It's my first post since 2022 because quite frankly, 2023 was a blur. There was too much new work and too many important world events to share where I was and what I was doing. Welcoming 2024 in with a bit of focus, some balance, and optimism for what's on the horizon, and wishing the same for you.
Sharing below some hopefully helpful thoughts on an area I've been focusing on, and also that starting in January, 2025, I'll be teaching the Inclusive Leadership and Conflict Management course as part of the new Master's Program on Digital Communication Leadership at Emerson College (woot woot!).
What "Difficult" Means in 2024
In April of 2023, at the International Ombuds Association’s Annual Conference in Seattle, I presented Ombudsing with Neurodiversity in Mind which, as is probably evident from the title, was a workshop focused on highlighting for ombuds and ombuds-adjacent attendees an often overlooked and largely ignored disability, neurodiversity.
Neurodiversity is defined as “the variation and differences in neurological structure and function that exist among human beings, especially when viewed as being normal and natural rather than pathological: recognizing autism as an example of neurodiversity” and the use of the term is intended to both recognize a hidden disability and normalize variations in how we process and interact with the world around us. For almost 2 years, across the multiple institutions where I both ombuds and consult, I’ve seen a repeated pattern: an employee is either overlooked for advancement opportunities or put on a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP for short) because they’re described as “rude”, “difficult” or “not meeting expectations”, not because they don’t perform their job functions with proficiency, but because the way they do them - more specifically the way they interact with others while they do them - is viewed as negative. They’re too direct, they don’t adapt quickly, they have one way of doing things. They are described as inflexible or insubordinate because change is difficult, if not impossible.
Some employees are described as “inappropriate” because they don’t pick up on social cues or follow social norms and observe boundaries. When I talk with these employees, either because they seek me out or because it’s been suggested they speak to me, (and I say this with the clear caveat that I do not diagnose anyone) it’s often clear to me that they exhibit traits that are fairly common among folks with various degrees of neurodiversity, in particular autism. They’ll often say “I do my job” because their focus is the literal nature of the functions they fulfill and sometimes they’re confused that doing their job isn’t enough to prove they’re capable of advancing or to keep them “out of trouble.”
I pick up on these cues as possible indicators of neurodiversity because I’ve met with literally thousands of people in my 30-year career as a mediator, ombuds and consultant, and I’ve become adept at changing my communication style to connect to the needs of those with whom I meet. And I’ve tried to educate myself on the myriad of ways that neurodiversity can present itself in the workplace. For my spectacular initial failure that was the impetus for this learning, check out: https://shoutout.wix.com/so/cdO3IB3OS?languageTag=en
Most workplaces aren’t equipped to support neurodiverse employees and I’ve submitted a piece on why this is and how to change the paradigm to The Journal of the International Ombuds Association (JIOA) which will hopefully be published soon, but a truly inclusive workplace requires recognition and support of invisible disabilities as well as visible ones, and neurodiversity is an invisible disability.
This means that employers need to be educated and to educate their teams, and in particular, managers, on how to support neurodiverse employees before those employees feel “targeted for failure” because they don’t meet neurotypical expectations for advancement or communications. It’s important to recognize that many workplaces require the employee to raise an issue and seek help before their needs can be met and for neurodiverse employees this can create a real barrier. Take for example the autistic employee I spoke with who was on the verge of having her employment terminated because they wouldn’t attend meetings in a particular building because the bathrooms weren’t marked. As that employee explained to me, they “would rather die” than share their need to do a bodily function so they couldn’t ask for directions to the bathroom, nor could they share this concern with their manager or HR.
For other employees I’ve spoken with, it can be confusing or frustrating to be told they need to “ask for help” when they are fulfilling the technical functions of their job descriptions. And for those that have been told their communication skills are lacking and/or have been given support in the form of communication skills training, it’s important to recognize that even after successfully completing it, implementing those skills may never be possible. Why? Communication skills trainings are predominantly created and delivered by and for people that are neurotypical. Imagine if you only spoke language A and were told that in order to keep your job you needed to be fluent in language B, but the training you were given to learn language B was exclusively taught in language B. How effective do you think that training would be and how likely would you be to keep your job?
It’s for this reason that I advise employers to take a few simple steps towards creating a more inclusive workplace when it comes to neurodiverse (read: all) employees. The first is to use a “Human User Manual”, a version of which I created and is downloadable here. By using this form and making this information available where appropriate to team members and, in particular supervisors, employers organically bring forward the issues that are at the heart of most workplace conflicts.
The second is to create understanding among managers and those in HR about how neurodiversity can present in terms of language and behaviors. While neither should ever be in a position to diagnose anyone, recognition can help employers adjust markers of success and inclusion. Learning to meet concerns about lack of flexibility, strict adherence to rules, directness in communications etc…with inquiry rather than judgment can help put both employees and employers on a better path to success.
A performance improvement plan (PIP) is a commonly used document whose purpose is to help employees who aren’t meeting performance goals by identifying perceived deficiencies and setting clear expectations for performance. Again, though, PIP’s are often developed by and for those with only an understanding that’s limited to neurotypical functioning.
Any plan needs to take into consideration the “deficiency” perceived could be complicated by an employee’s neurodiversity and - even with training - there should be an inquiry about whether the markers for performance and/or advancement should be shifted. While some might be concerned that this is just an excuse for “difficult” employees, we wouldn’t question an employee who asked for written transcripts of meetings because of a hearing impairment, or one that asked for auditory cues because their vision is impaired. Similarly, we should be giving the benefit of the doubt and support to employees that need it in less tangible or immediately available ways.
Shifting away from systems and procedures that treat employees as “one size fits all” and putting in place those that recognize differences and promote and support success for everyone is, after all, the meaning of inclusion.
Bình luận