The Sunday BlindSpot: Neurodivergence and Mental Health Are Not Quirks

They Are Workplace Reality

Workplace accessibility is often defined in narrow and visible terms. Organisations are quick to reference ramps, lifts, wide doorways, and accessible bathrooms. These are important, but they do not address the less visible but equally critical aspects of accessibility.

Neurodivergence and mental health conditions form a significant part of this conversation. Autism, ADHD, dyslexia, sensory processing differences, anxiety, depression, and related challenges are not rare. They are part of everyday life for a large proportion of staff and clients. Despite this, many workplaces continue to operate as if every worker and every client fits a mythical “average” model. This model assumes a person who never struggles with concentration, never feels overwhelmed by their environment, and thrives under bright lights and constant noise. That person does not exist.

It is time to recognise that designing workplaces for this fictional standard harms both employees and clients, and it undermines organisational effectiveness.

The Environment Problem

The modern office, particularly the open plan layout, is not a neutral space. It is a design choice, and it has consequences.

Open plan environments are celebrated as collaborative and dynamic, yet in practice they often create overstimulation. Phones ring, conversations overlap, keyboards clatter, and distractions are constant. For individuals with sensory processing differences, ADHD, or anxiety, this is not simply inconvenient. It is exhausting and reduces their ability to perform effectively.

Lighting adds another barrier. Fluorescent tubes that flicker and hum are tolerated by many, but for others they create headaches, heightened stress, and difficulty concentrating. This is not a minor inconvenience. It is an ongoing impairment caused by the environment itself.

Even waiting areas and client spaces can become unwelcoming. Receptions with bright lights, background music, and cluttered signage create confusion or discomfort for visitors. A client arriving already anxious about a legal matter, for example, should not face additional unnecessary barriers simply because the environment is poorly designed.

Processes That Compound the Issue

Workplace processes often add another layer of difficulty.

Performance reviews are a prime example. For neurodivergent staff, traditional review structures often reward traits such as eye contact, small talk, or ease in unstructured conversations, while giving less weight to measurable outcomes. Employees who deliver excellent work but struggle with conventional social cues can find themselves marked down.

There is also a generational shift to acknowledge. Many younger workers, particularly Gen Z, express a preference for “feedforward” rather than feedback. They question the premise of traditional review models altogether, sometimes perceiving them as intrusive or outdated. This is not hypothetical. I see this dynamic in my own home with two Gen Z children who embody this shift. It is a genuine generational change that intersects with accessibility conversations. For those already managing anxiety, this kind of performance process can feel unnecessarily adversarial and unproductive.

Recruitment practices further compound the challenge. The traditional panel interview is essentially a test of social confidence in an artificial setting. It measures how someone performs under pressure in a contrived environment rather than assessing actual ability. For candidates with autism, ADHD, or social anxiety, these interviews can be insurmountable hurdles, not because of lack of skill, but because of the format itself.

The Impact on Mental Health

The cumulative effect of these environments and processes is significant. Constant overstimulation, unclear communication, and rigid structures contribute directly to stress, anxiety, and burnout. Employees who could otherwise thrive leave organisations prematurely. Clients who might otherwise engage more deeply decide not to return.

For staff already managing mental health conditions, a workplace that disregards these realities can become actively harmful. A lack of flexibility, poor communication, and a culture that privileges performance theatre over actual results creates a cycle where mental health deteriorates rather than stabilises.

What Can Be Done Differently

The encouraging reality is that improvements are possible without major financial investment. Most solutions require thought and intention rather than significant cost.

Creating quiet spaces or designated low-stimulation areas provides staff with options to manage their environment. Adjusting lighting, or simply allowing individuals to use task lighting, removes unnecessary barriers. Offering noise-cancelling headphones or permitting remote work can reduce daily pressure significantly.

Communication practices can also evolve. Providing instructions in clear, written formats alongside verbal discussions ensures clarity. Structuring performance conversations around measurable outcomes rather than interpersonal cues creates fairness. Recognising generational expectations, and adapting review processes to be more constructive and forward-looking, can reduce resistance and anxiety while still holding staff accountable.

Recruitment practices can also be modernised. Practical assessments, structured interviews, or trial projects often provide better insights into a candidate’s ability than panel interrogations. These approaches benefit all candidates, not only those with neurodivergence or anxiety.

For clients and visitors, small adjustments such as asking about communication preferences, providing calm waiting areas, and simplifying forms make a significant difference. These changes are not radical, but they are noticeable and impactful.

Why Everyone Benefits

It is critical to understand that these adjustments are not charity or “special treatment.” They are simply the removal of unnecessary obstacles that never needed to exist.

Designing with neurodivergence and mental health in mind creates better workplaces for everyone. Clearer communication reduces errors across all teams. Quieter spaces improve focus for anyone under deadline pressure. Flexible working arrangements benefit parents, carers, and staff who simply work more effectively outside rigid nine-to-five schedules. Clients experience smoother, calmer interactions that enhance trust and confidence.

This is not about lowering expectations. It is about designing systems and environments that allow people to meet expectations without being undermined by irrelevant barriers.

The Broader Cultural Shift

Workplaces must acknowledge that the idea of a “default” worker or “typical” client is fiction. The diversity of human thought, behaviour, and mental health is not an exception; it is the reality of the modern workforce.

When leaders resist adjustments, claiming they are “special allowances,” they reveal an inability to imagine the workplace outside of their own limited experience. This lack of perspective not only harms staff and clients, it damages the organisation’s reputation and long-term viability.

There is also an undeniable cultural and generational shift taking place. Gen Z workers are vocal about wellbeing and inclusion. They will not tolerate environments that ignore mental health or dismiss the needs of neurodivergent colleagues. Organisations that fail to adapt will lose talent and clients to those that take accessibility seriously.

Conclusion

Neurodivergence, anxiety, depression, and other mental health conditions are not unusual. They are not quirks, exceptions, or edge cases. They are part of everyday professional life. Pretending otherwise simply drives capable staff and valuable clients away.

The choice is clear. Organisations can continue to design workplaces around a non-existent “average” employee and watch talent and opportunity quietly disappear. Or they can accept the reality of diversity in thought and mental health, and design environments and processes that allow all people to succeed.

This is not generosity. It is not lowering standards. It is the baseline of good business and responsible leadership.

And finally, you may have noticed this week’s Sunday BlindSpot has not been issued a number. This decision is courtesy of the Gen Z community, namely my daughter. She pointed out, with no small amount of certainty, that by numbering my articles I am setting up an expectation. Not only does it suggest that there will always be another one to follow, it also implies that there are earlier instalments people may have missed. In her words: “What if you don’t feel like writing one week?”

It is a fair point. Numbering creates an invisible contract, and breaking that sequence can trigger a very particular kind of anxiety. Gen Z are acutely aware of these pressures, and they will happily call them out. For me, the idea that my Sunday routine might be judged not only by the quality of what I write but also by whether I keep the numbers unbroken was enough to reconsider the whole system.

So this week, no number. Think of it as a small act of rebellion against the tyranny of sequence, and perhaps a reminder that sometimes accessibility is also about the pressure we put on ourselves to meet expectations that no one asked us to create.