Conversations about neurodiversity

Last month I attended an inspiring virtual webinar by Lexxic entitled “Neurodiversity and the Law”. I wanted to share some of the information presented in addition to some of my own thoughts to spark conversations on this important topic. 

What is Neurodiversity?

We all have a profile of strengths and challenges – that is what makes us uniquely different, that is what makes us human. You may have done some form of personality assessment such as Myers Briggs or if you haven’t, and you have some level of self-awareness, then you will be familiar with what your own personal strengths and challenges are. 

When we talk about neurodiversity, we are referring to the neurological differences in the ways our brains are wired and how they process information.  Gardner’s theory of Multiple Intelligences posits there are different kinds of intelligences such as visual-spatial, intrapersonal, interpersonal, logical-mathematical, linguistic-verbal, musical and naturalistic; and they relate to a number of different parts of the brain (in comparison to prior assumptions of intelligence which posited that there is one single type of intelligence, known as ‘g’ for general intelligence, that only focuses on cognitive abilities).  Therefore, it may be better to think of human neurocognitive styles as operating across multiple continuums of competence – rather than on single lines such as between ‘able’ and ‘disabled’, or between ‘less intelligent’ and ‘more intelligent’[1].

When we describe people as ‘neurodivergent’, we are talking about people who have a thinking style at the edges of one or more of these continuums, with a brain “that functions in ways that diverges significantly from the dominant societal standards of ‘normal’”[2]. The term covers diagnoses such as Dyslexia, Dyspraxia, Dyscalculia, ADHD and Autism.

Examples of famous neurodivergents you may have heard of include Richard Branson, Dr Maggie Aderin-Pocock MBE, Emma Watson, Steve Jobs, Ingvar Kamprad, and Duncan Bannatyne - it’s clear that people with thinking styles ‘at the edges’ can achieve great things.

Societal perceptions

Do you know someone who is neurodivergent? Chances are you do but you may not even realise it. Approximately 1 in 7 individuals have a neurodifference within the UK, some may not have a formal diagnosis and many may choose not to disclose through fear of judgement due to perceived associated stigmas within society. According to a report by Made by Dyslexia, 73% of respondents hid their dyslexia from their employers[3] - and for a valid reason. In the Power of Difference Report by the Institute of Leadership and Management, shockingly 50% of respondents stated that they would be uncomfortable employing or line managing someone with a neurodifference[4]. But why?

Previously, society tended to view these alternative thinking styles through the lens of treating them as disorders and focusing on the things that the individual struggles with (known as the medical model of disability[5] – Kumra & Manfredi, 2012). This is exemplified in the negative and medicalised language that has dominated the lexicon, as highlighted by the very terms ‘autism spectrum disorder’ and the double negative in ‘Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder’.

Such views have led, unsurprisingly, to a preoccupation with finding ways to help the neurodivergent individual better ‘fit in’ - to act and function as closely as possible to a ‘neurotypical’ - in a society shaped for the latter.

This language has shaped societal views leading to unconscious biases and stereotypical thinking. For example, research by Made in Dyslexia (2017) investigated the differences in perceptions from individuals who do not have dyslexia in comparison to those who have a diagnosis of dyslexia. Findings highlighted a clear alignment in perception when considering the challenges faced by individuals with dyslexia, but a marked difference in perception when looking at the strengths and skills dyslexic individuals often have[6].

In other words, people tend to focus on the things that dyslexics find challenging and there is much less focus or appreciation for the true and often unique capabilities of such individuals, who, though they may struggle with one task type, can excel in others.

Such stigmatisation can severely impact on the way neurodivergent individuals perceive themselves and can lead to low levels self-esteem and self-worth, as well as co-concurrent mental ill-health such as anxiety and depression.

Naturally, neurotypical individuals see the world through their own lens made up of their own life experiences and they may not see the barriers that neurodivergent individuals face every day. It is worth considering:

Are neurodivergent individuals incapable of social functioning because of their impairments or is society constructed by people with capabilities for people with capabilities in such a way that it makes it difficult for people with impairments to be able to function?[7]

Neurodiversity in NDT

Neurodiversity could be considered one of the most challenging areas within diversity and inclusion – complex, nuanced, and often invisible – yet it offers a business upside in this context: given that neurodivergent people literally think differently[8].

For example, dyslexic and dyspraxic people have a unique ability to ‘think outside the box’ and frequently have a greater capacity for innovative, visionary and creative thinking. Autistic people often bring strengths to their work such as analytical thinking, focus, and attention to detail. Traits associated with ADHD can include an ability to focus for extended periods, multitasking and being calm under pressure[9]. All these skills are extremely valuable to have in organisations, particularly when thinking about organisational growth, innovation and continuity.

Moreover, the very nature of engineering, and NDT specifically, requires people who can think creatively, outside the box and apply their knowledge in different ways to help solve the problems and challenges faced everyday within our industry. Because neurodivergent individuals process information differently, they are able to see things from different angles and provide solutions that neurotypical individuals may not consider and so provide extremely valuable skillsets to our industry.

However, it is important to emphasise that organisations need to create an inclusive environment to enable neurodivergent individuals to deliver their skillset in this way, to cultivate their abilities and enable them to flourish in their role. Some examples of steps organisations could take to create a more inclusive culture could include:

• raising awareness of what neurodiversity means within the organisation through training employees and managers to help overcome potential unconscious biases,
• introducing clear, organisation-wide neurodiversity-aware policies and procedures,
• creating a non-judgmental environment and a safe space for employees to be able to hold conversations surrounding neurodiversity, and
• awareness of potential reasonable adjustments that can be made to ensure neurodivergent individuals can work to the best of their abilities.

Employer duty & reasonable adjustments

Focusing on the point above, it is important to recognise that employers have a legal responsibility to ensure reasonable adjustments are made for neurodivergent individuals as they are protected under the Equality Act 2010. This is because neurodiversity falls under the protected characteristic of disability. It is worth emphasising that although most people with neurodifferences do not see themselves as disabled, when looking at the law we need to look through the lens of disability through the Equality Act.

A person is defined as disabled if “they have a physical or mental impairment which has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on their ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities.”[10]

Day-to-day activities are defined as “normal daily life activities such as getting up in the morning, getting dressed, walking a certain distance. More specialised activities, such as an ability to lift heavy objects, would not be classed as normal day to day activities.”[11]

This provides neurodivergent individuals with legal protection against discrimination (direct and indirect), harassment and victimisation. Neurodiversities such as ADHD, autism, dyspraxia, dyslexia and dyscalculia have all been recognised by employment tribunals as disabilities.

Organisations are obliged, under the Equality Act 2010, to make sure workers with disabilities, or physical or mental health conditions, are not substantially disadvantaged when doing their jobs.

“Where a disabled person is placed at a substantial disadvantage … In comparison with persons who are not disabled, an employer has a duty to take such steps as are reasonable to remedy that disadvantage”[12].

It is worth noting that many people who are neurodivergent may not have had a formal diagnosis – this may be more so for older people, women, and those from ethnic minorities. For organisations, this means there could be more neurodivergent people within the organisation than originally thought. In addition, for public sector employers, there are also additional duties that need to be considered under the Public Sector Equality Duty.

But what is reasonable?

Reasonable depends on the case and includes the effectiveness of the adjustment, health and safety, practicability of making an adjustment, cost and any potential disruption. Even if there is a significant cost to the organisation, it may still be considered cost effective overall. Employers also have a duty to consider other sources of funding to make the adjustments, such as Access to Work, and if such funding has not been explored the employer could still be liable.

Examples of reasonable adjustments could include:

• Adjustments in physical features – moving to a quieter workspace; adjusting workplace lighting or heating, providing a coloured reading panel.
• Providing auxiliary aids – speech to text software, ergonomic keyboards or other assistive technology.
• Changes in employer’s provision criterion or practice – requirement to sit written tests, longer period of time to complete tasks.

It is important for reasonable adjustments to be made with those who it will be affecting, after all, they know their needs best.

I hope the above information sparks further discussions on the topic of neurodiversity, I would be interested in hearing your own thoughts and experiences on the topic of neurodiversity within NDT – drop me a message!

Note: This article was written for the British Institute of Non-Destructive Testing NDT News journal on behalf of the Diversity & Inclusion Advisory Group. For further information please visit the BINDT website.

[1] CIPD, 2018. Neurodiversity at work.

[2] CIPD, 2018. Neurodiversity at work.

[3] Made By Dyslexia, 2017. Connecting the Dots Report.

[4] Institute of Leadership and Management, 2020. Neurodiversity – The Power of Difference Report

[5] Kumra, S & Manfredi, S., 2012. Managing Equality and Diversity: Theory and Practice.

[6] Made By Dyslexia, 2017. Connecting the Dots Report.

[7] Kumra, S & Manfredi, S., 2012. Managing Equality and Diversity: Theory and Practice.

[8] CIPD, 2018. Neurodiversity at work.

[9] Forbes, 2014. ADHD: The Entrepreneur’s Superpower.

[10] Equality Act, 2010. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/contents

[11] Equality Act, 2010. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/contents

[12] Equality Act, 2010. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/contents