When a retention problem is really a work-design problem. 

Many organisations have become more comfortable discussing neurodiversity in recruitment. Far less attention is paid to what happens later, when a neurodivergent employee is considered for promotion, given responsibility for a team or assessed as a potential leader.

A study published in the Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance offers a useful perspective on this issue. In an experiment involving 467 adults with professional experience, participants evaluated hypothetical colleagues and leaders described as neurotypical, autistic, dyslexic, intellectually gifted or having ADHD.

The researchers examined perceptions of warmth and competence, as well as social distance: in practical terms, how willing someone would be to work closely with, report to or develop a professional relationship with that person.

The results suggest that bias does not necessarily disappear when a neurodivergent employee demonstrates enough ability to enter an organisation. It may simply become more visible when that person is considered for leadership.

Participants generally expressed greater social distance from neurodivergent profiles, particularly when the individual was presented as a leader rather than a colleague. For ADHD, the difference between reactions to an employee and a leader was statistically significant, although modest.

This matters because organisations often treat recruitment, inclusion and leadership development as separate conversations. A company may successfully attract neurodivergent candidates while continuing to rely on conventional ideas about how authority, credibility and “leadership presence” should look.

An employee who thinks aloud, communicates with unusual intensity, needs written follow-up after complex discussions or uses external systems to manage working memory may be highly effective. However, these visible working methods can be interpreted as evidence that the person is not sufficiently organised, composed or senior.

Promotion decisions are rarely based on performance data alone. They are influenced by subjective judgements about readiness, confidence, communication style and whether someone appears to be a “natural fit” for leadership. These criteria can quietly reward familiarity rather than capability.

The answer is not to promote people simply because they are neurodivergent. It is to ensure that leadership potential is assessed through evidence rather than resemblance to an established managerial prototype.

Organisations can begin by examining several questions. Are promotion criteria clearly defined? Are candidates assessed on outcomes, judgement and their ability to support others, or on how closely their behaviour matches an unwritten cultural norm? Are unusual communication and organisational strategies treated as weaknesses even when they produce strong results?

The study used hypothetical profiles, so it cannot tell us exactly how these attitudes translate into real promotion decisions. Nevertheless, it identifies an important risk. Neuroinclusion may improve access to employment without improving access to influence.

Recruitment may open the door. Leadership systems determine who is allowed to move further.

Source

Curşeu et al. (2026), “Who belongs and who leads? Experimental evidence on bias against neurodivergent employees and leaders”, Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance.

https://doi.org/10.1108/JOEPP-06-2025-0496

Practical resource

Work enablement plan – a free workplace adjustment tool

Creating a more inclusive workplace starts with understanding what employees need to perform effectively. I have developed a free, one-page Work enablement plan to help employees and managers identify workplace barriers, agree on practical adjustments and establish clear expectations without compromising performance standards.

The template focuses on practical solutions rather than diagnoses and can be adapted to individual roles and workplace requirements.

Download the free Work enablement plan (PDF) →