In The Politics of Autism, I discuss the employment of people on the autism spectrum. It also discusses the workforce serving people with disabilities.
Abstract
PurposeWhile employment rates amongst neurodivergent adults are notoriously low, little is known about their experiences in the workplace and their contribution to innovation and productivity in the labor market. At the same time, the views of colleagues and employers with regard to the inclusion of neurodivergent adults in the workforce are important. The purpose of the systematic literature review presented here was to explore what is known about the experiences of neurodivergent employees, their colleagues, and employers in terms of facilitators and barriers to inclusive best practice in the workplace.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review of the literature. Our analysis and synthesis are based on 56 studies from 12 different countries that met inclusion criteria.ResultsEligible studies included 4909 neurodivergent employees, 2041 non-neurodivergent participants (mostly coworkers), and nearly 300 supervisors, managers, and employers. Identified barriers included a lack of awareness and education of supervisors, especially when they attributed social challenges to personal factors, at times resulting in disciplinary actions or exclusion. Key facilitators included supportive managers, flexible and tailored work arrangements, and the availability of assistive technologies. Benefits of inclusive approaches included improved employee retention, increased commitment, and an enhanced organizational image.ConclusionsOur review findings confirm that neurodivergent employees experience a number of impactful barriers at work. They also experience some important facilitators that can make their working life easier. We propose that future mainstream employment research should ensure that neurodivergent voices are heard and suggest that future work also includes employee, managerial, and organizational perspectives.
From the article:
The systematic review described in this paper identified 56 studies that reported on the experiences of neurodivergent employees and their employers. The studies identified definite and tangible benefits when facilitators such as supportive managers and supervisors were available, and neurodivergence aware policies and workplace adjustments were implemented. Benefits included improved employee retention, increased commitment, and enhanced organizational image. Barriers primarily stemmed from a lack of awareness and education of supervisors, especially when they attributed social challenges to personal factors, and this resulted in disciplinary actions or exclusion. Mixed outcomes acknowledged potential benefits of neurodivergence-aware policies in reducing biases, improving hiring practices, and fostering inclusion. However, some employers struggled to effectively benefit from neurodivergent employees and reported inconsistencies in implementing neurodivergence-aware policies and workplace adjustments, highlighting ongoing challenges in workplace inclusion.
Given the rise in awareness of neurodivergence since the early 2000s and wider recognition and acceptance more recently (Nicolosi & Dillenburger, 2025; Singer, 2017), it is not surprising that almost three-quarters of the studies were conducted from 2020 onwards. The majority of these studies were based on research conducted in an Anglo-Saxon context, with only 11 studies covering other regions, highlighting potential gaps in international research regarding the experiences of neurodivergent employees and their employers.
...
Our findings indicate that most of the participants in the studies included in this review were able to hold a relatively good job for extended periods of time, earning average or just below average incomes (bearing in mind that wages have risen substantially since many of these papers were published; Office for National Statistics, 2012). While this is encouraging, it confirms the fact that even well-educated neurodivergent employees with relatively low support needs tend to be somewhat “underemployed” and remain underpaid (Petty et al., 2023). It also indicates that those with higher support needs typically do not take part in employment-based research. This may be the case because they are more likely to be employed via supported employment schemes or in sheltered workshops. In any case, their voices appear to be missing from employment research (Dillenburger et al., 2019).
