessary redundancies. Second, these findings highlight
the neuronormative-focused approach to interviews and application processes that further bar
neurodivergent individuals from being successful. Third, these quotes emphasize the prevalence
of an overemphasis on conforming to social norms forcing neurodivergent candidates to either
mask who they are or attempt to predict unwritten cultural cues. Fourth, the propensity for
companies to discriminate based on misconceptions of neurodivergence was shown to be an
unseen malicious force barring neurodivergent individuals. Overall, this section explored
findings related to the theme of barriers faced by neurodivergent applicants to provide an
understanding of what challenges exist for workplace neurodiversity equity.
Hardships Experienced by Neurodivergent Employees (Retaining Neurodivergent Talent)
As neurodivergent individuals enter the workforce and overcome these barriers within the
recruitment process, the current section will show what unique difficulties will follow. For
example, this section explores quotations that illustrate the hardships experienced by
neurodivergent employees. Initially, this explores the issues that appear within traditional officebased work settings then progresses to examining those issues that will transcend also into
remote environments. These quotations will further develop the answer to the challenges that
exist to bring about neurodiverse workplace equity.
The first hardship neurodivergent individuals might face is what happens if they
courageously self-disclose their condition or needs and yet these are not accommodated by their
organization. Likewise, companies must be aware of these needs of their neurodivergent
employees, or they risk causing stress, alienation, and frustration in their staff. An example of
this was explained by Interviewee B who detailed their experience of how their own needs were
disregarded within an organization:

76
The first thing that comes to mind is when I'm in an office setting, I have a partial hearing
impairment. And I have repeatedly told workers and managers alike that I've made things
in email or in writing and if you expect me to know it, or do it, because of the processing
speed issues, it's not a volume, it's a processing speed, ADHD, and other things. And just
as a general best practice, as an auditor always put everything in writing. And this is very
casually disregarded when I'm in the office. Ya know, it's when there's clarity given or
expressed that can be frustrating to not have honored or have that follow through again.
This example illustrates how ignoring employee requests can spread dissatisfaction, and
the lack of documentation of attempts to accommodate could become problematic for the
organization. Likewise, this vulnerable articulation from a neurodiversity expert’s own
experience of being ignored provides a reflection of both sides of their expertise highlighting the
significant problematic impact of an organization disregarding employee needs. Overall, the
hardship of alienation of neurodivergent employees is a challenge to create workplace equity.
Additionally, as a continuation from the interviewing process, the latter employment
cycle can include a plethora of social constructs or settings which might be difficult for
neurodivergent employees. The office setting will innately have certain limitations for how a
neurodivergent staff member can alter this space along with an increased likelihood of
interacting with coworkers where a form of masking would be required. These office-related
hardships were detailed by Interviewee A who described this experience as:
I think when it comes to in office, like in the office setting, it can be a bit overwhelming
with different social norms. A lot of people including myself, have to mask when we're in
office. So sometimes we might have to suppress our emotions. Sometimes we might have
to like, it can be really difficult to work people and do a lot of nonverbal things. It can be

77
really difficult understanding different social norms of office. And I would like to say
hello to everyone, for example, who like shows up so the session on spirit can be really
exhausting. Masking can be really exhausting and office, there's also a lot of distractions,
like the printer going off every so often, people getting on phone calls in the cubicles next
to me can also be really distracting and kind of work.
The sounds, both environmental and social, are detailed within this excerpt which
emphasize how neurodivergent employees will have unique hardships with their experience
within an office-based setting. Likewise, Interviewee A describes here a tendency for these
atmospheric hardships to generate a workday wrought with a tiring need to mask, frequent social
or physical distractions, and various social cues to navigate. These office-based concerns for
neurodivergent employees emphasize the presence of unique challenges to workplace equity due
to social and environmental difficulties. Furthermore, the presence of physical, environmental,
and social issues was reiterated by Interviewee F who detailed these by stating that:
…I think that there's a piece of this when we think about employees in the workplace,
where we need to recognize that the workplace itself, like the environment, like an office,
or whatever it is, can add additional stress. And in a lot of ways, it can add additional
stress, because if you're in with people you don't know you might be masking and
camouflaging more, and that takes an emotional and physical toll on people. You may be
trying to filter in ways that you don't have to filter at home, both yourself and the
environment. I, for example, I'll give an example. Like a personal example, when I go
into an office, I'm very, very sensitive to like smells, perfumes, and things like that. And
it's very distracting to me, because my sense is I have synesthesia when I'm stressed out.

78
This statement by Interviewee F emphasizes the multisensory experience of being within
an office setting that can potentially negatively impact neurodivergent staff. These environmental
elements of sights, sounds, smells, social, and other sensory experiences can then lead to
neurodivergent employees having a variety of unique stimuli to try to navigate. These sensory
experiences have been referenced within these findings to lead neurodivergent employees,
especially those based within the office, to an increased propensity towards frustration, stress,
and distraction. Deductively, these experiential hardships consequently could cause a reduction
in job performance, engagement, and satisfaction when juxtaposed to neuronormative employees
who might have a decreased experience of these stressors.
Neurotypical individuals may further impact a neurodivergent employee’s experience in
the workforce. One example would be the lack of buy-in for neurodivergent equity within an
organization such as direct discrimination or disregard for a psychologically safe environment.
The following quotation includes language that could be offensive to some yet is included here
as an example from Interviewee B and some direct discrimination they experienced within an
organization that was attempting to improve neurodiverse equity:
…sometimes if you don't have the right environment, they may not stick so to speak. I
mean, I worked for an organization that despite creating the disabled employee resource
group, they refer to autistic people like me as retards, pardon my language. They yeah,
managers constantly sub the ‘R’ word. When I was put in charge of something
somebody, a manager, literally openly said right in front of me, “you're gonna put Rain
Man in charge,” that if you have this kind of core environment, unfortunately, the
program might not do what you hope it does until you address that root issue.

79
This vulnerable disclosure of discrimination even after an organization attempts to build
neurodivergent equity highlights a barrier that arises from the lack of buy-in within an
organization. Additionally, these examples of direct discrimination towards neurodivergence
represents a hardship that manifests through the pervasive presence of destructive stereotypes,
biases, and disregard towards neurodivergence. These negative articulations of neurodivergence,
especially when stated by management, will significantly delay the environmental improvements
necessary to bring about neurodivergent equity within the workplace.
Likewise, when these areas of improvement are so inconsistent, or uninformed, by the
real needs of the neurodiverse community they will fail to bring equity. This provides another
hardship if an organization attempts to bring about increased neurodivergent equity but does so
without consultation from those who are neurodiverse the intervention will fail. The lack of this
neurodivergent consultation was illustrated by Interviewee E who described this area of need as
being like other minority-focused workplace programs:
So, like, the same goes for neurodivergent people, if you go to an environment, this ain't
saying that you're neuro-inclusive, but you do not have you have not consulted or have
evidence of consulting any neurodivergent people. No matter how knowledgeable you
might be, people are going to be suspicious of their motives and of why you do not seem
to value the opinions of the neurodivergent community in shaping an inclusive
environment.
The lack of well-informed equity programs poses an additional hardship experienced by
neurodivergent employees through how attempts to assist them are based on incomplete or
misinformed understanding of neurodiversity. Also, this reiterates the common factor of
environmental elements that cause hardship to neurodivergent employees by adding how a

80
company’s attempts to bring equity can still cause barriers. Combined, the previous two
quotations illustrate, an unfortunate reality of how organizations and their employees can directly
subvert the creation of neurodivergent equity within the workplace.
When considering the hardships that afflict neurodivergent employees this section
highlights key areas. First, this section detailed the negative impact of neurodivergent employees
having their unique needs directly ignored within their organization. Second, the environmental
elements of social norms and frequent distractions were shown to have a negative impact for
neurodivergent employees. Third, these findings described the multisensory experience that faces
neurodivergent employees due to the increased sensitivity to sights, smells, sounds, and other
stimuli. Fourth, how neurodivergent individuals face the hardship of direct discrimination within
the workforce through the pervasive disrespectful and alienating language which can be harmful
especially from leadership. Finally, this section detailed how equity programs that are
uninformed by not involving the neurodivergent community can lead to the alienation of this
population. Overall, the current section explored the theme of hardships experienced by
neurodivergent employees.
These two sections address Research Question 2 and highlight the challenges of bringing
neurodivergent equity within the workforce. First, this section detailed the theme of the barriers
that face neurodivergent job candidates that exist from job hosting portal through interviews and
the onboarding experiences. Second, the theme of hardships experienced by neurodivergent
employees was explored which describe the challenges from the sensory, social, and
organizational environments. Overall, these sections detail the various difficulties that exist
which can adversely affect the ability of an organization to increase the level of neurodiverse
equity within their company.

81
Analysis of Research Question 3
This section details the findings from the interviews as they relate to the research question of:
How can organizations improve neurodivergent workplace equity?
The neurodiversity experts provided a variety of insights on how to address these past
concerns surrounding neurodivergent workplace equity which are detailed in the current section.
Specifically, the following section details the findings surrounding the best practices according
to the neurodiversity experts for bringing about increased levels of neurodiverse workplace
equity. First, this process will explore the theme of optimizing neurodiverse-focused hiring by
detailing how to improve equity within the interviewing and onboarding elements of the
employment cycle. Second, this will be followed by how to improve neurodivergent equity
within ongoing support as seen through the theme of empowering neurodiverse-inclusive
environments. Overall, this section will answer Research Question 3 on how organizations can
improve neurodivergent workplace equity.
Optimizing Neurodiverse-Focused Hiring (Recruiting Neurodivergent Talent)
The beginning of the employment cycle, the recruitment process, is the initial focus of
this exploration through the examination of, and explanation of, how to increase equity for
neurodivergent candidates. Specifically, this section explores the theme of how organizations can
optimize neurodiverse-focused hiring programs. Initially, this will include how to alter the
interviewing experience to be more equitable to different neurotypes. Second, the interviews as a
measure of assessment will be explored through how to tailor these more intentionally to targeted
position areas. Third, the position of hiring managers will be shown to be at the nexus of
increasing neurodivergent equity within the recruitment process. Fourth, moving from hiring
managers to interviewers and recruiters will be detailed to illustrate how this equity optimization
requires integration across the recruitment experience. Last, awareness will be drawn to how best

82
to bring neurodivergent employee specialization into the ongoing evaluation. Overall, the current
section will present findings and analysis surrounding the theme of how to optimize neurodiverse
focused hiring programs.
To enable neurodivergent job candidates to enter the workforce, there needs to be an
increase of revisions to traditional assessment within the recruitment process. This focus on
optimizing how organizations prepare applicants for success has become a required area of
revision. Companies want to see their employees succeed so this must be transposed into the
hiring process. For example, how interviews are conducted could be altered like job projects in
the sense that individuals can be better prepared ahead of time. This was detailed by Interviewee
I who described this change as follows:
One of the most common things that managers could provide without needing to ask an
employee if they have an accommodation is providing the interview questions in advance
because that typically helps folks who have problems with their executive functioning.
And a lot of managers are very hesitant to do that. Because they think it is cheating.
That's a word that I've heard used before. It's And I always kind of counter it and say,
what do you get before a test, you get a study guide. So, you're not necessarily getting the
answers that the manager wants for these questions, but you're getting the questions in
advance so that you can provide an answer.
This nontraditional, or innovative, revision to the interviewing process allows
neurodivergent, and neurotypical job candidates to prepare the best possible answer to represent
their best selves within the hiring process. This would be akin to allowing employers to prepare a
work proposal or training presentation ahead of time to assess their ability to research, present,
and synthesize the required information. Additionally, this, therefore, reflects the job experience

83
more accurately while also providing helpful accommodations to all applicants providing
increased clarity of expectations, relevant on-the-job knowledge, and a chance to demonstrate
required skill sets. Furthermore, this would take the emphasis off the subjective evaluation of
social norms, cues, and constructs further optimizing the process for the neurodivergent
candidates considering the position. These benefits were reiterated by the interview with
participant E who detailed these alterations by stating that:
So, like, the interview process is one thing and then doing your day-to-day job is
completely different monster. And you're going to need to assess needs based on both
those things. So, like, for instance, somebody may want the questions ahead of time so
they can prepare for a job interview, but they're not going to need their work assignments
ahead of time. Because they'll be able to have time to work on them, they're not going to
be asked to do their work on the spot, like you're doing your work on your spot, but you
have the resources you need to do them. Whereas you don't necessarily have that for a job
interview. So, the processes that you're addressing with your question are different and
so, the needs are different and again, the needs will vary across conditions and
intersections…
This interview excerpt parallels the previous analysis while further emphasizing the
requirement of how the needs of job candidates need to be considered during the optimization of
the interviewing process. Now, this additional quotation is necessary since it expands the current
analysis to also specifically consider the intersections that each neurodivergent job candidate
might have. This is a necessary inclusion since deductively organizations must therefore be
intentional about seeing the impact of each job applicant’s own elements of positionality and
how these intersect with their neurodivergent conditions. This emphasis on the

84
multidimensionality of applicants will create an emphasis for hiring managers to be curious
about every applicant, neurodivergent or neurotypical.
Hiring managers are the next logical step to explore when optimizing neurodiversefocused recruiting practices. Depending on the organization and company structure, this position
will interact with a neurodivergent job candidate at multiple junctures. Because of that, it
becomes vital that hiring managers are informed about the various nuances and manifestations
that belong under the neurodiversity umbrella to bring a focus of neurodiverse equity within their
realm. This emphasis was described by one neurodiversity expert, Interviewee G, who
summarized the focus on hiring managers by stating:
First, I think if you're coming from a place where the hiring manager is the locus point of
this effort, that's a great place to be right. That's kind of the ideal person you want leading
the charge rather than an individual contributor or recruiting or the diversity inclusion
department. Like, I think this really can only work if the hiring manager has their own
vested interest in doing this. But again, it has to be for the right reasons.
This powerful quote iterates the finding of how vital hiring managers are for bringing
about a more optimal recruitment process for neurodivergent candidates. Specifically, this
transcript excerpt also draws focus to the need of believing that neurodiversity-focused hiring is
beneficial. Since there is this requirement for hiring managers to pursue neuro-inclusive
recruitment strategies for their own reasons and with the correct intent, there becomes a need to
have a pervasive positive perception of these interventions across the organizations.
Organizations have more than just hiring managers during the recruitment process so
there is a required emphasis to be placed on any recruiters and interviewers of neurodivergent
candidates. Like previous sections, the emphasis on understanding equity for recruitment of

85
neurodivergent candidates must go beyond, or before, the onboarding process. Because of this
need, the optimization of neurodiverse focused hiring processes must be pervasive throughout
the recruitment process. Neurodiversity expert Interviewee H detailed this necessity by stating
the following about who holds the responsibility for increasing neurodivergent equity:
Yeah, I also think it applies not specifically to hiring managers, but also like interviewers
and recruiters, who may not be the hiring manager who may be doing this on behalf of
hiring manager like I'm, I'm a hiring manager, my interviews and so I do interviews, but
like at bigger companies, you'll have like multiple different layers. areas before someone
talks to the hiring manager before you even get to that point in time. So, I think it's those
additional layers beforehand. That's where you, that's where I think a lot of training has to
happen. Because right now, like, there's a lot of material and resources for two people,
managers and for the hiring manager, which is great. But that's not who a lot of people
speak with on the first phone call…Not with the hiring manager, but with a recruiter of a
screening specialist, whatever title we're gonna use, and that's where I think a lot more
attention could be spent.
So, the optimization of neurodiverse-focused hiring must be focused on every position
within a given organization that might interact with job candidates. In other words, this finding
suggests that to fully create equitable recruitment processes these must include all supervisors or
other staff members which might interact with a job candidate. This finding also suggests that
awareness of neurodiversity should be within interviews but also that those recruiters who are
out at job fairs or other events need to have an awareness of neurodivergence. Likewise, training
initiatives need to go beyond only training administrative supervisors to fully optimize the equity
for neurodivergent candidates at each tier of the recruitment process.

86
Now, if an organization integrates all this training and oversight to optimize the neuroinclusivity of their hiring practices, how do they know these interventions were successful? The
assessment of these interventions is vital due to the unique manifestations, conditions, and needs
of neurodivergent job candidates. Additionally, as the term neurodivergence continues to
develop to include more conditions, needs, and diagnoses, companies must also continue to adapt
to meet the needs of this population. Because of that, there is a need for organizations to form a
group to assess these optimizations continuously and from the perspective of neurodivergence to
be well and intentionally informed for this implementation. This need of intentional assessment
from a neurodivergent focused committee was detailed by Interviewee A who stated that:
…I envision a neurodivergent advisory board working out is that they evaluate what
hiring procedures are they accessible? To potential neurodivergent candidates, how's the
wording of the job description, how’s the interview process? Are there accommodations
offered into the process. So, these are all tasks, I envision an advisory board made up of
neurodivergent people to look at to provide guidance on and help make more accessible.
So, I kind of see the hiring and ongoing support being connected in that way, where
there's always neurodivergent people helping out with implementation and with the
design of different hiring procedures, hiring materials. So, I kind of see them intertwined
in that way.
This quotation provided justification for a neurodivergent-composed assessment
committee to keep companies on the correct track for optimizing their neurodiverse-focused
hiring programs. Additionally, this quotation answers the concerns discussed within the
exploration of Research Question 2 by detailing how this group would be responsible for
evaluating every element of the recruitment process. This would aid in combating unequitable

87
job portals with ill-conceived position descriptions with overbearing visualization and
duplication of redundant information. Likewise, such a group would be able to fine-tune
interview protocol by providing questions in advance that reflect the required skillset of a
position. Furthermore, the intentional involvement and representation of neurodivergent
employees on this committee would answer the concern of such interventions being uninformed
by lived experience from neurodivergent folks. Overall, this quotation highlights the findings of
how to answer previous challenges to neurodiversity-workplace equity while providing
information on how to optimize neurodiverse hiring practices.
This previous section on the recruiting of neurodivergent talent provides an answer to
practical tools organizations can utilize to improve neurodiverse equity within their workforce.
Specifically, this was accomplished by first highlighting the need to provide accommodations
within the interview process so candidates can be well-prepared to represent their strengths.
Second, these findings illustrated the need to be aware of job candidates’ various
intersectionality elements within the interview for additional considerations, understanding, and
accessibility options. Third, this section emphasized how hiring managers exist at the nexus of
the recruitment process and how this position requires specialized training and reasons to
genuinely believe in neurodiverse recruitment. Fourth, the integration of neurodiversity
awareness needs to be integrated into all positions who participate in recruitment to prioritize
equity pervasively throughout recruitment. Last, the ongoing evaluation by a neurodivergentcomposed advisory group was referenced to hold organizations accountable for these equitable
recruitment strategies. Overall, this section detailed findings on how organizations can optimize
neurodiverse-inclusive hiring processes to improve their neurodiversity-workplace equity.

88
Empowering Neurodiverse-Inclusive Environments (Retaining Neurodivergent Talent)
The neurodiversity experts had further thoughts on improving equity which are explored
within the last theme of empowering neurodiverse-inclusive environments. Specifically, this last
exploration of the findings will emphasize ways clear communication of expectations can aid
neurodivergent employees. Second, this theme covers how intentionality of finding equitable
tools will help empower neurodiverse-inclusive practices. Third, awareness of environmental
structures for diverse working spaces is highlighted. Fourth, the importance of psychological
safety will be reinforced to speak to the emotional and social aspects of improving workspaces.
Last, there will be two quotations that emphasize how improving equity requires considerations
of the flexibility of the work location and type to meet individual needs and preferences of
employees. Overall, this last theme of empowering neurodiverse-inclusive environments
provides additional answers to the research question of how workplace neurodivergent equity
can be improved.
When examining employees who work from home, as well as all other locations, there is
significant importance in communicating clear expectations from leadership. This can manifest
in outlining accomplishable objectives, defining availability, and maintaining a practice of
frequent reassessment of these requirements. This helps neurodivergent employees, and
neurotypical employees to know what is expected within their job duties and aids in preventing
unfortunate misalignment with leadership. These routes of improving the workspace were
emphasized by Interviewee C who described this by stating:
So, to give you some examples at home, when you set those guidelines and expectations
of, I need you to be accessible during these hours. When we're meeting, perhaps we need
to be meeting online so I can see you and I can physically, I can personally, the

89
neurotypical right, I feel like I'm engaging with you as though you're here, even though
you're not. So, I really need you to be on. So, that could be something so the clear
expectations and understanding of what's expected, as working from home, when, and
then you let them go, like you empower them to go, Okay, I'm gonna do this, I'm gonna
trust you, and you're gonna trust me, which then leads to that empowerment.
This link between workplace trust, awareness, and empowerment to the intentionality of
communication highlights the benefits of improving clarity of job details. Furthermore, this
expert emphasized relating trust to those staff working from home, which leads to both
individuals being able to accomplish personal and professional requirements. However, this
finding provides insight on how these improvements can be assumed to be relevant for staff
working from the office or hybrid-based settings by providing evidence on how vital this
communication is for all work-related relationships.
These ideas on techniques and tools to improve the work atmosphere were paralleled by
another neurodiversity expert who spoke to the need for these environments to be collaborative.
The link between collaboration, communication, and conscious improvement are aligned within
these findings to stress the need to link with neurodivergent employees. For example,
Interviewee D illustrated how workplace fluidity to meet individual needs often requires moving
away from traditional methodologies which is seen in this excerpt:
I'd say when you look at like outside of that immediate construct, some things to consider
are the tools you use for remote collaboration and things like that, and how inclusive
those tools are, if there's opportunities to communicate in many ways, whether you want
your cameras on or off, whether you want to communicate via chat, or you want to speak,
if you want to be able to rate collaborate in real time with somebody on a document, as

90
opposed to emailing back and forth. I've seen some really advanced things in terms of
like work hours, some people are more productive at different times of the day. So, if
there is the possibility in your organization to be able to offer flexible work hours in
times that work for you.
Technological prowess from both neurodivergent employees and supervisors can be
utilized to empower both parties to be more collaborative moving forward. This area of potential
future training of how to find ways to utilize innovative tools, programs, and collaborative
techniques provide a foundation of community and collaboration. Furthermore, this ability to
look outside-of-the-box of traditional methodologies create an environment of curiosity where
everyone is attempting to find the best solution for collaboration. Therefore, this finding provides
an example of how working from home can spark creativity and community while also
empowering the workspace inclusive practices for those that work at the office or hybrid.
Office-based environments also have specific routes for improving this space for
increased neurodiverse inclusion. The innovation of being able to either customize one’s
workspace physically or having alternative options to work provide increased workplace for
neurodiverse employees. Specific examples of how corporate office space can be created for
empowerment of employees can also be a source of generating recommendations for remotebased staff for office stipends or home revisions to maximize environmental benefits. Initially,
ideas for offices to innovate these atmospheric customizations was iterated by neurodiversity
expert Interviewee F who poses some valuable questions as seen here:
So, I mean, I think it's a matter of thinking through how do you create zones? Maybe in
your office, right, are there? Are there fragrance-free zones? Are there dim light zones?
Are there places where people can? I don't know, like, they call them hot desks. Right? I

91
think that the hot desk environment. Are there some of those that can be enclosed offices
and not like open spaces?
The integration of zone-based methodologies for the optimizing of a neuro-inclusive
office space allows organizations to aid all employees by having their preferred environment.
Likewise, the ability to change throughout a workday, or for specific tasks, by empowering
individuals, neurodivergent or neuronormative, to constantly adapt their space to maximize their
ability to focus, be productive, collaborate, and meet work expectations. Furthermore, this
intentionality to be aware of multisensory elements of a workspace provides organizations with a
language to ask what neurodivergent employees might like their space, at the office or at home,
to look like. Thus, the current finding highlights the need for corporations to intentionally ask
and provide examples of workspace revisions to further the equitable space.
While considering the physical alterations of a work environment, the next emphasis on
improvements shifts to awareness of emotional and social variables. Creating and maintaining
psychological safety is required to develop more significant neurodiverse inclusions within the
workplace. This requirement of prioritization of relational aspects of the work environment
speaks to an organization’s ability to bring employees together by adding precautions to prevent
the isolation of neurodivergent employees. This framework was described by Interviewee H by
their emphasis as seen in the following quotation:
You want to create an equitable space for everybody to thrive, such that the
neurodivergent people don't feel ostracized or out of the loop or otherwise alienated. Do
you really want to build a space where everybody has permission to say what they feel,
do what they feel and can be honest and forthcoming about things.

92
The converse of the current quote was seen within the exploration of Research Question 2
which described the challenge of division between neurodivergent and neuronormative
employees and this juxtaposition emphasizes the relevance of an equitable space. Furthermore,
this blueprint of creating a space built on trust, open communication, and authentic experience is
seen here to lead to increased neurodiverse inclusion. Corporations must prioritize training,
policies, and leadership empowerment for how to best create an atmosphere of psychological
safety, genuine interaction, and employee unity within their organization.
The last finding presented here under the theme of empowering neurodiverse-inclusive
environments examines two quotations that highlight additional ways for employees to
customize their workspace. These two contrasting findings emphasize how this flexibility can be
seen when looking at individual employees and how the neurodivergent community needs to be
seen as individual. The ability for organizations to see every neurodivergent employee as distinct
fosters additional inclination for continued curiosity and willingness to customize the space for
each employee. This requirement of prioritizing the preference of each person was provided by
Interviewee I as seen in their proposal here:
So, I feel like that is really it comes down again to that that thing that I mentioned earlier,
where you have to listen to the individual needs of the employee. If they feel like they do
best in a remote environment, you need to take that chance and trust them and give them
the remote environment. And if there's a performance issue down the road, that can be
addressed. But listening to those employee needs first should be like at the top of your
mind. Because there's always going to be people who want to be in office versus be at
home. But you at least need to give them the chance to show that they have the capability
to work in that remote environment or work by themselves in an office space.

93
This finding iterates the requirement of seeing the link between employee motivation,
engagement, and performance to their ability and control their space. In other words, if an
organization desires to empower a neurodiverse-inclusive space they must exert their power to
have more options for employees to work from the location of their choice. Furthermore, there is
a need for each neurodivergent, or neuronormative, employee being seen as a unique being with
their own preferences and how these needs differ between staff but also across projects or time.
The differences between individuals are further illustrated by Interviewee E who presented a
personal example to illustrate this perspective:
And the longer answer is not everybody is going to be able to work in the office versus
not everybody's going to be able to work remotely. Like for instance, you can look at my
direct family, my little brother, the idea of working remote, horrifies him to no end he
wants to work 100% in office in person, he's a very sociable person, whereas I'm like,
stay away from me, I want to get my stuff done. And I want to do it quickly. And I want
to do it thoroughly. And I don't want to talk to you while I'm trying to do it. Um, so even
when we have the same diagnosis, we're both autistic and yet that's a good example of we
have very different preferences and needs. My brother has a need to be social and in
person, I just don't have that need. And in fact, because I have at the intersection of
ADHD being impaired are saying really does interfere with my ability to get my work
done. So, and get my work done correctly. So, yes, in that the TLDR is yes, it's going to
be different. And the differences are going to be different, again, per individual
conditions, intersections and lived experiences.
The customization of working remotely, office-based, or a combination of both is
emphasized within this final quotation which sees this as a route to honor the unique dimensions

94
of every employee. Likewise, the personal example of how these differences of preferred
location can vary significantly between close relatives further pushes for a need for organizations
to see each neurodivergent, or neuronormative, individual as possessing their unique
requirements. This quotation also provides evidence of the importance of considering the
intersectionality of every employee and how these multidimensional elements might impact their
workplace preferences. When considering these last two quotations, organizations need to
consider the availability of all positions to have flexibility to work remotely at the office, or in
combination with increasing their neurodiverse inclusivity.
When considering the final theme of empowering neurodiverse-inclusive environments
within organizations there was evidence for investment within various experiential factors. First,
this section provided evidence for organizations to prioritize how to have clear communication to
employees so there is an alignment between staff and their supervisors from intentional dialogue
of job expectations. Second, findings suggested that inclusion can be developed through training
on, and utilization of, innovative solutions to provide individualized collaboration, productivity,
and ability to complete workplace requirements. Third, physical customizations which provide,
at home or the office, the ability for neurodivergent employees to alter the multisensory aspects
of their workspace was linked to increased equity. Fourth, the social elements of workspaces
being connected to the psychological safety of employees was stressed as another form of an
atmospheric alteration for greater inclusivity. Finally, two quotations were provided on
professional and personal expressions of a need to provide neurodivergent individuals with the
ability to work remote or from an office to provide acknowledgement of their unique needs,
preferences, and elements of intersectionality. Overall, these various excerpts from

95
neurodiversity specialists explain how organizations can improve workplace equity by
empowering neurodiverse-inclusive environments.
Summary & Conclusion
The current chapter provided an analysis of workplace neurodiversity by examining study
participants’ demographic information and expertise. Initially, the participants were seen to have
a legitimate ability to speak to this focus by highlighting their past professional, personal lives,
and experience on neurodivergent equity practices. Furthermore, this chapter explored the three
research questions to answer what workplace neurodiversity equity looks like, is challenged by,
and improved within organizations. Overall, this chapter provides evidence to answer these
questions while further reinforcing past referenced literature.
When considering the demographic information of the nine final research participants, it
is necessary to reiterate their information. Every one of these participants met the requirement of
having worked to improve neurodivergent workplace equity 100 percent, and courageously
disclosed one or more conditions of neurodivergence. This is vital to reiterate as the sample for
the current dissertation has two forms of credibility with this combination of professionals
experiencing increasing neurodiverse-inclusion and personal journeys of navigating the
workforce as neurodivergent employees. Additionally, when examining the intersectionality of
these participants there are representations of male, female, and nonbinary genders which speaks
to how the interviews provide evidence across this positionality type. Overall, the current
findings are founded upon these neurodiversity experts along with their personal and
professional expertise on neurodivergent equity within the workforce.
This foundation, through the application of Thematic Content Analysis of interview
transcripts, generated a variety of codes then ultimately six distinct themes divided into

96
intentional pairs for each research question. First, this exploration of findings detailed how the
themes of ‘equitable hiring and onboarding practices’ along with ‘inclusive workplace
characteristics’ provide evidence to answer what neurodivergent equity looks like at the
workplace. Likewise, the challenges of achieving this workplace neurodiverse equity were
detailed through the themes of the ‘barriers faced by neurodiverse applicants’ and the ‘hardships
experienced by neurodivergent employees.’ Last, the final two themes of ‘optimizing
neurodiverse-focused hiring’ and ‘empowering neurodiverse-inclusive environments’ were
contrasted to show how workplace neurodiversity equity can be improved. Therefore, the current
chapter detailed how nine key neurodiversity specialists stated, from professional and firsthand
experiences, evidence surrounding workplace neurodiversity equity.

97
Chapter Five: Recommendations
This dissertation explored the professional and personal lived experience of
neurodivergent job candidates and employees. The purpose of this study was to contribute to the
available research on neurodiversity as this concept pertains to empowering neurodivergent
employees throughout the employment cycle, from recruitment to retention, and to bring this
support to both remote and office-based work locations. Overall, this study adds to the literature
on workplace neurodiverse equity by providing insight from neurodiversity-focused leaders and
consults who also disclosed their own lived experiences of being neurodivergent.
This last chapter will provide a synthesis of the previous literature juxtaposed with
additional evidence from research participants to illustrate three distinct recommendations
founded on the six themes for improving neurodivergent workplace equity. Previous sections
detailed the importance of the contrast between recruiting and retaining neurodivergent talent
and the differences between how neurodivergent-inclusive equity will manifest differently within
office and remote settings. Because of this, the following chapter will link a recommendation to
each of the three research questions and will integrate past research and interview evidence
within these sections. These elements will also be related to Social Cognitive Theory (Bandura,
2000) as the theoretical framework of this dissertation. Likewise, each recommendation will be
relevant to each step of the employment cycle by explicit links to the conceptual framework of
this dissertation. This integration will provide recommendations that address all previous themes
and that can be transposed across focuses to recruit and retain neurodivergent talent while also
being applicable across job environments of remote, office, and hybrid. Overall, this concluding
chapter will provide valuable and relevant applications of previous evidence for how to

98
understand, maintain, and improve equity across neurotypes within the workforce systematically
and intentionally.
Summary of Findings
This section will include conclusions by summarizing previous literature and interview
findings to increase understanding of neurodiversity equity at the workplace. Within Chapter
Four, evidence was presented to answer the three research questions of the current study and the
generated themes from that analysis will now be integrated into current research. This
progression will be further integrated into earlier chapters of this dissertation through the
reference to the problem of practice and conceptual framework as a total progression. This will
provide a brief synthesis of literature, thematic content analysis, and the foundation of the
conceptual framework to generate three distinct recommendations. Overall, this will provide a
link through all previous evidence to provide practical routes organizations can use to
understand, reinforce, and improve neurodiverse workplace equity.
Research Question 1
This section provides a conclusion for the findings from the interviews juxtaposed to
current literature to answer the first research question: What does neurodivergent equity look like
in the workplace?
As argued by Fletcher and Beuregard (2022), organizations must be aware of the various
positionalities that their staff possess to increase equity through building in advancement of
equality for each employee and their intersectionality. This is reinforced by additional findings
that emphasize the intersection between workplace equity and staff psychological safety, wellbeing, and job experience (Berstein et al, 2020; Joyce et al., 2022; Sasaki et al., 2022; Wilcox &
Koontz, 2022). Moreover, organizations must put forth effort to create equity versus simply

99
stating they employ DEI-related programs but then do not back these initiatives with action
(Chiru et al., 2022). This research parallels the themes identified within Chapter Four of how
equity is seen within hiring practices and inclusive workplace characteristics. For example, the
concept of workplace safety, physical, emotional, and psychological, was emphasized within
eight out of nine interviews and linked to employee support, open communication, and trust. For
one such quote, Interviewee I concisely concluded how “psychological safety is extremely
important to not just neurodivergent employees, but everybody.” Overall, this contrast between
current research and expert testimony illustrates how providing workplace safety is integral to
building equity for all employees, especially those who have positionalities associated with being
marginalized within the workforce.
Previously, when the themes of ‘equitable hiring and onboarding practices’ and ‘inclusive
workplace characteristics’ were explored, these themes further highlight the needs for
psychological safety as a route to measure workplace equity. Furthermore, this linked need to
focus on how to achieve equity within recruiting and retaining neurodivergent talent illustrates
the conceptual framework of pervasive workplace inclusion. The ability to build equity
throughout the cycle of employment allows for the presence of psychological, emotional, and
physical safety for neurodivergent employees along with everyone else. Furthermore, this
connection to the conceptual framework is also aligned with social cognitive theory due to SCT
speaking to the awareness of how all these elements are interconnected. Because of this, SCT
provides a link for the recruiting and retaining of neurodivergent talent functions within the
nexus between how individuals help themselves with how organizational leaders can build a safe
environment free of discrimination and inclusive for all employees (Austin & Pisano, 2017;
Chapman, 2021; Ezerins et al., 2023). Overall, this golden thread between the conceptual and

100
theoretical frameworks contrasted with the findings from thematic content analysis places the
emphasis on equity being seen through the presence of genuine and pervasive safety for all
employees throughout the employment cycle and organization.
This understanding of neurodiverse-workplace equity speaks to the initial problem of
practice of this dissertation by showing what the workforce needs to look like if there is hope of
increasing the presence of neurodivergent workers. Furthermore, the link to social, emotional,
and physical safety within the workforce as a sign of safety provides organizations with a
template for how to work against issues of bias, discrimination, and intolerance of
neurodiversity. The ability for this safety being created for equity will also be characterized by a
space of transparency, curiosity, and willingness to learn about others within the hiring and
ongoing support of neurodivergent individuals. Last, this new perception of neurodiversity as
something that requires intentional individualization of focus is a stark juxtaposition to the
previous medical model that neurodivergence must be cured or fixed. Overall, the emphasis on
how equity can be seen through communication, openness, and safety within the workforce
provides a conclusion of how neurodiversity-workplace equity can manifest.
Research Question 2
This section provides a conclusion for the findings from the interviews contrasted to
current literature to answer the second research question: What are the challenges of
Neurodivergent Equity in the Workplace?
When considering the difficulties faced by neurodivergent employees or job seekers these
have been shown to particularly impact this population, along with other underrepresented
groups, since the Covid-19 pandemic (Jashinsku et al., 2021). Additionally, the neurodiverse
community has been frequently misunderstood since being seen only as a population who have a

101
variety of deficits that require medical or other intervention to be fixed (Pellicano & Houting,
2022). In contrast, the neurodivergent community has also been impacted by the prevalence of
stereotypes which create unrealistic fears or expectations for how the individual will act or
contribute within the workforce (Draaisma, 2009; Sedgwick et al., 2018). Overall, this
population has been marginalized by the lack of research connecting neurodiversity to workplace
metrics of employee performance, engagement, or burnout (Wolbring & Lillywhite, 2023). This
restatement of literature highlights the difficulties that neurodivergent individuals face within the
employment cycle.
Furthermore, when considering the results from Thematic Content Analysis, these themes
of the barriers and hardships experienced by neurodivergent individuals reinforce these
challenges. For example, five of the research participants specifically referenced the negative
impact or prevalence of biases and stigmas that negatively impact neurodivergent individuals
within the workplace. In fact, Interviewee G emphasized this within hiring specifically by
detailing how:
And these hiring managers in teams virtually never have the competencies to check their
own biases or, or care that someone has neurodivergent, or the ways in or whatever just
might be playing in. And on the flip side, what makes neurodiversity different and even
more challenging, and so many other diversity categories is that people have a lot of
misconceptions about different forms of neurodiversity.
This quotation continues the trend of information pointing out the level of
misunderstanding that neurodivergent individuals interact within the workforce. Likewise,
Interviewee B emphasized how this area of stigmas is so important that every leader should
receive anti-bias training as a requirement of their position. There are a variety of additional

102
challenges which can be reiterated here from Chapter Four such as the impact of unequitable
environments, inflexibility of job expectations, or multisensory elements being overwhelming
within hiring and office-based settings. Overall, the findings summarized here suggest a
continued theme of a range of challenges throughout the employment cycle which manifest
differently due to the unique characteristics of each neurodivergent person.
The link to how each neurodivergent person may experience unique needs, frustrations or
barriers to equity is a further representation of the current conceptual framework. Awareness of
how the job areas of hiring, HR support, ongoing supervisor involvement, and environmental
factors bring to light what the employment cycle may look like across a range of individuals.
Similarly. Schunk and Usher (2019) highlight that SCT perspective would involve awareness of
how individuals are impacted by their own beliefs and behaviors while also their environment.
This theoretical perspective illustrates how the unique qualities of each neurodivergent
individual will have their own characteristics while also being impacted by their environment.
This provides a more thorough understanding of the challenges that face neurodivergent
employees and job seekers since the organizational atmosphere can provide various barriers.
Overall, this section summarized past findings on the challenges that exist within the
environment of the workforce that are faced by neurodivergent individuals; moreover, this
highlighted how literature and interview findings iterate the negative impact of stereotypes and
misunderstandings of neurodiversity and how this negatively impacts equity. Also, the link
between the identified themes of barriers within recruitment and hardships impacting retention
along with the conceptual framework of pervasive workplace equity highlights the adverse
consequences of the lack of neurodivergent equity. Therefore, the current section provides a

103
synthesis of previous research and current interview themes to provide an overview of the
challenges that impact workplace neurodivergent equity.
Research Question 3
This section provides a conclusion for the findings from the interviews contrasted to
current literature to answer the third research question: How can organizations improve
neurodivergent workplace equity?
When examining the best practices for improving neurodivergent-inclusive workplaces
there are a variety of strategies which are present within literature and the interview themes of
the current dissertation. First, providing more significant equity within recruiting, interviewing,
and onboarding neurodivergent talent must be considered. Within job postings, portals and
descriptions organizations must provide the utmost clarity through ensuring that every position
advertised clearly provides transparency of the required skill sets (Davies et al., 2023; Russo et
al., 2023). Next, there is a requirement for the communication and interview environment to have
elements of customization that are available to neurodivergent candidates such as the ability to
be in person or virtual (Mellifont et al., 2022; Patton, 2019). Other environmental considerations
need to ensure an equitable atmosphere such as being aware of the multi-sensory factors of the
interviewing space to further create an inclusive space (Davies et al., 2023). For the content of
these interviews, increased neurodiverse equity is associated with a prioritization of evaluating
job requirements over subjective social skills or charismatic prowess (Doyle & McDowall, 2022;
Morehouse, 2023). Overall, this literature summary provides a reminder of the necessary equity
elements for recruiting neurodivergent talent.
This information was seen to be aligned with the theme of how to optimize neurodiversefocused hiring practices as seen by analyzing interview transcripts. Specifically, eight out of the

104
nine research participants spoke to the necessity of considering the interview process when it
comes to creating equitable best practices. One excerpt from Interviewee A especially parallels
the previous research by stressing the following:
When it comes to like the interview stage, I think it's important that the hiring manager
whoever sent and tweak that interview offer, explicitly asks if there's any combinations or
adjustments that you might want to make before the interview, such as like having
questions ahead of time or having the interview done through Zoom or another alternate
that I think being explicitly asked that question is really important, because we might go
into job. And like, I experienced this my first, during my first interview, I did not know
that interview accommodations were a thing, because they didn't teach me that in school.
So, I think it's important that it's explicitly stated that you can ask or requests for
accommodations and interview process.
This brief statement reinforces the previous literature on the importance of presenting
accommodations to applicants, especially on ways that they can alter the process to be more
equitable to their own preferences and needs. The SCT concepts highlight the relationship
between personal behaviors and environmental elements being intertwined by placing the
emphasis on the interviewee asking for these accommodations. This section mentioned how
applicants do not know they can ask, which reinforces the need for support throughout the
employment process as illustrated by the conceptual framework. These findings provide a
glimpse into the best practices on how neurodivergent equity is improved within organizations.
Similarly, research on retaining neurodivergent talent provides insight on how to continue
to reinforce these equitable practices for ongoing support during employment. This can be seen
through an adjacent answer to Research Question 1 which emphasized psychological safety, so

105
organizations need to improve these working conditions of comfortability, community, and
feeling cared for to increase equity (Mellifont et al., 2022; Narenthiran et al., 2022; Vogus &
Taylor, 2018). There has also been evidence arguing for special emphasis being placed on
creating increased clarity of job expectations, project deadlines, or other forms of checklists to
aid in decreasing workplace confusion (Hogstedt et al., 2022). Further equitable options have
included alternative engagement options within meetings such as using closed captions or
transcripts, note-taking software, recording options or one-on-one debriefing (Das et al., 2021;
Kalmanovich-Cohen & Stanton, 2023; Mellifont et al., 2022). Also, when considering locationspecific improvements, particular care should be given to creating a multisensory experience
which provides alterations for preferences around sound, light, noise, smells, temperature, social
involvement, and additional factors. Overall, this brief emphasis on research illustrates a
requirement for improving equity within organizations is to adapt the physical, emotional,
relational, and professional characteristics to address employees’ unique needs.
When considering these dimensions of improving equity for neurodivergent employees,
this was supported within the identified theme of empowering neurodiverse-inclusive
environments. In fact, eight out of nine interviewees reiterated how vital environmental factors
are in increasing the equity for neurodivergent employees within the workplace. As one example,
Interviewee D mentioned their work helping create more inclusive spaces by detailing “…some
of my work is working with the built environment and what that looks like from an inclusion
perspective. Right. So that's where I work with architects in terms of the sensory environmental,
the lighting, the sound, all of that.” The requirement here is of how neurodivergent equity
requires more than only training through the physical augmentation of the workspace to be more

106
sensitive to neurodiversity. Furthermore, Interviewee F pushes this further by linking in the
social aspects of an environment by highlighting:
…I think that there's a piece of this when we think about employees in the workplace,
where we need to actually recognize that the workplace itself, like the environment, like
an office, or whatever it is, can add additional stress. And in a lot of ways, it can add
additional stress, because if you're in with people you don't know you might be masking
and camouflaging more, and that takes an emotional and physical toll on people.
Therefore, there is a need to decrease the feelings that work areas require neurodivergent
individuals to mask through creating an atmosphere of physical and emotional comfort. This
combination of quotes highlighting the multifactor elements of an equitable environment
reinforce the conceptual framework of the need of pervasive inclusion throughout an
employment cycle. Further, this emphasizes the need for employees and organizations to work
together to identify unique needs and accommodations in line with SCT by honoring the
reciprocal relationship between a staff member, supervisor, and organization. Hence, these
factors relate also to the problem of the current dissertation through highlighting how the lack of
neurodivergent equity can be improved for employees.
The previous summaries provide a review, synthesis, and further emphasis on the
findings of the current dissertation. First, this detailed how neurodiversity equity within the
workplace is exemplified when psychological safety is fostered, maintained, and felt by all
employees, especially those within marginalized groups. Second, the challenges of
neurodiversity equity at work are referenced to include the presence of biases, stereotypes, and
misunderstandings of neurodivergence. Third, for improving workplace equity, emphasis on the
various dimensions of a working environment needs to be intentionally considered, building

107
inclusive practices within social, physical, emotional, and personal aspects. Each of these three
research questions collected past research and current interview findings then aligned with social
cognitive theory and the conceptual framework of this dissertation. Overall, this provides a
summary including all findings built upon theoretical foundations to highlight the key takeaways
from previous chapters.
Recommendations for Practice
The following section provides three distinct recommendations for building neurodiverse
focused workplaces for organizations to build more significant equity at each tier of the
employment process. First, the implementation of informed individualization of employee
support will be detailed through providing examples of all the ways the work environment can be
transformed for every employee. Second, utilizing employee resource groups specifically
focused on furthering neurodivergent equity will be detailed. Third, the executive level of
organizations must be aware, represent, and empower neurodiversity from the top to the rest of
the organization. Additionally, each of these recommendations highlights how there is a
reciprocal relationship between the employee, their choices, and their environmental factors such
as the space and support as outlined through an SCT-informed perspective. Overall, these three
recommendations provide how companies can intentionally work to create more equitable spaces
for all neurotypes within each stage of the employment process speaking to the conceptual
framework of this dissertation.
As a summary of these recommendations and as convenient way to preview the
remainder of this section, the following table describes each of the three along with their required
components needed to bring them about.

108
Table 7
Recommendations & Components of Effective Implementation
Recommendation Required Components
1) Informed individualization
of neurodivergent support
A. Customize work location, communication, and
environment to employee preferences to engage, participant,
and collaborate comfortably.
B. Provide meeting or interview questions in advance to
push accessibility and focus such as transcripts, closed
captions, or other word-text programs.
C. Utilization of a strength-based approach to identifying the
skills, motivations, and passions of each employee then
building their position and career advancement plan.
2) Neurodivergent focused
employee resource groups
A. Emphasize the creation of psychological safety within an
ERG to facilitate openness, transparency, and authenticity
then equip to implement meaningful changes.
B. Empower the ERG to communicate across neurotypes and
learning styles to increase their ability to gather information
and implement initiatives.
C. Ensure neurodivergent representation and consultation
within the ERG to have the group truly be aware of
neurodiversity for effectiveness and employee engagement.
3) Leadership neurodiversity
awareness, support, and
representation
A. Executives need to model by authentically disclosing,
discussing, and demonstrating neurodivergence.
B. Organizations need to create pathways for neurodivergent
advancement professionally and into leadership positions.
C. Leaders need to learn, understand, and demonstrate
neurodivergent inclusive practices, preferences, and
vocabulary.
D. Company stakeholders need to see neurodivergent equity
within their workforce as more than only a moral imperative
by understanding the financial incentives of these changes.
The following sections will expand upon this table which will include the incorporation of
the conceptual framework of this dissertation in conjunction with a reiteration of the study’s

109
findings and relevant research. These recommendations will also be relevant to all neurodivergent
individuals which include ADHD, ASD, Dyslexia and an expanding list of additional conditions,
diagnoses, and needs. This will therefore be a continuation and conglobulation of all previous
chapters of the current dissertation.
Recommendation 1: Informed individualization of neurodivergent support
The first recommendation for more significant neurodiversity-workplace equity is the
implementation of universal design interventions (UDIs) which are available to every employee.
For example, these include a variety of customization such as providing alternative options
flexible for every individual such as changes to communication, position duties, work
environment, location to work, and other potentialities (Narenthiran et al., 2022; KalmanovichCohen & Stanton, 2023; Tomczak & Ziemiański, 2023). When considering the consistent
emphasis within previous literature and findings on the variety of accommodations, changes, and
forms of support that can be offered there is a requirement to individualize these to each
employee. These forms of individualized support and awareness must also extend to allow for
the diversification of social, cultural, and relational norms including preferences of eye contact,
tone, nonverbal communication, and other factors (Hillary, 2020).
Furthermore, there needs to be individualization available from interviews through
ongoing support and for these options to be broadcast, clearly detailed, and given to all
employees. This initiative-taking, intentional, and open communication surrounding potential
accommodations can normalize the utilization of these supports without requiring the disclosure
of a neurodivergent-related condition. The adaptation and awareness of neurodivergent practices
by neurotypical individuals has been seen to improve interactions between neurotypes (Jurgens,
2020). Also, these interventions would then be a benefit across all neurotypes leading to the

110
ability to positively influence the workplace social environment for every employee. This also
provides the opportunity to minimize the alienation of minority groups within the organization
such as neurodivergent employees.
To further emphasize the array of options of UDIs there is a necessity to reflect on the
previous findings from neurodiversity experts who have aided companies to increase
neurodivergent informed best practices. When examining the interviews eight out of nine
explicitly referenced individualizing support to neurodivergent employees. With the range of
ways support can be individualized here are some options highlighted by these neurodiversity
experts. First, there is a need to provide the ability to flexibility of work location,
communication, and participation as detailed by Interviewee D here:
“So, it is really individualized. But I think the general guidance that I give in terms of
remote versus in person is as much flexibility as you can, right. So, people can choose
whether going into the office or working remotely works better for them…there's
opportunities to communicate in many ways, whether you, you want your cameras on or
off, whether you want to communicate via chat, or you want to speak, if you want to be
able to rate collaborate in real time with somebody on a document, as opposed to
emailing back and forth. I've seen some really advanced things in terms of like work
hours, some people are more productive at different times of the day.”
This excerpt speaks to how to alter the major elements of a position and how we expect
employees to engage within a team, project, or other collaboration. The alternative options to
work at separate times of day, physical location, or office settings further provide ways to
empower both office and remote employees. Additionally, this provides a vocabulary for
supervisors and HR-related positions to engage their employees on what they need by offering a

111
range of potential position changes. Overall, the first part of the implementation of UDIs
recommendation requires the customization of working location, environmental spaces,
communication, and collaboration of distinct roles to aid neurodivergent employees while also
helping all neurotypes.
The next form of UDIs can be seen through providing alternative ways to communicate
with colleagues, within meetings, to maximize attention, consumption, and engagement within
meetings. The ability to apply accommodations which aid neurodivergent employees while not
harming others were detailed simple supports which can be implemented within any workplace
as seen by this excerpt from Interviewee H:
In the case of neurodiversity. Like there are other ways of altering his space to become
more equitable, such that it does not adversely affect other people's working experiences,
but still allows that narrative urgent person to do better work, like something that I think
is a very simple thing that every company could benefit from is like, meeting agendas.
There's nobody in the world who would complain about having a meeting agenda for a
meeting. And for folks who have ADHD or ADD or focus issues, they may benefit
greatly from other meeting agenda, and somebody who has good attention to detail may
only benefit marginally by it, but nobody is going to be harmed by a meeting agenda.
This example of meeting agendas as one example of UDIs for communication is aligned
with previous routes of improving equity such as using closed captions, live transcripts,
receiving questions in advance, and other forms to adapt to communication preferences.
Additional options might be included here too as organizations are able to survey or otherwise
identify the communication preferences for their employees. As this array of extra minor changes

112
which can assist neurodivergent staff or applicants are implemented then organizations will be
able to have various UDIs within their organization.
Another avenue of tailoring support to each employee is by identifying their unique
strengths, passions, and goals. For example, this awareness of the skill sets possessed and aspired
to obtain provides routes for creating individualized support, positions, and job progressions.
Likewise, these place the advancement of potential career opportunities on what employees want
to grow on versus ambiguous social standards. This emphasis on personal passion provides an
ability to aid in motivating employees by honoring their achievements and integrating their
unique aspirations into their daily position duties. This perspective was emphasized by
Interviewee A who argued for previously identified UDIs and this strengths-forwards perspective
of empowerment:
I also think a strengths-based approach to management can really help when it comes to
like one-on-one supervision, and recognizing the strengths of the divergent person, and
working on owning it on and building upon those strengths. And helping the
neurodivergent person see that they do have strengths and that I think that can really help
build their self-confidence or self-esteem and their motivation, knowing that they can do
something well. Because some neurodivergent might go into the first job with a lot of
things already, because of past experiences of being told what they can't do, what they're
messing up, or what backpedaling out. So, I think having a different approach where you
focus in on your strengths and focusing on what they can do can really help that selfconfidence, and they can help their self-esteem and it can really benefit the employer and
the organization overall.

113
The longer quotation here provides a link through these three elements of informed
individualization of support for neurodivergent individuals within the workforce. Likewise, this
emphasis on aiding an individual but impacting the larger ecosystem for the better further argues
for the benefits of using UDIs to increase workplace equity. This ecosystem-focused approach
links to the reciprocal relationship that exists within SCT while highlighting the benefit of a
pervasively supportive perspective from the conceptual framework. The last example, a
strengths-based approach, also responds to previous concerns of the negative biases and positive
stereotypes that afflict neurodiverse individuals by empowering each person to identify their own
skills, passions, and pursuits. This social-based approach allows for an environment specifically
adapted for neurodivergent individuals to create awareness, space, and tools for these employees
along with those that are neurotypical (Jurgens, 2020). These elements allow organizations to
prioritize the individual needs of each employee which includes ADHD, ASD, and Dyslexia
along with the ever-evolving list of additional conditions that are included within neurodiversity.
Furthermore, this maintains the emphasis that there is a societal responsibility to adapt support to
the unique traits, types, and manifestations of neurodivergence seen across societies and cultures
(Rosqvist et al., 2020). Overall, the first recommendation is for organizations to provide
individualized support to all employees using UDIs within their workplace. Likewise, there are
three distinct areas for these UDIs to be applied as defined by the following list:
A. Customize work location, communication, and environment to employee preferences
to engage, participant, and collaborate comfortably.
B. Provide meeting or interview questions in advance to push accessibility and focus
such as transcripts, closed captions, or other word-text programs.

114
C. Utilization of a strength-based approach to identifying the skills, motivations, and
passions of each employee then building their position and career advancement plan.
These three target applications of UDI for neurodivergent equity show how this
recommendation is manifested through providing an ecological perspective in enriching an
organization to achieve workplace neurodiversity equity.
Recommendation 2: Neurodivergent-focused employee resource groups
As support is implemented within organizations for neurodivergent employees it becomes
essential to ensure that these changes continue to provide equity. The second recommendation is
then the implementation of neurodiversity-focused employee resource groups (ERGs) focused on
constantly supporting neurodivergent employees and an equitable organizational space. This
emphasis on creating neurodiversity-focused policy change is essential to provide audits of
accommodations using employee focus groups with neurodivergent representation (Doyle &
McDowall, 2022; Mellifont et al., 2022; Rosales et al., 2023). Moreover, these groups would
provide the ability for neurodivergent employees to network, mentor, and support each other
while ensuring that equitable practices are being implemented organizationally (Scott et al.,
2018; Patton, 2019; Rosales et al., 2023). The research here emphasizes how the use of ERGs
can aid in giving neurodivergent employees a voice and control over their workspace while also
providing social support. These ERGs also would be given the authority and ability to assess
each stage of the employment process and advocate for office- or remote-based employees.
Overall, the use of ERGs acknowledges the conceptual framework of pervasive employee
support by focusing on neurodiversity throughout the employment cycle.
Similarly, within the current study, six of the nine interviewees specifically referenced
the utilization of ERGs within organizations. The following will highlight three distinct routes to

115
empower and implement ERGs within companies for the most significant improvement for
neurodivergent equity. First, there is a need for these groups to be known throughout an
organization to provide a comfortable space for neurodivergent individuals to share their needs,
concerns, and requests. Second, empower these ERGs to have the ability to communicate, and
include representation, across neurotypes to advance the group’s ability to assess what staff
require. Third, work to ensure that neurodivergent voices are heard by this group through
neurodiverse membership and other ways to consult with neurodivergent perspectives. These
factors will aid in the implementation of ERGs for the benefit of increased neurodivergent equity
within an organization.
Within the implementation of ERGs there is a requirement to ensure that these are created
and maintained in such a way that they are a source of comfort, psychological safety, and
inclusion. For example, these groups need to be accessible where individuals can join without the
need to self-disclose a diagnosis and feel this is a place where they will be accepted, advocated
for, and otherwise supported. This prioritization of what such a group needs to include was
emphasized when Interviewee A clarified:
And it's important that everyone within an organization feel supported and safe and
accepted for who they are. I also think it's important that different organizations create
different advisory boards for disabled people. Because a lot of disabled people feel scared
or feel anxious or nervous about disclosing and having an advisory board could serve as
like it does between for the board of directors and the employees working in an
organization. And it can help people who might not feel as comfortable sharing your
diagnosis, it might help them realize that they have allies and organizations are willing to

116
help them out and are willing to advocate on their behalf and are willing to take steps to
make the organization more accessible and more inclusive.
This highlights how the objective of an ERG needs to be primarily focused on the
creation of a space culture, space, and team within the organization. The ability for
neurodivergent individuals to feel this safety, in addition to knowing key advocates and supports,
is essential for advancing equity within the workplace. Likewise, the intermediary relationship
between an ERG and the wider organization functions within this nexus of advocacy through
being able to transport the needs of neurodivergent employees to executive stakeholders to
initiate required alterations. Overall, this first point clarifies how ERGs need to have the specific
purpose of creating, maintaining, and evaluating neurodivergent safety, inclusion, and equity
within the workforce.
Similarly, to clarify purpose, ERGs must be equipped to speak across neurotypes, given
awareness of learning styles, and allowed to conduct organizationally wide initiatives.
Neurodiverse-inclusive ERGs need to have the ability to seek out and to assess the current needs
of the neurodivergent community within the workforce and at each stage of the employment
process. Additionally, these ERGs must be empowered to conduct relevant training, awareness,
and other communication to spread awareness of neurodiversity throughout an organization. This
advocacy and education for companies can manifest in a variety of ways which can be seen
through the following excerpt from Interviewee C who declared:
One is having a focus group setup focus groups within your organization, that include
supervisors, and the doers of all different neurotypes, almost like, you know, maybe an
employee resource group… having those focus groups to truly again, curiosity seek to
understand what's happening, what's not happening, what they need, how to most

117
appropriately work together across learning styles. So, the visual, the auditory, the
kinesthetic, the multimodal learner, like I talk a lot about that. And in the sessions that I
do, too, but having those focus groups getting some of that information, then from there,
having an understanding or diversity training, and Q&A session and interactive
conversation, ask questions, gain an understanding.
The empowerment of ERGs to conduct company-wide initiatives allows for the group to
possess a diversification of routes to influence the inclusive nature of an organization. For
example, the ability to bring learned concerns, needs, or awareness to executives, conduct
training, and host educational interventions allows for the maximization of neurodiversity
awareness. Providing ERGs with this level of integration into a company along with the ability to
immediately, and intentionally, carry out interventions allows for the continued modification of
neurodivergent customization, support, and advocacy within an organization. Overall, ERGs
must have the ability to gather information throughout an organization to have a pulse on most
present needs while having the ability, and power, to communicate these needs at each level of
the organizational structure.
Another factor that ERGs must acquire is the direct relationship and representation of
neurodivergent employees. If organizations create an ERG without this integration, then there is
a likelihood that, regardless of good intentions or education, the group will be uninformed on the
unique needs of their neurodivergent employees. Without this awareness of neurodivergent
employees an ERG focused on neurodiversity will fail due to either the lack of factual evidence
or employees not seeing the motives of the group as actually focused on creating an inclusive
organization. The caution here on how to avoid this pitfall was detailed in the interview with
Interviewee E who explained:

118
So, like, the same goes for neurodivergent people, if you go to an environment, this isn’t
saying that you're neuro-inclusive, but if you do not, or you have not consulted, or have
evidence of consulting any neurodivergent people. No matter how knowledgeable you
might be, people are going to be suspicious of their motives and of why you do not seem
to value the opinions of the neurodivergent community in shaping an inclusive
environment. So TLDR, work with neurodivergent people to create an inclusive
environment. And understand that a variety of neurodivergent people will be needed to be
consulted. Because neurodiversity is an umbrella term that manifests differently across
conditions, intersections of conditions and intersections, lived experiences.
To earnestly implement ERGs within an organization requires these elements of direct
consultation, communication, and essential collaboration with neurodivergent voices. If an ERG
is created within this intentional integration into the neurodivergent community, then any
organizational intervention will not only be uninformed but ill-received by neurodivergent
employees. Because of this, ERG implementation must include consultation with neurodiversity
experts within and outside a given company. Therefore, the intentional composition of ERGs is
essential to inform neurodiversity initiatives and maximizing the group’s ability to influence
company-wide change.
These three characteristics of the effective implementation of ERGs detail how to
optimize the current recommendation for increasing neurodiversity-workplace equity.
Specifically, details provide insight into how ERGs allow for the furtherment of neurodiverseinclusive practices at each tier of an organization and for every part of the employment cycle.
Because of this level of influence, ERGs reference the conceptual framework of pervasive
employee support through highlighting how this second recommendation can assess, implement,

119
and assess change throughout an organization. In summary, the three elements of this second
recommendation can be concisely stated as follows:
A. Emphasize the creation of psychological safety within an ERG to facilitate openness,
transparency, and authenticity; then, equip to implement meaningful changes.
B. Empower the ERG to communicate across neurotypes and learning styles to increase
their ability to gather information and implement initiatives.
C. Ensure neurodivergent representation and consultation within the ERG to have the group
truly be aware of neurodiversity for effectiveness and employee engagement.
Overall, these three facets of forging formal and functional ERGs illustrate what an
organization would need to prioritize for conducting this second recommendation for
neurodiversity-workplace equity. Moreover, the recommendation of ERGs highlights the
perspective of SCT being applied, as seen through the emphasis on various elements of
reciprocity throughout organizations and the nuanced relationship with neurodiversity-focused
improvements. Additionally, the implementation of ERGs responds to the needs of ADHD,
ASD, Dyslexia, and a variety of other conditions that neurodivergence now encompasses, to be
able to provide support despite the evolution of this term. ERGs are then positioned as a
continuation of the utilization of UDIs through being able to inform, individualize, and
implement these specific workplace alterations. Because of this integration, ERGs are a tangible
directive for organizations who want to optimize their workforce through employee
representation, engagement, and inclusion.
Recommendation 3: Leadership neurodiversity awareness, support, and representation
The third recommendation details how the use of UDIs and ERGs can be supported
within an organization through educating, engaging, and encompassing executives. This

120
emphasis on leadership through the reference to a focus on leaders, executives, or managers, was
referenced by each of the nine interviewees. Furthermore, leaders need to advocate and
implement neurodiversity programs such as securing appropriate funding, policy creation,
workplace accountability, and other neurodivergent-inclusive initiatives (Mellifont et al., 2022;
Morehouse, 2023). Now, there were a variety of points emphasized on how organizational
leadership can influence neurodiverse equity so this recommendation will zone into three
primary characteristics. Specifically, the empowerment of leaders for developing neurodiverseworkplace equity requires these executives to model authentic expressions of neurodiversity.
Second, organizations need to create pathways to executive-level positions so that
neurodivergent employees know how, and are empowered to, advance into the chief-suite tier.
The third required component is for all leaders to learn, model, and support the implementation
of neurodiverse-inclusive vocabulary, policies, and other company-wide initiatives. Overall,
these three components comprise the third recommendation of the current dissertation to
highlight how to prioritize workplace neurodiverse equity.
For the recommendation of leadership awareness, support, and representation of
neurodiversity, the first required component, is that leaders must create a safe space through
modeling expression of neurodivergence. This top-down perspective of implementing change for
neurodivergence is founded upon executives, directives, and other leadership stakeholders being
willing to model any neurodivergence within this tier to normalize this expression. Likewise, the
vulnerable disclosure from positions of power can be a way to clearly state and illustrate a
commitment to the organization bringing about increased levels of neurodivergent equity. Now,
there is risk as previously described to the disclosure of neurodivergent conditions so there is
possibility that leaders will face repercussions for these statements. However, this is part of the

121
logic behind why this is the third recommendation as these disclosures would be post the
implementation of UDIs and ERGs. Leaders choosing this route to model, empower, and discuss
neurodiversity was recently advocated for within a TED Talk focused on this topic (Thompson,
2024). The benefits of this disclosure and modeling from the leadership tier was emphasized by
Interviewee I who stated their observations here:
If leaders are neurodivergent themselves, leaders need to say something, leaders need to
speak on their own lived experiences and their own problems, because that shows them
as vulnerable, which sets an example for the rest of the staff. For example, one of our
leaders in our employee resources group is a vice president to one of our contracts, and
they are neurodivergent and have openly spoken about it to our staff, which sets a good
example for the rest of the executives as well as the mid-level managers and the staff.
So, leaders stepping up and talking about out their lived experiences is extremely
important because it will trickle down in that aspect. Or, at the very least, the leader could
recommend other leaders on their team to also be vulnerable and talk about their lived
experience.
This first component of leadership spearheading neurodivergence-inclusive practices aids
overall organizational development of equity through setting the bar by relying on the safety
built within an organization. Furthermore, this progression would have the most potential to
influence the organization from the executive position, but this expert excerpt emphasizes how
there is also a benefit from each tier of management. Therefore, to bring about increased levels
of neurodiversity, workplace-equity organizations must model, from the very top, the willingness
to courageously model a willingness to disclose, discuss, and demonstrate neurodivergence.

122
Secondly, the next component of effective leadership implementation of neurodivergent
initiatives requires the acknowledging of a need for unique pathways into the leadership tier. As
previously discussed, there is an underrepresented percentage of neurodivergent individuals
within the workforce and there is even less representation within leadership and executive-level
positions. Likewise, neurodivergent employees find that there are either ambiguous or
nonexistent routes to move into leadership positions, further barring them from equity
experienced by neuronormative colleagues. The focus here on clear leadership career tracks aids
in creating clear pathways for how neurodivergent employees can move into higher positions to
model and advocate for additional equity. This requirement was detailed by neurodiversity
expert, Interviewee H who stated their vision for a future they would love to bring about by
detailing their passion for developing talent:
I will do like a neurodiversity Leadership Program, seminar thing. I don't know what just
because there's just such a big gap. And how do how do you train neurodivergent people
to become leaders. The challenges vary between being a regular employee and being a
manager being an executive, like I don't know that many neurodivergent executives, like
I know, a handful of leaders and founders and stuff. And they all have like all the crazy
challenges around people treating them differently.
This quotation exemplifies a picture of both the present and future by detailing the unique
challenges neurodivergent employees face barring them from leadership and giving suggestions
on how to accomplish a different future. Because of that, organizations need to develop clear
ways to empower neurodivergent employees to progress to leadership-level positions such as
through specialized career tracks. Furthermore, there is a need for the creation of specific
leadership-focused training programs, the normalization of neurodivergent individuals within

123
management, and support from executives for the implementation of these strategies. Also, as
stressed by Morehouse (2023) within a recent and complimentary dissertation, there is a
requirement for executive level buy-in to bring about neurodivergent focused initiatives. For the
leadership of an organization to intentionally build neurodivergent equity, an opportunity must
be created for neurodivergent individuals to advance within the organization through
individualized and generalized development plans.
As there is the achievement of additional neurodivergent leaders within the organizations,
and to enable this to occur, there is a requirement for leaders to be educated on neurodiversity.
Examples of this must include understanding the ways that neurodiversity might manifest, along
with how to discuss these concepts, to further model a prioritization of inclusion for
neurodiversity. Specifically, this needs to require awareness on how, and how not, to discuss
neurodiversity. For example, Interviewee B concisely detailed this must include appropriate
education by requesting “maybe not the employee but on the management leadership team. I
would also strongly suggest anti-bias training. I think quite frankly, that's something every
people leader should have.” This highlights the requirement that there must be specific efforts to
avoid vocabulary and actions that will alienate, ostracize, or stigmatize neurodivergent
employees. Furthermore, there is a need for leaders to gain an awareness of how to navigate
more inclusive language to model what neurodivergent equity looks like. An example of what
this can look like was provided by Interviewee D who recommended:
My go to is always everyone has the ability to identify how they want, and I respect
whatever language preference that is, right. So, you'll hear neuro-distinct, you'll hear
neuro-atypical you will hear neurodiverse, you'll hear autistic versus person with autism,

124
right? There's so many different language differences. So, my approach is to respect those
individual differences.
This quotation parallels additional suggestions such as the difference between person-first
language (PFL) and identity-first language (IFL) as there is both debate between what
methodology is best but there is a need to adapt to individual preferences (Ladau, 2021, p. 13-
14). For example, this would be seen by a leader asking if an employee prefers the language of
being an autistic person juxtaposed with a person with autism. Additionally, these findings
highlight the need for vernacular fluidity through learning if individual employees identify with
the terms neurodiverse, neurodivergent, neurodistinct, disabled, or other words. The willingness
of leadership to be courageously curious to learn, remember, and utilize the preferred
terminology further models an equitable space for neurodivergent employees. Overall, this third
component of the leadership focused recommendation provides further emphasis on the need for
leadership to intentionally speak about and individualize neuro-inclusive language.
Additionally, for this last recommendation, there is a fourth condition to be considered,
which surrounds the necessity of leaders seeing the benefits of neurodiverse equity within their
organization. First, a moral argument can be made here to show that advocating for the
neurodivergent community is an ethical imperative. Or there is a rationale here on how
advocating for neurodivergent employees also helps all other employees. Nevertheless, an
additional argument is that leaders need to be aware of the financial benefit of neurodiverse
equity, which is present through expanding their potential workforce and assisting all employees
to be more effective. This emphasis on the financial impacts of neurodiverse equity was detailed
by Interviewee E, who concluded:

125
And therefore, it's worthwhile, a worthwhile investment, no matter the situation, the
company itself is in. Because at the end of the day, a lot of attitudes towards the
neurodiversity community is that there are changes that need to be made to the corporate
environment, whatever corporate environment they're trying to join. And that's not
wrong. But within corporate, corporate overarching corporate world, I use this in
corporate America, but really, it's just corporations... they need to see [neurodivergent
equity] as an expense that will pay off for them.
This emphasis on corporations refocusing on neurodiversity expands the conversation
beyond equity into how change for neurodiverse employees will provide a monetary incentive.
Additionally, this quotation highlights how there is always an expense to these workplace
revisions but that these renovations of policy, practice, and program are not simply an expense to
be written off but a future-focused investment that will provide a return on investment.
These four required components of effective leadership implementation of
neurodiversity-workplace equity provide a framework for this final recommendation.
Additionally, these elements of effective neurodivergent-inclusive leaders emphasize a
multilevel perspective on equity as seen within the conceptual framework of the impact of
pervasive workplace equity. For example, this can be seen through the first element here on the
importance of leaders courageously modeling a prioritization on neurodivergent equity by
disclosing, discussing, and demonstrating neurodivergence. Likewise, this company-wide
perspective is the foundation behind the need for organizations to look at their structure and
create neurodivergent specific development and leadership progression pathways. Last, the
willingness for leaders, executives to middle management, to be trained how, and how not, to use
neurodivergent inclusive language and actions illustrate the integration of the conceptual

126
framework. These three elements for effective empowerment on leadership education and
implementation of neurodivergent initiatives can be seen through this list:
A) Executives need to model by authentically disclosing, discussing, and demonstrating
neurodivergence.
B) Organizations need to create pathways for neurodivergent advancement professionally
and into leadership positions.
C) Leaders need to learn, understand, and demonstrate neurodivergent inclusive practices,
preferences, and vocabulary.
D) Company stakeholders need to see neurodivergent equity within their workforce as more
than only a moral imperative by understanding the financial incentives of these changes.
The emphasis here on the larger employment cycle also highlights the reciprocal
relationship between neurodivergent employees, neurodiverse supervisors, and the larger
organization drawing a connection to the reciprocal relationship within SCT. Furthermore, this
integration of the two foundational theories maintains the connection to why this
recommendation relates to the problem of inequity for neurodiverse job candidates and
employees. The focus on understanding neurodivergence from the top-down of an organization
also creates a culture that allows for neurodivergence, an ever-changing term, to constantly adapt
to new needs or conditions represented within the workforce. Similarly, the emphasis that was
shown here on emphasizing the benefits, morally and financially, for organizations allow them to
make an informed investment for their company through deploying equity interventions.
Therefore, this recommendation provides a final valid directive for organizations who are
looking to increase neurodivergent workplace equity interventions established upon literature,
theoretical foundations, and expert testimony.

127
Considering these three recommendations, and the total of ten required components,
provides a framework for companies attempting to increase the equity of their neurodivergent
candidates and employees. Initially, this articulated how the implementation of UDIs within
organizations will specifically alter the environment for the betterment of neurodivergent
individuals while also creating a more equitable space for all employees. Next, the second
recommendation detailed the utilization of ERGs to assess, advocate for, and actualize
appropriate accommodations for neurodivergent employees at each stage of the employment
cycle. Last, the expectation of encouraging leadership to exhibit neurodivergence while
empowering future leaders with leadership progression plans was illustrated as how to ensure
these neurodiversity programs to be effective. These three recommendations, and the ten
required components, can be seen in their entirety within the earlier table shared at the start of
the current section.
Likewise, these three recommendations resonate, reflect, and reply to the themes
identified within the findings section of Chapter Four. In combination, the table from this section
on recommendations (Table 8) and the previous table (Table 7) on codes and identified themes
create a condensed progression from the theoretical foundation to the conclusion of this
dissertation. As discussed within the first recommendation, all these suggestions need to be
explicitly linked to how they are founded upon the interviewees’ own lived experience as
neurodivergent individuals along with recognition of their expert awareness of neurodiversity
equity. These tables utilized as two parts of the document are designed to provide a quick
reference to quickly skim, summarize, and send off to encourage awareness of the nexus of
neurodiversity and workplace equity.

128
Discussion
When considering neurodiversity within the workforce, there is a required emphasis on
awareness of each neurotype that might be present, and particularly those often ostracized such
as those with neurodivergence. Moreover, in line with the conceptual framework of pervasive
workplace inclusion, this awareness must examine each stage of the employment cycle along
with what forms of coworkers, executives, and managers are at each tier. This intentionally
comprehensive perspective allows neurodiversity to be examined and appropriately addressed
through the construction of equitable practices within recruitment and retention programs.
Likewise, these processes to build more significant neurodiverse-focused equity provides the
flexibility of alternative working conditions, locations, and environments to provide this support
for office-, remote-, and hybrid-based employees. However, the needs here are beyond stating
what the characteristics, challenges, and creative solutions are for neurodiverse equity.
Additionally, this discussion would be incomplete without a brief note on the importance
of accountability and tracking outcomes of all the previous recommendations. Accountability for
organizational improvements can be understood as a person being answerable to bringing about a
specific goal or outcome (Dubnick, 2014). As it relates to the current dissertation, this would be
executive stakeholders being responsible for the furtherment of neurodivergent equity. For
example, organizations could utilize the route of assessing the four levels of training evaluation
by measuring the results, employee behaviors, learning outcomes, and organizational reactions of
this organizational improvements (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Likewise, another route of
measuring the effectiveness of training hiring managers, supervisors, and executives would be
ensuring they can practice these areas along with moving through the learning domains of factual
to conceptual, procedural and, ultimately, metacognitive knowledge on neurodiversity (Anderson

129
& Krothwhol, 2001). This intentional accountability towards measuring the impact of changes
for neurodivergent equity illustrates how there is interaction and interconnectedness between the
subsystems of an organization (Vibert, 2014). These elements of implementation of neurodiverse
equity through training leadership further highlights the use of SCT along with the conceptual
framework of pervasive workplace inclusion by highlighting the reciprocal relationship between
organizations and their employees.
When examining this application of the recommendations on how to further
neurodivergent equity within the workplace, there is also a need to highlight how stakeholders
can evaluate the impact to their organization. One route is to see if employees feel a sense of
safety and connection at their organization. This assessment was noted by Interviewee H who
dialogued:
I think that I would say would be probably the best metric for success where people are
opening up and being honest about that. because when you have, again, I feel like a
broken record, but I think is still really important. Like, when you have that space, when
you have that environment, people can be straightforward and honest, then it means that
they feel comfortable, they feel safe, they won't feel like there'll be reprimanded or
attacked, or otherwise dissuaded from being who they are. They don't have the mask sort
of missing. They don't have the mask around their team or their employer that can be
authentic or as close to authentic as possible.
This ability to see employees simply showing up as their authentic selves can be a route
stakeholders can utilize to see if their implementation of recommendations has been successful.
There similarly needs to be awareness of what the organization looked like before, then how to
use the previous recommendation to achieve desired metrics. Likewise, organizations can use

130
human capital metrics of employee engagement or retention as a sign of increased equity as
stated by Interviewee F who references the following outcomes:
So, I think there are a couple of metrics. The first is you have to do the baseline, right,
you have to use the baseline, I would say, a baseline of understanding and baseline of
self-disclosure, right, and baseline of attrition and retention, because I think those are the
things that really will help you measure. Right. So regardless of whether or not you do
that, I think the things to measure are, you know, self-disclosure Up, right, our formal
request for accommodations happening regularly kind of thing, right? Do people know
what the process is?...Because employees who feel safe, understood, able to speak up for
themselves won't often leave companies on their own.
This highlights the need for organizations to understand their current equity levels, an
intentional plan on utilizing interventions, and a way to assess the effectiveness of these changes.
Because of this, organizational stakeholders would be able to create company directives for
routes to increase equity while having established outcomes to intentionally assess to be able to
report if change has occurred. Moreover, this would allow for organizations, and their leadership,
to be held accountable in their ability to bring about change. This provides a connection on how
the three previous recommendations are connected by illustrating the routes an ERG could be
used alongside UDIs within an organization. The prioritization of applying these routes of
accountability further provides a way to respond to the everchanging definition of
neurodivergence so an organization can similarly adapt inclusive practices moving forward.
Overall, the ability for organizations, and their leadership, to have a plan to implement these
recommendations, and an ongoing assessment strategy, is key to effectively increase
neurodivergent equity within their company.

131
Therefore, this dialogue on understanding, maintaining, and developing neurodiverseinclusive workspaces is only the beginning of the process. There must be action to systematically
empower the workplace since, to harken back to the initial statistics, only 1 in 10 neurodivergent
persons have been able to join the workforce despite representing over 10% of the global
population (Narenthiran et al., 2022; Szulc et al., 2021). This is unacceptable and a grim
indication of how this conversation is so necessary to learn the steps to aid the 90% of
unemployed neurodivergent individuals by creating a work atmosphere where they can thrive.
Furthermore, this discussion highlights techniques that organizations, and their stakeholders, can
utilize to measure the effectiveness of these interventions for organizational change. This
application and accountability for the increased levels of neurodivergent equity provide the
metrics to assess the effectiveness of the application of equitable practices for neurodivergent
employees. These revisions to traditional organizational structures are foundationally built to
serve, recognize, and advocate for this group.
Suggestions for Future Research
The following section of this chapter reemphasizes the current study’s limitations and
exists as a plea for additional research, advocacy, and studies to be done. This will reflect upon
demographic underrepresentation within the current study to emphasize what this study cannot
show and where future studies could start. Likewise, this will include a call to action for the
intersectionality between neurodiversity and gender, as this population faces unique hardships
within the workforce and beyond. Furthermore, the positionalities of being a part of a racial
minority and neurodivergent is detailed as there must be additional awareness drawn to this
marginalized group. Finally, a section here highlights a need to research the nexus between
neurodivergence and systemic issues of education, well-being, and other common

132
misconceptions. These suggestions for future research are a cumulative plea for researchers,
consultants, and leaders to continue this investigation into the intersections of neurodiversity and
other forms of marginalization to support this population. In summary, the following table
provides an outline of the next section for the convenience of future researchers, advocates, and
leaders to further emphasize neurodiverse equity.
Table 8
Areas of need to expand research on neurodiversity
Number Suggestion Brief description
1 Expansion
Future research needs to include more elements of positionality such
as Dyslexia and other neurodivergent conditions along with more
representation of alterative age and occupation.
2 LGBTQ+
There needs to be additional understanding, awareness, and advocacy
for those individuals who hold the intersectionality of marginalized
gender identities and neurodivergence.
3 Race
When examining the intersection between neurodivergence and race
there is a significant need of more research especially within law
enforcement response in addition to the workforce.
4 Systemic
Understanding the barriers that neurodivergent individuals face during
education, in the community, and what policies impact them all need
to be researched to further assist this population.
When examining the findings of the current study, there are clear deficits in what
populations are unrepresented. For example, even though there were forms of neurodiversity
represented the participants were White so there must be additional research into the nexus
between neurodivergence and race. Furthermore, with nine participants, there were a handful of
occupations listed but there are industries where specific studies could be conducted to learn
unique job-specific routes of neurodivergent empowerment. One limitation of the current study
was also how participants were adults, mostly middle-aged, and all resided within the United
States. Because of this, future research studies are needed to explore neurodiversity for youth and

133
the elderly along with those living outside of the US, respectively. Another
underrepresented group which can be seen from the participants' demographic information is the
lack of those who reported identifying with Dyslexia, Dyspraxia, Dysgraphia, or Dyscalculia.
Specifically, only one out of the nine participants reported connection to these elements of
neurodivergence. Likewise, there are many new additions to which might be now included
within neurodivergence such as Tourette syndrome, Dyspraxia/developmental coordination
disorder (DCD), Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), along with anxiety, mood, or
personality related disorders (Doyle, 2022; Komarow & Hector, 2020; Mellifont, 2023).
Likewise, this was seen within the sample of the current study since respondents also provided
the other neurodivergent conditions of Bipolar II, OCD, CPTSD, Anxiety, and Visual Processing
Disorder.
This emphasis on the ever-expanding definitions of neurodivergence was explained by
Interviewee I who clarified:
I think one of the main things that people have to look at and think about is the
uniqueness of the neurodiversity paradigm. Because under that umbrella, there are so
many disabilities that sit under that umbrella. But a problem that I see across the board is
that people only relate neurodivergence to autism and ADHD, which is problematic
because there are, like many other disabilities that technically would fall under the
paradigm. The way the neurodiversity paradigm works, is that it's generally showing how
your brain diverges from what is considered to be typical. So, this could be a multitude of
things like PTSD, or synesthesia, or OCD, Tourette's, schizophrenia, things like that
bipolar disorder.

134
Because of this, there is a need for neurodivergence being understood as a growing
concept with a variety of definitions, diagnoses, and disabilities. Nevertheless, all themes and
recommendations should, through the individualization support, to relate to these additional
inclusions of neurodivergence. However, these areas provide limitations of the current study by
highlighting the lack of representation from the study sample on this more expanded definition of
neurodivergence so further research is required as this term continues to evolve.
Next, the current study fortunately did contain representation of male, female, and
nonbinary participants; nevertheless, the nexus between neurodiversity, sex, and gender identity
is one that is often misunderstood leading to minorities with this intersectionality to face unique
and prevalent hardships. Williams and Gotham (2021), who conducted research on quality of life
and autism, conclude with advocating for additional research between similar mental conditions
and additional populations such as gender. Likewise, Hogan (2023) advocated for additional
instruction and tools for education professionals on aiding those students with the intersectional
of disabilities and identifying with LGBTQ+ to fully support this population. Also, within
Wharmby’s (2022) insightful novel on his own lived experience and advice for a more
neurodiverse-friendly world, he reflects how neurodiversity and trans communities have an
intertwined relationship and how both groups are under attack.
The intersection of gender identity and neurodivergence was highlighted by Interviewee
H who emphasized this area of need through the following quotation:
Something that I also believe in this is kind of related, but like, something that I believe
in pretty strongly is that when leadership gets up and gets up and talks about their
disability and gender diversity, that also drastically helps people feel like they can talk
about it too, because it's like, well, if they're talking about it, and so can I because if they

135
feel like they can get up and talk about neurodiversity, nothing's gonna happen to them…
It gives individual credibility, it gives the organization credibility, because the company
credibility for enabling an individual disability, to lead this community and advocate for
people disabilities, and just be really open and honest about it. And that motivates people
to do the same thing as well. Because if that person is up there talking to you about it,
then so can I.
These few sources illustrate a clear need for additional research to examine the
intersectionality of LGBTQ+ identification and neurodiversity. Moreover, this focus point could
produce future studies within education, community support, or workplace equity as a natural
continuation and refinement of the current dissertation. There must be additional research to
bring action, advocacy, and acceptance of those who are within both minorities as the
combination of marginalized positionalities compounds discrimination, hardship, and
stereotypes.
Similarly, another area of double marginalization exists with the intersectionality
between race and neurodivergence. This is most explicitly observed when examining the oftendetrimental overlap that occurs between racism and ableism. Moreover, due to the lack of data
on the intersection between neurodivergence and race, disabled multiracial people are the most
likely recipients of violent acts (Mueller et al., 2019). Additionally, when examining
neurotypical norms these seem to be even more specifically relatable to White Western
neurotypical characteristics further excluding neurodivergent folks (Hillary, 2020). For a specific
example Ogden et al. (2019) concluded there was a prevalence of ableism stereotypes along with
the ignoring of systemic racism within media coverage following the police homicide of Eric
Garner, a Black male with disabilities. Additionally, Simplican (2021) argues for advocacy for

136
those with the intersectionality of mental disabilities and racial minorities as there is
disproportional likelihood of police brutality and Covid-19-related risk towards this group. The
presence of this risk highlights the unacceptable level of discrimination that exists for
neurodivergent individuals of racial minorities. This awareness of intersectionality to race was
also highlighted by Interviewee A who stated that:
So, I think recognizing how, like, let's say, gender, our race, how ethnicity interplays with
disabilities really important because the supports when a white person is disabled might
need might differ from like an Asian person or an African American person. So, I think
having different supports and understandings of intersectionality is also really important
for managers, for supervisors, and for different organizations when it comes to working
with disabled people.”
This emphasis on paying attention to the intersectionality of race and neurodivergence is
a required area of equity inside and out of organizations. Furthermore, within the current study
eight of nine participants disclosed their ethnicity as being ‘White’, which further emphasizes
how more diverse representation is necessary for this exploration as this is a limitation of the
current dissertation. Hence, there is the utmost necessity that future research examines
occurrence of marginalized groups of racial minorities and neurodivergence to bring equity,
safety, and justice for those of this intersectionality.
The current dissertation focused on the recruitment and retention of neurodivergent
individuals from the perspective of prospective organization but there is also a need to examine
societal factors which bar this population from the workforce. For example, Mellifont (2023)
details the significant negative stigmas and unideal lived experience of neurodivergent faculty in
higher education. This highlights a specific instance where neurodivergent students would

137
struggle to witness appropriate accommodations for their own needs or traits since their
professors are struggling to have an equitable working environment. Likewise, Chapman and
Carel (2022) emphasized how neurodiverse individuals face stereotypes through outdated
perceptions on what it truly means to thrive and how these societal norms need to be updated to
decrease discrimination. Similarly, Milton and Sims (2020) detail how autistic adults often
experience a form of ‘societal othering’ in which they experience alienation from within social
groups, family, high-education, and the workplace leading to increased anxiety, depression, and
isolation. Last, Martin (2020) claims there is a need for autistic and neurodivergent folks to
receive clear guidance, expectations, and instructions for how to advance through each stage of
the academic and professional progressions (Belmonte, 2020).
Furthermore, the pervasive elements of these stereotypes of neurodivergence expand
throughout other social domains as was stressed by Interviewee F who detailed how:
There are people have ideas of what neuro divergent means. They have ideas of like what
a certain diagnosis means. And they don't. And some people are afraid of it. And I think
that's, that's just the truth of the matter. And so, the stigma exists or self-stigma, right? I
don't want to go in there and talk about this because I don't feel good about the fact that I
have a need that's seems so vastly different than other people's right. So, I mean, stigma is
a consistent, and then there's societal stigma, right? And there's cultural stigma. There's
all these kinds of pieces of it. But I also think that there are just there are barriers in the
way people stereotype what neuro divergence is.
The courageous and vulnerable disclosure in this quotation provides additional insight on
how the neurodivergent community faces hardships and unique barriers not only in the
workplace, but also within the larger social and cultural contexts. This research, and reference to

138
findings of this dissertation, stress the systemic issues that exist for the neurodivergent
population that further highlights how this group has been barred from participating in society,
education, and the workplace. Overall, each of these intersections between neurodivergence and
larger societal issues are potential areas that require future research to bring equity for
neurodivergent individuals.
The previous sections on required research provide individual and collective requests for
additional research. First, the lack of representation of other positionalities than what was
covered within the current study along with expanding the sample to include the evolving
concept of neurodivergence. Second, the need for future studies examining the intersection of
LGBTQ+ and neurodivergence was examined. Third, the link between racial and neurodivergent
minorities was identified as another area of additional research. Last, there was the examination
of systemic societal issues which impact neurodivergent individuals through barriers within
education and other social groups. Furthermore, there is an implied emphasis, also, that there are
individuals that are within the marginalized groups of neurodivergence, race, and gender identity
that experience the compounding impacts of these hardships. These areas of additional research
also draw attention to how neurodivergence is a positionality that is growing to encompass
additional conditions, needs, and characteristics, further showing the need of more research.
These all require diligent, deliberate, and distinct future research to bring equity to
neurodivergence and potential intersections with other marginalized groups.
Conclusion
This study is neither the first nor the last to be conducted on the nuanced intersection of
neurodiversity and equity within the workplace. Nevertheless, the current study provided
reinforcement of previous research while highlighting a need for further neurodiversity work to

139
occur. In particular, the study contributed by examining the lived experience of neurodivergent
experts who provided insight from their personal and professional journeys. This work is vital as
it examines the actual lived experience of neurodivergent professionals while concurrently
learning from individuals who have worked to create more neuro-inclusive workspaces. This is
how we move forward, through listening to neurodivergent employees, celebrating their
differences, and placing them in positions of influence.
However, this study included a need to look more inclusively across neurotypes to
determine what equity truly looks like for neuronormative and neurodivergent employees to
achieve neurodiversity-focused equity within the workplace. If this study has done anything of
consequence it may generate increased awareness of neurodiversity, inspire ideas on how to
improve neurodivergent workplace equity, and beget indignation so strong that others include
this work into yet to-be-explored areas of intersectionality. Moreover, this study addressed how
future research and workplace equity programs need to have contingencies in place to adapt to
the constantly evolving nature of neurodivergence in order to achieve equity. The drive towards
action, for neurodivergence and other minorities within the workforce, through intentional
support, highlighting strengths, and building inclusive psychological safety is the goal of this
work. This movement to cultivate curiosity, seeing individual employees, and shift towards
shared language is the impact of the current study which is built upon the courageous shoulders
of neurodivergent employees and neurodiversity experts developing equity every day.

140
References
Anderson, L. & Krathwohl, D. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A
revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives (abridged edition) (p. 46). New
York, NY. Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
Annabi, H., Crooks, E.W., Barnett, N., Guadagno, J., Mahoney, J.R., Michelle, J., Pacilio, A.,
Shukla, H. and Velasco, J. (2021). Autism @ work playbook: Finding talent and creating
meaningful employment opportunities for people with autism. 2nd ed. Seattle, WA:
ACCESS-IT, The Information School, University of Washington, 2021
Annamma, S., Conner, D., & Fern, B. (2013). Dis/ability critical race studies (DisCrit):
Theorizing at the intersections of race and dis/ability. Race, Ethnicity and Education,
16(1), 1-31. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2012.730511
Austin, D., & Pisano, G. (2017). Neurodiversity as a competitive advantage. Harvard Business
Review. https://hbr.org/2017/05/neurodiversity-as-a-competitive-advantage
Autism @ work playbook. (2021, March 29). Disability:IN.
https://disabilityin.org/resource/autism-work-playbook/
Bauer, G. (2021, February). Meet the Methods series: Quantitative intersectional study design
and primary data collection. Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) Institute of
Gender and Health. https://cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/52352.html
Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 9, 75–78. https://doi:10.1111/1467-8721.00064
Beatty, J., Baldridge, D., Boehm, S., Kulkarni, M., & Colella, A. (2019). On the treatment of
persons with disabilities in organizations: A review and research agenda. Human
Resource Management, 58(2), 119–137. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21940

141
Belmonte, A. (2020). How individuals and institutions can learn to make room for human
cognitive diversity: A personal perspective from my life in neuroscience. In Rosqvist, H.,
Chown, N. & Stenning, A. (Eds.), Neurodiversity studies a new critical paradigm (1st ed.,
pp. 73-89). Routledge.
Bernstein, R., Bulger, M., Salipante, P., & Weisinger, J. (2020). From diversity to inclusion to
equity: A theory of generative interactions. Journal of Business Ethics, 167(3), 395–410.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04180-1
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in
Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Bovell, V. (2020). Is there an ethical case for the prevention and/or cure of autism? In Rosqvist,
H., Chown, N., & Stenning, A. (Eds.), Neurodiversity studies a new critical paradigm (1st
ed., pp. 39-54). Routledge.
Bury, S., Flower, R., Zulla, R., Nicholas, D., & Hedley, D. (2021). Workplace Social Challenges
Experienced by Employees on the Autism Spectrum: An International Exploratory Study
Examining Employee and Supervisor Perspectives. Journal of Autism and Developmental
Disorders, 51(5), 1614–1627. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-020-04662-6
Carrero, J., Krzeminska, A., & Härtel, C. (2019). The DXC technology work experience
program: Disability-inclusive recruitment and selection in action. Journal of Management
& Organization, 25(4), 535–542. https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2019.23
Chang, E., Milkman, K. L., Gromet, D. M., Rebele, R. W., Massey, C., Duckworth, A. L., &
Grant, A. M. (2019). The mixed effects of online diversity training. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences - PNAS, 116(16), 7778–7783.
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1816076116

142
Chapman, R. & Carel, H. (2022). Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life.
Journal of Social Philosophy, 53(4), 614–631. https://doi.org/10.1111/josp.12456
Chapman, R. (2021). Neurodiversity and the social ecology of mental functions. Perspectives on
Psychological Science, 16(6), 1360–1372. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620959833
Chapman, R. (2020). Neurodiversity, disability, wellbeing. In Rosqvist, H., Chown, N., &
Stenning, A. (Eds.), Neurodiversity studies a new critical paradigm (1st ed., pp. 57-72).
Routledge.
Cheryan, S. & Bodenhausen, G. (2000). When positive stereotypes threaten intellectual
performance: The psychological hazards of “model minority” status. Psychological
Science, 11(5). 399-402.
Caulfield, J. (2023, June 22). How to do thematic analysis: Step-by-step guide & examples.
Scribbr. https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/thematic-analysis/
Chiru, Ivan, C., & Arcos, R. (2022). Diversity in intelligence: Organizations, processes, and
people. International Journal of Intelligence and Counterintelligence, 35(4), 607–620.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08850607.2022.2047533
Chown, N. (2020). Language games used to construct autism as pathology. In Rosqvist, H.,
Chown, N., & Stenning, A. (Eds.), Neurodiversity studies a new critical paradigm (1
st
ed., pp. 27-38). Routledge.
Coplan, J., Crocker, L., Landin, J., & Stenn, T. (2021). Building supportive, inclusive
Workplaces where neurodivergent thinkers thrive: Approaches in managing diversity,
inclusion, and building entrepreneurship in the workplace. S.A.M. Advanced Management
Journal (1984), 86(1), 21–30. https://doi.org/10.52770/XTBM1097

143
Cooper, R. & Kennady, C. (2021). Autistic voices from the workplace. Advances in Autism, 7(1),
73–85. https://doi.org/10.1108/AIA-09-2019-0031
Creswell, J. W. & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Cypress, R. (2017). Rigor or reliability and validity in qualitative research: Perspectives,
strategies, reconceptualization, and recommendations. Dimensions of Critical Care
Nursing 36(4), 253-263. DOI: 10.1097/DCC.0000000000000253
Czopp, A., Kay, A., & Cheryan, S. (2015). Positive stereotypes are pervasive and powerful.
Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(4), 451-463. DOI:
10.1177/1745691615588091
Draaisma D. (2009). Stereotypes of autism. Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of
London. Series B, Biological sciences, 364(1522), 1475–1480.
https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2008.0324
Das, M., Tang, J., Ringland, K. E., & Piper, A. M. (2021). Towards accessible remote work:
Understanding work-from-home practices of neurodivergent professionals. Proceedings
of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 5(CSCW1), 1–30.
https://doi.org/10.1145/3449282
Davies, J., Heasman, B., Livesey, A., Walker, A., Pellicano, E., & Remington, A. (2023). Access
to employment: A comparison of autistic, neurodivergent and neurotypical adults’ hiring
process experiences in the United Kingdom. Autism: The International Journal of
Research and Practice, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1177/13623613221145377

144
Davies, J., Heasman, B., Livesey, A., Walker, A., Pellicano, E., & Remington, A. (2022).
Autistic adults’ views and experiences of requesting and receiving workplace adjustments
in the UK. PloS One, 17(8), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0272420
De-la-Calle-Durán, M.-C., & Rodríguez-Sánchez, J.-L. (2021). Employee engagement and
wellbeing in times of COVID-19: A proposal of the 5Cs Model. International Journal of
Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(10), 5470.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18105470
Djela, M. (2021). Change of autism narrative is required to improve employment of autistic
people. Advances in Autism, 7(1), 86–100. https://doi.org/10.1108/AIA-11-2019-0041
Douglas, T., & Nganga, C. (2013). What’s radical love got to do with it: Navigating identity,
pedagogy, and positionality in pre-service education. International Journal of Critical
Pedagogy, (5)1, 58-82.
Doyle, N. (2020) Neurodiversity at work: A biopsychosocial model and the impact on working
adults. British Medical Bulletin, 135(1), 108–125. https://doi.org/10.1093/bmb/ldaa021
Doyle, N. & McDowall, A. (2022). Diamond in the rough? An “empty review” of research into
“neurodiversity” and a road map for developing the inclusion agenda. Equality, Diversity,
and Inclusion, 41(3), 352–382. https://doi.org/10.1108/EDI-06-2020-0172
Dreaver, J., Thompson, C., Girdler, S., Adolfsson, M., Black, M., & Falkmer, M. (2019).
Success factors enabling employment for adults on the autism spectrum from employers’
perspective. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 50, 1657–1667,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-019-03923-3

145
Dubnick, M. (2014). Accountability as cultural keyword. In M. Bovens, R. E. Goodin, & T.
Schillemans (Eds.), Oxford handbook of public accountability (pp. 23–28). Oxford:
Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199641253.001.0001
Dwyer, P. (2022). The neurodiversity approach(es): What are they, and what do they mean for
researchers? Human Development, 66(2), 73–92. https://doi.org/10.1159/000523723
Ezerins, M., Vogus, T. J., Gabriel, A. S., Simon, L. S., Calderwood, C., & Rosen, C. C. (2023).
From environmental niches to unique contributions: Reconsidering fit to foster inclusion
across neurotypes. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 16(1), 41–44.
https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2022.98
Fletcher, L. & Beauregard, T. (2022). The psychology of diversity and its implications for
workplace (in)equality: Looking back at the last decade and forward to the next. Journal
of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 95(3), 577–594.
https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12388
Flower, R., Hedley, D., Spoor, J., & Dissanayake, C. (2019). An alternative pathway to
employment for autistic job-seekers: A case study of a training and assessment program
targeted to autistic job candidates. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 71(3),
407–428. https://doi.org/10.1080/13636820.2019.1636846
Gibbs, G. (2018). Analyzing qualitative data. 2
nd Ed. Sage publications.
Grandin, T. (2023). When great minds don’t think alike. Harvard Business Review.
https://hbr.org/2023/05/when-great-minds-dont-think-alike
Grant, A. (2008). Does intrinsic motivation fuel the prosocial fire? Motivational synergy in
predicting persistence, performance, and productivity. Journal of Applied Psychology,
93(1), 48–58. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.1.48

146
Griffiths, A., Hanson, A. H., Giannantonio, C. M., Mathur, S. K., Hyde, K., & Linstead, E.
(2020). Developing employment environments where individuals with ASD thrive: Using
machine learning to explore employer policies and practices. Brain Sciences, 10(9), 1–22.
https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci10090632
Hillary, A. (2020). Neurodiversity and cross-cultural communication. In Rosqvist, H., Chown,
N., & Stenning, A. (Eds.), Neurodiversity studies a new critical paradigm (1st ed., pp. 91-
107). Routledge.
Hipolito, I., Hutto, D., & Chown, N. (2020). Understanding autistic individuals: Cognitive
diversity not theoretical deficit. In Rosqvist, H., Chown, N., & Stenning, A. (Eds.),
Neurodiversity studies a new critical paradigm (1st ed., pp. 73-89). Routledge.
Hogan, J. (2023). Having a disability and identifying as LGBTQ+: Are educational professionals
prepared for this intersectional experience? Journal of LGBT Youth, ahead-ofprint(ahead-of-print), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/19361653.2023.2231921
Högstedt, E., Igelström, K., Korhonen, L., Käcker, P., Marteinsdottir, I., & Björk, M. (2022).
“It’s like it is designed to keep me stressed’-Working sustainably with ADHD or autism.
Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy, ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print), 1–12.
https://doi.org/10.1080/11038128.2022.2143420
Jashinsky, T., King, C. L., Kwiat, N. M., Henry, B. L., & Lockett‐Glover, A. (2021). Disability
and COVID‐19: Impact on workers, intersectionality with race, and inclusion strategies.
The Career Development Quarterly, 69(4), 313–325. https://doi.org/10.1002/cdq.12276
Joyce, A., Moussa, B., Elmes, A., Campbell, P., Suchowerska, R., Buick, F., Barraket, J., &
Carey, G. (2022). Organizational structures and processes for health and well-being:

147
insights from work integration social enterprise. BMC Public Health, 22(1), 1–1624.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-13920-4
Jurgens, A., (2020). Neurodiversity in a neurotypical world: An enactive framework for
investigating autism and social institutions. In Rosqvist, H., Chown, N., & Stenning, A.
(Eds.), Neurodiversity studies a new critical paradigm (1st ed., pp. 73-89). Routledge.
Kalmanovich-Cohen, H. & Stanton, S. J. (2023). How can work from home support
neurodiversity and inclusion? Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 16(1), 20–24.
https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2022.93
Khan, M., Grabarski, M. K., Ali, M., & Buckmaster, S. (2022). Insights into creating and
managing an inclusive neurodiverse workplace for positive outcomes: A multistaged
theoretical framework. Group & Organization Management, 105960112211335–.
https://doi.org/10.1177/10596011221133583
Kidwell, K., Clancy, R. L., & Fisher, G. G. (2023). The devil you know versus the devil you
don’t: Disclosure versus masking in the workplace. Industrial and Organizational
Psychology, 16(1), 55–60. https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2022.101
Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick’s four levels of training evaluation.
Alexandria, VA: ATD Press.
Komarow, A. & Hector, B. L. (2020). Incorporating neurodivergent individuals into diversity
and inclusion initiatives. Journal of Financial Planning (Denver, Colo.), 33(11), 36–38.
Krzeminska, A., Austin, R. D., Bruyère, S. M., & Hedley, D. (2019). The advantages and
challenges of neurodiversity employment in organizations. Journal of Management &
Organization, 25(4), 453–463. https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2019.58

148
Ladau, E. (2021). Demystifying disability what to know, what to say, and how to be an ally. Ten
Speed Press.
Legault, M., Bourdon, JN., & Poirier, P. (2021). From neurodiversity to neurodivergence: The
role of epistemic and cognitive marginalization. Synthese, 199, 12843–12868.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-021-03356-5
Lindsay, S., Osten, V., Rezai, M., & Bui, S. (2021). Disclosure and workplace accommodations
for people with autism: A systematic review. Disability and Rehabilitation, 43(5), 597–
610. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2019.1635658
Martin, V., Flanagan, T. D., Vogus, T. J., & Chênevert, D. (2022). Sustainable employment
depends on quality relationships between supervisors and their employees on the autism
spectrum. Disability and Rehabilitation, 1–12.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2022.2074550
Martínez-Mesa, J., González-Chica, D. A., Duquia, R. P., Bonamigo, R. R., & Bastos, J. L.
(2016). Sampling: how to select participants in my research study?. Anais brasileiros de
dermatologia, 91(3), 326–330. https://doi.org/10.1590/abd1806-4841.20165254
Mellifont, D. (2020). Taming the raging bully! A case study critically exploring anti-bullying
measures to support neurodiverse employees. South Asian Journal of Business and
Management Cases, 9(1), 54–67. https://doi.org/10.1177/2277977919881406
Mellifont, D. (2021). Facilitators and inhibitors of mental discrimination in the workplace: A
traditional review. Studies in Social Justice, 15(1), 59–80.
https://doi.org/10.26522/ssj.v15i1.2436

149
Mellifont. D. (2022). COVID-19 related factors affecting the experiences of neurodivergent
persons in the workplace: A rapid review. Work (Reading, Mass.), 71(1), 3–12.
https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-210811
Mellifont. D. (2023). Ableist ivory towers: a narrative review informing about the lived
experiences of neurodivergent staff in contemporary higher education. Disability &
Society, 38(5), 865–886. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2021.1965547
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. (4th ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Milton, D. & Sims, T. (2016). How is a sense of well-being and belonging constructed in the
accounts of autistic adults? Disability & Society, 31(4), 520–534.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2016.1186529
Mor Barak., M., (2015). Inclusion is the key to diversity management, but what is inclusion?
Human Service Organizations, Management, Leadership & Governance, 39(2), 83–88.
https://doi.org/10.1080/23303131.2015.1035599
Morehouse, N.S. (2023). A neurodiverse way of hiring [unpublished doctoral dissertation].
University of Southern California.
Mueller, C.O., Forbes-Pratt, A.J., & Sriken, J. (2019). Disability: Missing from the conversation
of violence. Journal of Social Issues, 75(3), 707-725. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12339
Narenthiran O., Torero, J., & Woodrow, M. (2022). Inclusive design of workspaces: Mixed
methods approach to understanding users. Sustainability (Basel, Switzerland), 14(6),
3337. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14063337
Neurodiversity @ work employer roundtable (n.d.). Disability: IN. https://disabilityin.org/whatwe-do/committees/neurodiversity-at-work-roundtable/

150
New industry survey highlights state of neurodiversity and inclusivity in U.S. companies. (2022,
Sep 13). PR Newswire Retrieved from
http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/wire-feeds/new-industrysurvey-highlights-state/docview/2713201636/se-2
Lumivero (2023). NVivo 14 [Computer software]. https://lumivero.com/product/nvivo-14/
O’Brolcháin, F., & Gordijn, B. (2018). Risks of stigmatisation resulting from assistive
technologies for persons with Autism Spectrum Disorder. Technologies (Basel), 6(1), 27–
. https://doi.org/10.3390/technologies6010027
Ogden, L., Fulambarker, A. J., & Haggerty, C. (2020). Race and disability in media coverage of
the police homicide of Eric Garner. Journal of Social Work Education, 56(4), 649–663.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2019.1661918
Patton, E. (2019). Autism, attributions, and accommodations: Overcoming barriers and
integrating a neurodiverse workforce. Personnel Review, 48(4), 915–934.
https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-04-2018-0116
Pellicano, E. & Houting, J. (2022). Annual research review: Shifting from “normal science” to
neurodiversity in autism science. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 63(4),
381–396. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.13534
Priscott, T. & Allen, R. (2021). Human capital neurodiversity: An examination of stereotype
threat anticipation. Employee Relations, 43(5). 1067-1082. https://doi.org/10.1108/ER06-2020-0304
Remington, A., Heasman, B., Romualdez, A. M., & Pellicano, E. (2022). Experiences of autistic
and non-autistic individuals participating in a corporate internship scheme. Autism: The

151
International Journal of Research and Practice, 26(1), 201–216.
https://doi.org/10.1177/13623613211025115
Richards, J., Sang, K., Marks, A., & Gill, S. (2019). “I’ve found it extremely draining”:
Emotional labour and the lived experience of line managing neurodiversity. Personnel
Review, 48(7), 1903–1923. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-08-2018-0289
Rosales, R., León, I. A., & León-Fuentes, A. L. (2023). Recommendations for recruitment and
retention of a diverse workforce: A report from the field. Behavior Analysis in Practice,
16(1), 346–361. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-022-00747-z
Rosenberg, S. (2017). Respectful collection of demographic data. Retrieved from
https://medium.com/@anna.sarai.rosenberg/respectful-collection-of-demographic-data56de9fcb80e2
Rosqvist, H., Stenning, A., & Chown, N. (2020). Neurodiversity studies: Proposing a new field
of inquiry. In Rosqvist, H., Chown, N., & Stenning, A. (Eds.), Neurodiversity studies a
new critical paradigm (1st ed., pp. 73-89). Routledge.
Ross-Hellauer, T., Tennant, J. P., Banelytė, V., Gorogh, E., Luzi, D., Kraker, P., Pisacane, L.,
Ruggieri, R., Sifacaki, E., & Vignoli, M. (2020). Ten simple rules for innovative
dissemination of research. PLoS computational biology, 16(4), e1007704.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007704
Russo, E. R., Ott, D. L., & Moeller, M. (2023). Helping neurodivergent employees succeed. MIT
Sloan Management Review, 64(3), 1-11.
http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/helpingneurodivergent-employees-succeed/docview/2826432374/se-2

152
Sasaki, N., Inoue, A., Asaoka, H., Sekiya, Y., Nishi, D., Tsutsumi, A., & Imamura, K. (2022).
The survey measure of psychological safety and its association with mental health and
job performance: A validation study and cross-sectional analysis. International Journal
of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(16), 9879–.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19169879
Schunk, U., & Usher, E. L. (2019). Social cognitive theory and motivation. In The Oxford
handbook of human motivation (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190666453.013.2
Scott, M., Milbourn, B., Falkmer, M., Black, M., Bolte, S., Halladay, A., Lerner, M., Taylor, J.,
& Girdler, S. (2018). Factors impacting employment for people with autism spectrum
disorder: A scoping review. Autism, 23(4), 869-901.
.https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361318787789
Sedgwick, J. A., Merwood, A., & Asherson, P. (2018). The positive aspects of attention deficit
hyperactivity disorder: A qualitative investigation of successful adults with ADHD.
ADHD Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity Disorders, 11, 241-253.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12402-018-0277-6
Shakespeare, T., & Watson, N. (1997). Defending the Social Model. Disability &
Society, (12)2, 293-300, https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599727380
Shmulsky, S., Gobbo, K., & Vitt, S. (2022). Culturally relevant pedagogy for neurodiversity.
Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 46(9), 681–685.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10668926.2021.1972362

153
Shore, L., Randel, A. E., Chung, B. G., Dean, M. A., Holcombe Ehrhart, K., & Singh, G. (2011).
Inclusion and diversity in work groups: A review and model for future research. Journal
of Management, 37(4), 1262–1289. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310385943
Silver, E., Nittrouer, C. L., & Hebl, M. R. (2023). Beyond the business case: Universally
designing the workplace for neurodiversity and inclusion. Industrial and Organizational
Psychology, 16(1), 45–49. https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2022.99
Simplican, C. (2021). Politicizing disability in political science, COVID-19, and police violence.
Politics, Groups & Identities, 9(2), 387–394.
https://doi.org/10.1080/21565503.2020.1864652
Singer, J. (1999). Why can’t you be normal for once in your life? From a problem with no name
to the emergence of a new category of difference. In Corker, M. and French, S. (Eds),
Disability discourse, 59-70.
Siy, J. & Cheryan, S. (2013). When compliments fail to flatter: American individualism and
response to positive stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 104(1).
87-102. DOI: 10.1037/a0030183
Solomon, C. (2020). Autism and employment: Implications for employers and adults with ASD.
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 50(11), 4209–4217.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-020-04537-w
Spoor, J., Bury, S. M., & Hedley, D. (2021). Non-autistic employees’ perspectives on the
implementation of an autism employment programme. Autism: The International Journal
of Research and Practice, 25(8), 2177–2188.
https://doi.org/10.1177/13623613211012880

154
About the Stanford Neurodiversity Project (n.d.). Stanford Medicine.
https://med.stanford.edu/neurodiversity.html
Stenning, A. (2020). Understanding empathy through a study of autistic life writing: On the
importance of neurodivergent morality. In Rosqvist, H., Chown, N., & Stenning, A.
(Eds.), Neurodiversity studies a new critical paradigm (1st ed., pp. 108-124). Routledge.
Szulc, J., Tomczak, M., & McGregor, F., (2021). AMO perspectives on the well-being of
neurodivergent human capital. Employee Relations, 43(4), 858–872.
https://doi.org/10.1108/ER-09-2020-0446
Tamers, S., Streit, J., Pana‐Cryan, R., Ray, T., Syron, L., Flynn, M. A., Castillo, D., Roth, G.,
Geraci, C., Guerin, R., Schulte, P., Henn, S., Chang, C., Felknor, S., & Howard, J.
(2020). Envisioning the future of work to safeguard the safety, health, and well‐being of
the workforce: A perspective from the CDC’s National Institute for Occupational Safety
and Health. American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 63(12), 1065–1084.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.23183
Thompson, D. (2024, January). Rebranding the brain: Neurodiversity at work | Dave Thompson
| TEDxDanville [Video]. TED Conferences.
https://youtu.be/vp7QfomN2Bs?feature=shared
Tomczak, M. & Ziemiański, P. (2023). Autistic employees’ technology-based workplace
accommodation preferences survey—Preliminary findings. International Journal of
Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(10), 1-11.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20105773

155
Tomczak, M. (2022). How can the work environment be redesigned to enhance the well-being of
individuals with autism? Employee Relations, 44(6), 1467–1484.
https://doi.org/10.1108/ER-12-2021-0535
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (2011). Fact Sheet on the EEOC's Final
Regulations Implementing the ADAAA. https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/fact-sheeteeocs-final-regulations-implementing-adaaa
U.S. Department of Education. (2022, February 11). Disability discrimination: Overview of the
laws. https://www2.ed.gov/policy/rights/guid/ocr/disabilityoverview.html
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2006, June). Fact sheet: Your rights under
section 504 of the rehabilitation act.
https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/ocr/civilrights/resources/factsheets/504.pdf
U.S. Department of Labor: Office of Disability Employment Policy (n.d.). Employer Assistance
and Resource Network on Disability Inclusion (EARN).
https://www.dol.gov/agencies/odep/resources/earn#:~:text=The%20Employer%20Assista
nce%20and%20Resource,and%20advance%20people%20with%20disabilities.
Vibert, F. (2014). The need for a systemic approach. In M. Bovens, R. E. Goodin, & T.
Schillemans (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of public accountability (pp. 655-660). Oxford
University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199641253.013.0001
Villaverde, L. (2008). Feminist theories and education primer. Peter Lang.
Vogus, T. & Taylor, J. L. (2018). Flipping the script: Bringing an organizational perspective to
the study of autism at work. Autism: The International Journal of Research and Practice,
22(5), 514–516. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361318776103

156
Walker, N. (2022). Neurodiversity: Some basic terms and definitions. Neuroqueer: The Writings
of Dr. Nick Walker. https://neuroqueer.com/neurodiversity-terms-and-definitions/
Waisman-Nitzan, M., Gal, E., & Schreuer, N. (2019). Employers’ perspectives regarding
reasonable accommodations for employees with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of
Management & Organization, 25(4), 481–498. https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2018.59
Weber, C., Krieger, B., Häne, E., Yarker, J., & McDowall, A. (2022). Physical workplace
adjustments to support neurodivergent workers: A systematic review. Applied
Psychology. 1-53. https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.12431
Wegmeyer, L., & Speer, A. (2023). Examining personality testing in selection for neurodiverse
individuals. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 16(1), 61–65.
https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2022.102
Wharmby, P. (2022). Untypical: How the world isn’t built for autistic people and what we
should all do about it. Harper Collins UK.
Whelpley, C., Banks, G. C., Bochantin, J. E., & Sandoval, R. (2021). Tensions on the spectrum:
An inductive investigation of employee and manager experiences of autism. Journal of
Business and Psychology, 36(2), 283–297. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-019-09676-1
Whelpley, C. & Woznyj, H. M. (2023). Balancing the teeter totter: A dialectical view of
managing neurodiverse employees. Human Performance, ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print),
1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/08959285.2023.2219061
Wilcox, A. & Koontz, A. (2022). Workplace well‐being: Shifting from an individual to an
organizational framework. Sociology Compass, 16(10).
https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.13035

157
Williams, Z. & Gotham, K. O. (2021). Assessing general and autism‐relevant quality of life in
autistic adults: A psychometric investigation using item response theory. Autism
Research, 14(8), 1633–1644. https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.2519
Williams, A. (2021, July 8). Top companies who are engaging their neurodivergence in 2021.
LinkedIn. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/top-companies-who-engagingneurodivergence-2021-andrew-williams
Winters, C. A. (2012). The politics of neurodiversity: Why public policy matters. The Social
Science Journal (Fort Collins), 49(1), 114–115.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soscij.2012.01.003
Wolbring, G. & Lillywhite, A. (2023). Burnout through the lenses of equity/equality, diversity
and inclusion and disabled people: A scoping review. Societies (Basel, Switzerland),
13(5), 131–. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc13050131

158
Appendix A
Information Sheet & Informed Consent Form
Before the semi-structured interviews, there will be a demographic survey conducted, which will
include the following informed consent description for IRB approval, which will require
participants to select consent to participate and provide basic information about the study:
Welcome to the research study!
My name is Zachary Yarde, and I am a doctoral candidate at the
University of Southern California. I am interested in understanding
Neurodiversity, and my current dissertation title is “Workplace Neurodiverse
Equity.” You will be presented with information relevant to neurodiversityworkplace equity and asked to answer questions about it. Please be assured that
your responses will be kept entirely confidential.
My goal is to gather information about the best practices and barriers
against workplace neurodiverse equity for hiring talent along with supporting
remote, office, and hybrid-based neurodiverse employees.
The initial survey here should take five (5) minutes to complete. Your
participation in this research is voluntary. You have the right to withdraw at any
point during the study, for any reason, and without any prejudice. There will be no
compensation provided to any research participant. If you would like to contact
the Principal Investigator in the study to discuss this research, please e-mail
Zachary Yarde (yarde@usc.edu).
By clicking the button below, you acknowledge that your participation in
the study is voluntary and that:
• You are at least 18 years of age.
• Reside in the United States.
• Have experience bringing about workplace neurodiverse equity.
• You are aware that you may choose to terminate your participation at any
time and for any reason.
During this initial survey, you will also have the option to acknowledge
your willingness to participate in a future 1:1 online 30-45 minute interview over
Zoom.
Please note that this survey will best be displayed on a laptop or desktop.
Some features may be less compatible for use on a mobile device.
I will publish the results in dissertation and/or publication. Participants
will not be identified in the results. I will take reasonable measures to protect the
security of all your personal information. All data will be de-identified prior to

159
any publication or presentations. I may share your data, de-identified with other
researchers in the future.
If you have any questions about this study, please contact me:
yarde@usc.edu. If you have any questions about your rights as a research
participant, please contact the University of Southern California Institutional
Review Board at (323) 442-0114 or email hrpp@usc.edu.
- I consent, begin the study.
- I do not consent; I do not wish to participate.

160
Appendix B
Demographic Survey Protocol
Table 9
Survey on demographic information
Question
Open or
closed?
Level of
Measurement Response options
R
Q
Concept being
measured
My ethnicity
is:
Closed –
Allow
Multiple
Options
Nominal
1 – Asian
2 – Black / African
3 – White / Caucasian
4 – Hispanic / Latinx
5 – Native American
6 – Pacific Islander
7 – Prefer not to say
8 – Other
Demographic
If you selected
“Other,”
please describe
Open Free Text Field 1 Demographic
My gender is:
Closed –
Dropdown
field
Nominal
1 – Female
2 – Male
3 – Nonbinary
4 – Prefer not to say
5 – Other
Demographic
If you selected
“Other,”
please describe
Open Free Text Field 1 Demographic
Do you
identify as
transgender?
Closed Nominal
1 – Yes
2 – No
3 – Prefer not to say
Demographic
My Age is: Closed Ordinal
1 – 18-24
2 – 25-34
3 – 35-44
4 – 45-54
5 – 55-64
6 – 65 and over
Demographic
My
employment
status is?
Closed Ordinal
1 – Full time
2 – Part-time
3 – unemployed
1 Employment
My occupation
is associated
with:
Closed –
Single Nominal
1 – Administrative
2 – Construction
3 – Education
1 Workplace

161
Selectio
n
Dropdown
4 – Pharmaceutical /
Healthcare
5 – Scientist /
Researcher
6 – Food Service /
Restaurant
7 – Social Services
8 – Information
Security /Technology
9 – The Arts / Acting /
Creation
10 – Religion / Clergy
11 – Veterinarian /
Animal Care
12 – Social Science
13 – Military
14 – State or Federal
Government
15 – Sports &
Athletics
16 – Wellness &
Nutrition
17 - Legal / Law
18 – Logistics /
Shipping /
Transportation
19 – Environmental
Services
20 – News or Media
21 – DEI Advocacy
22 – Consultant
23 –
Farming/agriculture
24 – Entertainment
25 – Financial /
Economics
26 – Self-employed /
Entrepreneur
27 - Other
My annual
income or
salary range is:
Closed Ordinal
1 - $0-$19,999
2 - $20,000-$39,999
3 - $40,000-$59,999
4 - $60,000-$79,999
5 - $80,000-$99,999
1 Employment

162
6 - $100,000-
$119,999
7 - $120,00-$139,999
8 - $140,000-
$159,999
9 - $160,000-
$179,999
10 - $180,000+
How often do
you work from
home or
remote?
Closed Ordinal
1 – Daily
2 – More than once a
week
3 – Once a week
4- Once a month
5 – Less than once a
month
6 – Never
1
Workplace
setting
Which of the
following
neurodiverse
groups do you
identify with?
Closed –
Allow
Multiple
Options
Nominal
1 - ASD: Autism
Spectrum Disorder /
Autistic
2 - ADHD: Attention
Deficit/ Hyperactivity
Disorder / ADD:
Attention Deficit
Disorder
3 – Dyslexia /
Dyscalculia /
Dyspraxia /
Dysgraphia
4 - Other: _____
5 - None of the above
1 Neurodivergence
If you selected
“Other,”
please describe
Open Free Text Field 1 Neurodivergence
Do you agree
with the
following:
Your
organization
supports
neurodivergent
equity.
Closed Ordinal
1 – Yes
2 – No
1
Workplace
Neurodivergent
Equity
Have you
facilitated a
neurodiverse
Closed Ordinal
1 – Yes
2 – No
3
Neurodivergent
Equity Programs

163
support
program?
If so, would
you be
interested in
being
contacted for
an interview
about your
experience
with
implementing
neurodiverse
equity at
work?
Closed Ordinal
1 – Yes
2 – No
3
Interest Measure
for Qualitative
Interviews
These
interviews will
be
confidential,
recorded, and
transcribed.
Are you
willing to
participate,
and do you
agree to be
recorded?
Closed Ordinal
1 – Yes
2 – No
3
Interest Measure
for Qualitative
Interviews
Please provide
your phone
number and
email address
for scheduling
purposes.
Open Text field 3
Contact
information for
interviews
The current demographic survey questions are influenced by studies surrounding neurodivergent
equity and recommendations on how to intentionally structure demographic inquiries
(Narenthiran et al., 2022; Das et al., 2021; Rosenberg, 2017).

164
Appendix C
Interview Protocol
Table 10
Interview questions
Interview Questions (Program
Implementor) Potential Probes
RQ
Addressed
Key
Concept
Addressed
1. What were your expectations
when you created neurodiverse
teams?
How did remote or officebased considerations
influence these? 1
Neurodiver
se equity
2. Please briefly describe the
structures you provided for team
members
What other forms of
neurodiversity support did
you use? 2
ND
inclusion
3. How were the teams supervised?
What was the frequency of
supervision, and were there
differences across
neurotypes? 2 ND support
4. Name some of the notable
outcomes or projects How were these measured? 1
Impact of
ND support
5. Did anything surprise you about
the team’s performance or
approaches to the project?
Did you observe any
barriers for neurodiverse
employees or equity? 1
Impact of
ND
Support
6. Do you have any
recommendations for others
interested in using neurodiverse
teams in their workplace?
What about remote ‘work
from home’ versus ‘officebased’ teams or hiring
versus ongoing? 3
Improving
ND Equity
&
Inclusion/d
ifferences
by setting
Note. The “Potential Probes” were added to the adopted “Interview Questions” as utilized in
“Building supportive, inclusive workplaces where neurodivergent thinkers thrive: Approaches in
managing diversity, inclusion, and building entrepreneurship in the workplace” by Coplan,
Crocker, L., Landin, J., & Stenn, T., 2021, S.A.M. Advanced Management Journal (2-21), 86(1),
21–30. https://doi.org/10.52770/XTBM1097.

165
Appendix D
Interview Script & Supplemental Questions
Interview Script
Interviews begin with the introduction statement and end with the conclusion section below.
Introduction to the Interview:
Hello, my name is Zachary Yarde. I am a doctoral candidate at the University of
Southern California studying best practices for bringing equity and inclusion to neurodiverse
employees within the workforce. Specifically, the current interview is part of a study identifying
how companies can create equitable environments to foster inclusion for neurodiverse
employees. This study also examines the differences between hiring versus ongoing support and
between staff working at the office, from home, or in a hybrid setting. Before we start, can you
provide your permission by completing the informed consent document acknowledging your
willingness to participate and recording this interview? Thank you, now, are there any questions
you have before getting started? Fantastic, let’s begin:
Conclusion to the Interview:
Thank you again for your participation in the current interview. If you have follow-up questions,
please send emails to: yarde@usc.edu. Have a fantastic rest of your day!
Supplemental Interview Questions
The following section provides additional questions for the semi-structured interviews to use
depending on the participant's background and only after the primary interview protocol.
Table 11
Supplemental Interview Questions A – Equity Program Participants
The current table is for those employees who have participated in programs to bring equity and
inclusion to neurodiverse employees.
Interview Questions (Program
Participant) Potential Probes
RQ
Addressed
Key
Concept
Addressed
1. What advice would you give
someone with autism
[Neurodivergence] considering
participating in an employment
program like this? In your
response, please consider both
negative and positive impacts
What advice for
supervisors implementing
these programs? 2
Impact of
ND
Inclusion
2. Has the support provided to you
How do you think this
support differs for staff 3
Workplace
setting

166
changed over time? If so, can you
tell me how?
working from home versus
those at the office?
differences
on Equity
3. How integrated into the
workplace do you feel?
Did you experience
differences during
onboarding or hiring
versus your ongoing
position? 1
Workplace
Inclusion
for ND
4. Has this program affected your
life outside of work? Can you
explain how?
Do you feel others will
have the same impact? 1
Impact of
Workplace
ND Equity
Note. These “Potential Probes” were added to the adopted “Interview Questions” utilized in “An
alternative pathway to employment for autistic job-seekers: a case study of a training and
assessment program targeted to autistic job candidates” by Flower, Hedley, D., Spoor, J. R., &
Dissanayake, C., 2019, Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 71(3), 407–428.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13636820.2019.1636846
Table 12
Supplemental Interview Questions B – Equity Program Facilitators
This table provides additional questions for supervisors who have connected staff to
neurodiverse equity programs. The supplemental questions ensure that each semi-structured
interview focuses similarly on the core concepts of the current research study. Also, bolded text
indicates prioritized questions when there is time within the interview.
Interview Questions
(Organizational Level) Potential Probes
RQ
Addressed
Key
Concept
Addressed
1. Could you give an overview of
the organizational structure of
your organization?
How does this look for
Neurodiverse
employees? 1
Workplace
ND Equity
2. When is a person eligible for your
service?
How do they know they
are? 3
ND
Inclusive
program
access
3. How would someone typically
“come in” to your organization?
What barriers do they face
to find these? 3
Inclusion
Access
4. Who would be a “typical”
employee receiving your services?
How are these staff
identified? 3
ND
Inclusion
5. Is there any time limit to access
services?
Or is there anything else
that would impact access,
such as staff at the office
versus those working
from home? 3 ND Equity
6. When would a person be
‘discharged’ from your services?
Who makes this decision,
and how? 3
Workplace
ND Equity

167
7. Do you have any clearly defined
stages “from a person ‘coming into
your organization’ to getting
Employment? Could you describe the
employment model/processes that
you use?
Does this look different
from staff already a part
of your organization? 1
Workplace
setting
differences
on Equity
8. What kind of support do you
provide during the process
(interview, ongoing support)?
What about barriers
identified for
Neurodiverse staff? 3
Equity in
Hiring
versus
ongoing
aid.
9. Do you have a defined protocol
for the job-matching process?
What does this look like
for neurodiverse
employees 3
ND Equity
& Inclusion
10. How do you evaluate the
outcome of the services on an
individual level / organizational
level?
Who does the evaluation,
and how often? 3
Impact of
ND Equity
Programs
11. Do you have collaboration with
other employers/organizations?
How does this inform
equity practices? 3
Improving
ND Equity
12. How do you connect with other
employers/businesses/organizations? How often? 3
Improving
ND Equity
13. Do you collaborate with other
‘treatment teams’ (Medical, social,
rehabilitation, the individual’s social
network)?
How often? Who typically
or most often? 3
Improving
ND Equity
14. What kind of
workplaces/employment do you have
access to?
What about your
neurodiverse staff? 3 ND Equity
15. How would an individual transfer
to open employment?
Any differences for
neurodiverse staff? 3
ND
Inclusion
16. Do you follow up with former
employees who have transferred
“out” of your organization?
What does this look like,
and what have you
learned about
neurodiverse retention
or staff? 2
ND Equity
& Inclusion
Note. The “Potential Probes” were added to the adopted “Interview Questions” from “Success
factors enabling employment for adults on the autism spectrum from employers’ perspective” by
Dreaver, Thompson, C., Girdler, S., Adolfsson, M., Black, M., & Falkmer, M., 2019, Journal of
Autism and Developmental Disorders, 50, 1657–1667, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-019-
03923-3.

168
Appendix E
Recruitment Social Media Post for LinkedIn
Study participants needed for a dissertation focused on learning about the best practices and
barriers to facilitating workplace equity for neurodiverse employees!
This focus will be on gathering insight from executives, leaders, or consultants who have
implemented neurodiverse equity programs within the workplace. Other eligibility requirements
include being at least 18 years of age and residing in the US. If selected, the study will include a
1:1 online interview over Zoom for 30-45 minutes.
If you are interested in participating, please complete this initial demographic survey:
https://usc.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_2iqVxhbJDKGwBiS
Please repost this if you know of others who might be interested in participation. If you have
questions, please contact me at yarde@usc.edu or via LinkedIn direct messages.
Thank you!
#neurodiversity #neurodiversityatwork #neurodiversityemployment

169
Appendix F
IRB Approval Form Notification

170

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

A neurodiverse way to hire

PDF

Understanding workplace burnout in the nonprofit sector

PDF

Perceptions of early childhood educators on how reflective supervision influences instructional effectiveness and teacher wellbeing

PDF

Workplace bullying of women leaders in the United States

PDF

Understanding experiences of previously incarcerated Black men and employment: a mixed methods study of racial disparities amongst Black men with a prior history of incarceration

PDF

The role of organizational leaders in creating sustainable diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives in the workplace

PDF

The attributes of effective equity-focused elementary school principals

PDF

Representation of gay Asian men in the media

PDF

Stories of persistence: illuminating the experiences of California Latina K–12 leaders: a retention and career development model

PDF

Canaries in the mine: centering the voices of Black women DEI practitioners in a period of DEI resistance

PDF

Enduring in silence: understanding the intersecting challenges of women living with multiple sclerosis in the workplace

PDF

Understanding the gaps for neurotypical managers to support college-educated autistic employees across industries

PDF

"We belong": women of color in technology (WOCT)

PDF

Lived experiences of athletic administrators advancing athletic programming

PDF

What university equity and diversity leaders are doing to deal with issues of equity, access, and inclusion

PDF

No officer left behind? The promotion experiences of retired and separated Black commissioned officers in the United States Army

PDF

Examining teachers’ perceptions of diversity, equity, and inclusion professional development

PDF

“Black” workplace belonging: an examination of the lived experiences of Black faculty sense of belonging factors in community colleges

PDF

Healthcare leaders developing highly reliable organizations

PDF

The attributes of effective equity-focused high school principals

Asset Metadata

Creator Yarde, Zachary Foster (author)

Core Title Workplace neurodiverse equity

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2024-05

Publication Date 05/21/2024

Defense Date 04/05/2024

Publisher Los Angeles, California (original), University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag employee resource groups,equity,human capital,neurodivergent,neurodiversity,OAI-PMH Harvest,social cognitive theory,universal design interventions,workplace inclusion

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Riggio, Marsha (committee chair), Quintana, Taqueena (committee member), Trahan, Don Jr. (committee member)

Creator Email yarde@usc.edu,zackyarde@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC113950147

Unique identifier UC113950147

Identifier etd-YardeZacha-12985.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-YardeZacha-12985

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Yarde, Zachary Foster

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20240521-usctheses-batch-1158 (batch), University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright.

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu