Raymond Klassen – Ideals and Identities

What is Neurodiversity?

Neurodiversity is a term that was coined in the late 1990s by an Australian sociologist, Judy Singer. It’s not a medical term or a diagnosis. It refers to the way our brains function, learn, and process information. Left-handed individuals navigate a world designed for the right-handed majority. Similarly, neurodiverse individuals grapple with environments not always tailored to their unique wiring. As such, it becomes common for them to believe something is wrong with them or for others to underestimate their abilities.

Traditionally, the narrative around neurodiversity in the professional environment has been somewhat constrained. The focus often fell on the perceived limitations or accommodations that individuals with autism, ADHD, or dyslexia might require. The conversation was primarily rooted in a medical or pathological model, where neurological differences were viewed through a lens of disability, often emphasizing the challenges and overlooking the strengths. Employees with these characteristics were sometimes unfairly labeled, and their unique skill sets and perspectives were underutilized or overlooked. The emphasis was on adapting these individuals to fit into pre-existing workplace structures rather than adapting the workplace to leverage their unique abilities fully.

But a new perspective is emerging, one that recognizes that difference does not equate to negative. It’s a perspective that considers the full spectrum of human abilities. This perspective has profound implications for everyone in the workplace, whether they identify as neurodiverse or neurotypical.

So neurodiversity is a non-medical term that includes both biologically given and socially acquired differences without upstaging any particular type. See the image below from Johns Hopkins University, to visualize the particular strengths of each type of neurodivergence:

A Personal Story

Two areas of my professional expertise have merged in my current and most recent contracted job: meta-cognitive processes in education and Teaching English as an Additional Language. I have an interesting task: I have been asked to teach the following clientele toward the end of gainful employment:

1. Neurodivergent – identified by interview and factors such as slow progress at school, i.e. in English-language learning, or by academic troubles in previous schooling.
2. Newcomers to Canada (less than 2 years)
3. English level equivalent to CLB (Canadian Language Benchmark) 3 – 4 / CEFR A2/B1
4. In stable housing, financial, and social situations, “stable” is defined as not moving. It also includes family or social supports that allow the student to study without worrying about having the necessities of biological life.

It is a team effort at Norquest College. We have an administrator, a project lead, a funder, and a .6 FTE work placement coordinator. However, narrowing down the clientele has its challenges. Criteria 2 & 3 above are easier to assess. For my project, they are taken as a given. In the other 2 categories, there is resistance. 

Criteria 1, for example, is not a given – often students need more support to provide the necessary details to determine meta-cognitive processing, which is core to assessing whether someone is neuro-typical or neuro-diverse. Cultural stigmas around neurodivergence are particularly stubborn. Students don’t want to admit that they may be neurodivergent because the stereotype is that something is wrong with them. They believe neurodivergence is an obstacle to both learning and employment. Admitting it, in their own cultures, is a sign of weakness, rather than a positive sign of self-knowledge. In the 30+ interviews I conducted with applicants to the program, more than half admitted academic or workplace difficulties related to neurodivergence as soon as they heard that we valued people whose minds operated in differing ways from their previous educational experience. 

So, there is an element of cultural resistance to expressing neurodivergence.

While I am a certified learning assessor (from the Detroit Test of Learning Aptitude, the Brigance test, and from Wescheler), I do not have a psychology degree. Without one, it is hard to pin down neurodivergence. Why? Well, neurodivergence is a very broad, and historically pejorative, term. It has the negative connotations often associated with diagnoses of ADHD, Autism, PTSD, Dyslexia, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, and Depression. What I have found is that neurodivergence is often treated as an obstacle to the institutional pace of learning dictated by schedules and common teacher expectations – which are taken as a given. So, in instances like this, we often think that the way to cope is by providing learner accommodations. I have experience as a secondary and postsecondary instructor in academic support facilities throughout the school system. I also have experience at universities and colleges and as an employer in workplaces. Institutional environments treat neurodivergence as a type of nuisance. It must be accommodated under the larger umbrella of diversity, equity, and inclusion.

So, there is also an institutional inertia that creates a misfit between neurodivergent individuals and their educational and workplace institutions. It isn’t merely cultural stigma that excludes neurodiverse learners; systemic features work to merely mitigate the negative effects of neurodiversity rather than embrace neurodiverse learners. In other words, neurodivergence is treated as an outlier such that an attitude of tolerance (which aligns with values of inclusion) – rather than ownership (which embraces diversity) – is built into our educational structures. The instinct to treat neurodivergence as pathological is still present. However, on its own, mere tolerance of neurodivergent exceptions still leaves the puzzles and problems of institutional pace and individuals who are not served by this pace underserved.

The resistance to disclose around Criteria 4 – stability in social, financial, and housing situations – adds a necessary piece to this puzzle and points us toward a solution. Newcomers know that they are not to be a long-term burden on Canadian social systems (it is part of their immigration process). If Criteria 2 (that applicants are newcomers to Canada) & 3 (that they have an upper beginner English level) above are taken as given, then Criteria 4 will have in-built obstacles – they will not likely admit that they experience financial, social, and housing stability. Given Criteria 3, they are unlikely to have the employment necessary to stabilize their housing and finances to liberate them for the completion of the program. While Canada provides refugees one year of living subsidies, most newcomers aren’t yet on their feet for much longer than that. They will need some non-governmental support that includes these newcomers. Additionally, as newcomers, they are also not likely to have the social stability required to complete such an adventure as fulfilling a full-time work-integrated training program. They just haven’t been in Canada long enough to establish the necessary social connections. Unless that is, they came as welcomed by a cultural community that provided them social and financial stability.

If cultural obstacles and institutional inertia tend to suppress their neurodivergent characters, then the integration of these individuals will always be left unfinished. What they fear will become a reality; they will become a long-time burden on the Canadian social system or some smaller cultural group.

Integration, as it turns out, not only changes the individual to be integrated, but also the system that integrates.

Inclusion is a term that aims at cultural, ethnic, and religious diversity. However, with neurodivergence, we now start by bringing diversity to the center of our concern, rather than leaving it on the “included” periphery. We can embrace neurodivergence, rather than merely tolerating it. But the challenge is to be open to it. 

Why should we embrace neurodiversity?

I am grateful that In today’s rapidly evolving corporate and institutional landscape, inclusion, as a practiced value, is gaining necessary traction, embedding itself at the core of organizational strategies and values. An often overlooked facet of inclusion is neurodiversity, an element that transcends the aforementioned cultural categories.

Instead of tolerating neurodiversity, as is the current trend dominated by the broad social value of inclusion, we might embrace the fact that organizations include large and potentially hidden neurodiverse populations with significant and hidden talents. In recent years, innovative organizations such as Microsoft, Ernst & Young, JP Morgan, and Ford have all adopted inclusive recruiting processes, reporting success in hiring neurodiverse people, decreasing turnover, and increasing retention rates. A conscious effort to create and support such diversity leads to more creativity, innovation, productivity, and resilience, and everyone benefits.

Resilience and Neurodiversity

At this point, one might doubt the leap from a pathological conception of neurodiversity to a strengths-based conception of it. Some evidence has persuaded me.

First, I had the pleasure of teaching Howard Gardner’s Frames of Mind (free download) for 5 years, in a course on Educational Strategies at The King’s University in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. In it, he describes how socially acquired neurological differences like trauma can create similar neurological differences as blunt-force brain damage such as sports concussions. Gardner argues forcefully that brain damage that occurs from traumatic experiences has the same overall effect as neurological differences given at birth: the individual’s brain re-adjusts to severe impacts to cope with environments not suited to the neurological difference. That is, the individual has resiliently developed coping skills to mediate between the environment and the impacted organ. This has been confirmed by the authors of The Body Keeps the Score, and When the Body Says No. Thus, resilience is a key term in strengths-based responses to neurodiversity.

Resilience pertains to the ability to endure adversity, adapt, and emerge even stronger. Resilience is paramount in a corporate workplace marked by constant regulatory changes, economic uncertainties, and shifting market dynamics. The resilience mindset recognizes that every person, neurodiverse and neurotypical, possesses distinctive strengths and challenges. It sees the whole picture.

Consider the case of an accountant with ADHD who struggles with focus and time management but possesses an extraordinary ability to think creatively and identify patterns that others might miss. Or an autistic colleague who excels in attention to detail, making them an invaluable asset in auditing processes. In both instances, the focus is not solely on the challenges but on the individual’s unique strengths and contributions. By shifting the mindset from deficit-focused to resilience-focused, organizations can unlock the full potential of all individuals, enhancing creativity, innovation, productivity, and resilience within teams and organizations.

The Case For Embracing Neurodivergence

Organizational climates that connect neurodiversity with inclusion and ethical climates do better. There are many benefits:

Creativity and innovation: A diverse team, including neurodivergent members, brings various perspectives and problem-solving approaches together. This diversity can lead to innovative solutions to complex financial challenges, giving organizations a competitive edge in a rapidly changing business environment. But it isn’t just a matter of competitive edge. They have unique visions that differentiate your business.

Productivity: Neurodivergent individuals often possess hyper-focused abilities in areas that align with their interests and strengths. Harnessing these talents can significantly boost productivity within teams. Moreover, neurodivergent individuals are often strongly committed to their work, contributing to a positive work ethic.

Resilience: Neurodivergent individuals have, by necessity, developed resilience throughout their lives as they navigate a world that may not always understand and accommodate their differences. This resilience can be a valuable asset within organizations, helping them weather storms and adapt to unforeseen challenges.

However, more is needed to acknowledge the benefits of neurodiversity; organizations must actively create a culture of inclusion and support.

Implementing a Strategy for Neurodiversity

Here are some steps that organizations can take to harness the power of neurodiversity:

Education and awareness: Start by educating teams about neurodiversity. Encourage open conversations and dispel myths and misconceptions. Awareness is the first step toward fostering a culture that values different ways of thinking.

Flexible work environments: Recognize that neurodivergent individuals may thrive in different working environments. Offering flexibility regarding workspace, hours, and work arrangements not only accommodates their needs but it also creates avenues for their strengths to manifest.

Mentorship and support: Establish mentorship programs that pair neurodivergent individuals with experienced colleagues who can provide guidance and support. Creating a strong support network is crucial for their success.

Tools: Be proactive in identifying and providing reasonable tools for neurodivergent employees. These tools can range from noise-canceling headphones to other communication methods.

Ethical climates: Promote a culture of ethical conduct and integrity within the organization. Neurodivergent individuals often excel in areas where precision and adherence to rules are crucial, making them valuable contributors to ethical climates.

The benefits of embracing neurodiversity extend beyond immediate work environments. They extend to society, setting an example for cultures and systems for diversity to thrive. When organizations consciously create and support diverse climates, everyone benefits. Neurodiversity is not a challenge to overcome; it’s a strength to harness.

Further reading:

One educational resource that affects teaching practice is Universal Design For Learning: Theory and Practice. 

For more on the spiritual foundations of incorporating diversity into everyday life:

The Intersection of Faith and Neurodiversity

A Meaning of Otherness – from this blog