Neurodiversity is no longer a niche topic. It’s on the minds of every forward-thinking HR and TA leader — and rightly so. Not just because it’s the right thing to do, but because our workforces should reflect the rich diversity of thought, background and experience that exist across our communities and families.
But despite the best of intentions, inclusion efforts can fall short. Especially for neurodivergent candidates.
That’s why we invited Theo Smith to join the latest episode of the TA Disruptors podcast. Theo is the founder of Neurodiversity at Work, and author of the book by the same name. He sat down with Arctic Shores co-founder Robert Newry to explore what inclusive hiring really looks like — and how employers can redesign their processes with neurodivergent people in mind.
1. Don’t just aim for compliance — aim for genuine inclusion
A lot of companies say they want to be more inclusive of neurodivergent talent. But often, their first move is to fall back on medicalised language, diagnostic labels, or rigid processes that don’t serve the actual needs of candidates.
As Theo points out: neurodivergent people don’t want to be pathologised. They want to be understood, supported, and given the same fair shot at success. That means shifting from a lens of "intervention" to one of "design" — looking at how you build systems that work for everyone, not just accommodate some.
2. Tech can be both a bridge and a barrier
AI and automation have huge potential to reduce bias, increase accessibility, and streamline decision-making in recruitment. But without care, they can do the opposite — especially for neurodivergent candidates.
Theo shares examples where ATS platforms and video interview tools filter out brilliant candidates because of atypical eye contact or non-standard CV formats. Rather than levelling the playing field, these tools can entrench exclusion unless they’re designed and applied thoughtfully.
The takeaway: don’t assume your tech is inclusive by default. Test, audit, and challenge it.
3. Be curious, not controlling
Many hiring processes are designed around conformity. But neurodivergent talent often thrives through difference: different communication styles, ways of problem-solving, or approaches to collaboration.
Theo argues that great recruiters don’t just tick boxes. They ask better questions. What strengths does this person bring? What kind of environment helps them flourish? How do we assess them in a way that reveals their potential?
The best hiring strategies are built on curiosity, not control.
4. Drop the assumptions about disclosure
Disclosure is a deeply personal issue. Some candidates won’t disclose their neurodivergence at all. Others will, but only if they feel psychologically safe. And some may not even have a formal diagnosis.
This means organisations can’t wait for disclosure before making their systems more inclusive. As Theo puts it: if you build inclusive processes by default, you won’t need to rely on disclosure to do the right thing.
5. Inclusion isn’t static. It’s a practice.
Finally, Theo reminds us that inclusion isn’t a checklist. It’s not about doing one thing and moving on. It’s an ongoing practice of learning, listening, and adapting.
That’s especially true when it comes to neurodiversity. Our understanding is still evolving. So is the language. But the key is to stay open. To design with, not for. And to keep asking: how can we do this better?
Robert: Welcome to the TA Disruptors podcast. I'm Robert Newry, co-founder and chief explorer at Arctic Shores, the task-based psychometric assessment company that helps organisations uncover potential and see more in people. And this is our fourth series in the podcast. And we are talking about the impact of AI, how that is forcing teams to deal with a huge amount of change and in many different aspects of recruitment as well. And in today's episode, we're going to be talking about the impact of AI and technology on neurodiversity in recruitment.
And I am very excited to be welcoming somebody who I've known and respected for several years now since I first heard him talk Theo Smith and Theo is somebody who is really passionate and has a lot to be able to share around neurodiversity and we'll come in a second to why that is something that is so important to your life. But I love a little bit about your background too that you've shared before on other podcasts and LinkedIn that you left school with few qualifications and dropping out of college before then achieving a university degree as a mature student, which I think is a wonderful example of how you can come back to these things later on, even if the system has conspired against you before then.
You are the founder of a tech company NeuroMind, and a consultancy company, NeuroDiversity at Work, a company that helps clients create inclusive and thriving neuro-inclusive work environments. With 15 plus years of experience in recruitment, talent and diversity, you are passionate about driving innovation, performance and productivity through NeuroDiversity. You're also a LinkedIn top voice and a fellow podcast host. And your podcast is called Neurodiversity with Theo Smith. Welcome to the TA Disruptors podcast, Theo.
Theo: Oh, it's amazing to be here. My setup for my podcast is nowhere near this. So this is a real joy to see other pros do it.
Robert: Brilliant. Well, thank you for coming along, Theo. And let's get into the topic of neurodiversity in recruitment. And we'll come to the impact of AI on that. But I'd like to start off with just your perspective on where we are in the state of play today in terms of neuro inclusion within recruitment? Is it something that organisations properly understand? Is it something that organisations are getting better at? Where do you think we are at the moment?
Theo: Well, think the, especially in the UK, the awareness has increased exponentially. We, you know, we can look at the data to provide us with those insights. Google Trends is an example. If you look at the trend of neurodiversity as a search word, it's absolutely gone through the roof over the last six years. UK is one of the most prominent areas where people are searching that word and associated terms like autism, what is neurodiversity, et cetera.
TikTok has doubled by billions and billions of views each year in terms of viewings of content. So we know the topic is of big interest. And therefore, how can we expect it not then to impact the workplace recruitment assessment, for example. I think where we're at today, when I wrote the book some four or five years ago, that went on to win the Business Book of the Year award, it went on to win that award because it was a topic that had such little visibility within organisations at that time. And therefore it made an impact.
Robert: People have been talking about it for some time, but actually there was a gap between the, I'm learning about it and actually I'm doing something about it.
Theo: Even worse than that, it was entrenched in very limited singularity ideas or single ideas of what neurodiversity is. So it was like autism, know, 15, 20 years of people thinking that neurodiversity is autism. And that's as far as we go.
Robert: And that is one of the biggest challenges, isn't it? That's when people think about neurodiversity; they just put it into one bucket. They've got this sort of single idea that it is all aspects of neurodiversity can be grouped into a single entity when we know that, and as you learn about it, is crazy because there's a great breadth to it, and there's a great breadth even to different elements like autism.
Theo: Yeah, and so there's the problem in the recruitment process. If we've got people who gain interest in the topic, we get organisations that invest in it, and they support individuals to come into the organisation and talk about it. Those individuals have varied experience and understanding; therefore, the level of expertise that then comes into the workplace is as diverse as the topic itself. And therefore, that leaves holes and gaps. And so where we're at today from a recruitment perspective, before we get into the complexity around what neurodiversity is, as we were just touching upon there, we've got organisations that have gone, right, we want to support it. We've gone individuals who've run with it, where there's great energy behind it.
things start to happen, budgets start to open up, and changes start to be made. But we still have this problem of managers being left without the real support when the requests come through. So if everybody gets excited that, hey, somebody's talking about ADHD and I've seen it on TikTok and it affects my family and this is what I'm really passionate about and I want the organisation to do something about it. They may do something about what they know about ADHD, but that still leaves lots of other gaps.
And what happens is somebody comes through a recruitment process in a retail environment or in a hotel, for example, and they don't really know how to help this person who doesn't have all the shiny bells and whistles they expected. They're not Usain Bolt, right? Or they're not some famous actor. They're actually somebody who may have significant challenges and needs, and they may need those to be supported throughout the recruitment process.
And then into the organisation. And then what you have is a manager that's had all this pressure internally from groups and from these wonderful talks that have maybe gone on to hire this person because they feel that they need to, because there's this young autistic person sat in front of them where their mom's been allowed to come in and join the interview. And there's this kind of sense of pressure on this manager thinking, I wanna do the right thing. Yet they don't have the training, the expertise, the support.
The recruitment process wasn't constructed in a way that supported the manager. So here the managers sat on their own with very limited infrastructure to ensure that the person they hire has a good experience. And then we get into legal proceedings, get into challenges on health and safety. So I would say that's where we're at currently with neurodiversity. It's a mixed bag. Now some organisations they're doing incredible things piece by piece. We have some that are really supporting people internally and that's helping. But there are gaps all over the place and there are gaps in understanding and there are gaps in the help and support that exist throughout those systems and processes. And then adding the complexity of suppliers and other facets and aspects of moving workforces, changes in infrastructure, and leadership structures.
Robert: Sure, and I think that you highlight a couple of really important things there. One is just education and understanding, and the other is the complexity around this as well. So just going back to the education and understanding piece, what in your experience and your recommendations from what you've seen should companies be thinking about in terms of the interventions or the education that they can provide around an understanding of the breadth of what neurodiversity means and how they should approach that within the recruitment process?
Theo: Yeah, well, it's really, it's evolved over a very quick period of time in terms of what neurodiversity is, what it means to people. There's been lots of arguments across the community, across the world, around what it is, where it comes from, what it means, the impact, and whether it can be developed over a period of time. So there's so much medical complexity around the topic. However, that was part of the problem that we had. It was seen as a medical problem, a single medical problem.
And when you focus on it in that context, organisations immediately think, well, if it's a medical problem, then it's a medical intervention that we need. And when you see it in that way, you immediately think, well, we need to put in place workplace psychologists, or we need organisations to support us. And what happens then is the only direction for people is via the disability route and the medical support route. And when you have that idea and concept from an organisational perspective, you're actually in the U,K specifically feeding people back into the health service, the NHS.
We know that's a problem, right? We know that the NHS is under significant pressure. And if organisations, by nature of where they are currently in their understanding, inadvertently feed, more people into that system, that is not the right solution as a whole piece. So I think what organisations need to understand is when we think about neurodiversity and we think about neurodivergence, those people who face barriers, systemic barriers, because of the way that their brain works.
Often, for the majority of individuals, the types of interventions are simple. It's not medical. I've got a headache. I don't need to have paracetamol at this point. I need to go for a walk. And I know that about myself. Or I know this headache might turn into a visual or a migraine because I suffer from migraines. Or I know that actually this is really severe and I think I need to call an ambulance now.
So when we think of that, those things there, we're just at the minute, and organisations at the minute are not really thinking about neurodiversity as a concept about those different points of intervention. And I think we've rushed into this fear around the risk of not dealing with it. And therefore, we've gone to extremes in how we deal with it.
Robert: Yeah, and I think that's such a good point that it's not a medical, you know, condition, so we shouldn't be thinking about it entirely through that lens, which often is the case. I think the other thing too that you allude to there is that we need to recognise the differences that people require in terms of the accommodations, the interventions that they might need. And so on that note, what's your take on, should we give candidates more power to request the accommodations that they need for their situation and circumstance, rather than at the moment, it just seems to be bit of a tick box, which is, do you require an extra accommodation or an allowance? Tick this box. And then it's it's almost as if I don't really, I'm not going to go into the details of what that is, you're just going to get this accommodation. And I wonder from what you're saying there, maybe we need to be a bit more nuanced and a bit more respectful and thoughtful for what that individual intervention or accommodation might be.
Theo: Yeah. Well, what you're talking about there is a legal right to request an adaptation or adjustments that we can challenge on as a job seeker or an individual if those legal rights not be met, right? That's fine. But we come back to the sharp edge of the needs again and that's problematic.
So when we only provide the medical intervention at the sharp end, the request, the adjustment at the sharp end, we're forgetting around 90 % of other people and other individuals who just will absolutely never see themselves in that sharp edge or they fear the cost of what will happen if they tick that box. Because in reality, there's been no evidence, they can search no statistics to back up the fact if they tick that box what will happen. You know, are they more likely to get the job or not get the job? Are they more likely to get the help or not get the help? Yes. So I absolutely think the tick box is problematic. Yes. In the majority of instances here. Yes. But the other challenge we've got is that co-occurrences the norm. And what I mean by that is ADHD is 74 % heritable.
So if you have it, know two thirds of your family are likely to have it. If you're ADHD, you're 50 times as likely to also be, sorry, 50 % likely to also be autistic, right? Oh, okay. If you think about the complexity just around those that we discussed there, we don't think about dyspraxia, dyscalculia, or Tourette's. I mean, I could go on. And that's without even thinking about the nuances within all of those traits. And so the problem that we've got for candidates coming through that process is they're not, they don't have a qualification, a medical qualification. They don't have a HR qualification. They don't have a psychologist qualification.
So the problem is, how are they supposed to be able to communicate when they don't have all of the facts around what their needs are? And especially if we think about people further down the road, and that's people who maybe didn't benefit from as much help and support that might exist within the education system today, especially early on in the education system, universities have been much further forwards, think. Still not always wonderful, but…
I was diagnosed when I walked into a Redbrick University within weeks as dyslexic and it had never been discussed prior to that. So I think it's too much to put it on a job seeker and an applicant who's already faced lifelong barriers through stuff that they didn't understand. So we need to do more and we need to help individuals better understand what some of those barriers are.
Why they may be affected by those barriers and what the options are to overcome those barriers without ever having to ask you. That is even better, right? If I know what I'm like in the morning and I don't really want to engage with people, better I'm in a position where I don't have to engage with people in the morning, that I'm forced to do it knowing the impact that it may have on the rest of my day and on those people that I may come into contact with.
Robert: I saw I love that Theo and I think you're right that this is a lot of this is about education awareness, transparency and flexibility and if we can get some of those things up front around this then we'll make a lot of strides rather than just a tick box. So where do you think technology then might play in this, because there's a lot of talk that Generative AI is going to level the playing field now. Do you think that is the case for neurodiverse candidates, that generative AI tools are going to make it better rather than worse in the recruitment process?
Theo: Absolutely. It's going to make a massive difference. So left-handed scissors for left-handed people or universal scissors that suit everybody. The barrier is the access to it. So if you've not got access to glasses and you're short or long-sighted, barrier. So what we've got here is a solution that is absolutely game-changing for individuals who've been facing barriers with no mechanism or opportunity to take down those barriers.
Now, potentially, when I talk about putting the power in the job seekers' hands in the instance of recruitment, we have the opportunity to do that. The only tricky situation is, that even though LLMs and, you know, generative AI and what have you can be incredibly powerful, without the support, without the mechanisms to know the correct prompts, you can inadvertently find yourself in a, either in a circle, going around in a circle constantly, why am I stuck in this circle? So it's helped you out of the bed or the ditch or whatever it may be.
But then you're stuck in this cycle, in this circle, and not being able to move on from there, which I find can sometimes become problematic. And just accessing the quality of technology and technology that's been developed specifically for the need in mind. So, you get long-sighted glasses when you needed short-sighted, do you know what I mean? And you're not aware, you're just stuck with this thing that is just not doing what everybody else says it should do.
They will make a massive impact. They will help individuals not have to mask as much because they can potentially overlay some of those situations. They will ensure that individuals can be more productive. They can do things that they couldn't before. And a lot of these things are basic, but if we can't get the basic things, and I talk about getting out of bed in the morning, if I can't get out of bed in the morning, which other people may just find easy,
And my struggle is the overwhelm of knowing what clothes to put on, which one my child struggles with significantly. I never thought I'd be a massive advocate for school clothing, but in that instance, a huge barrier is clothing tags. So if we're thinking about the clothing as the brain, the clothing impacts the brain by the nature of the texture, the smell.
the overwhelm of I don't know what to pick, I don't know what people will think of me, you can't get out the door. Now, if LLMs can help you get out the door in business, in life, in work, in recruitment, oh my goodness gracious me, they are big game changers. But who's gonna be responsible for it?
Robert: Yes, and no, like that, I really like that analogy too, because there is this massive assumption, and I agree with you, I think that LLMs can level the playing field, but there's a huge assumption that you can get to the playing field in the first place.
And I just came across today from a mid-sized technology company that as part of its guidance on its career site for AI usage by candidates, they actually gave some prompts and said, here's some good prompts that you can use that will be helpful as part of preparing for the job application and job interview, which I thought was great. And I think that, you know, comes to your point about this.
But one thing I'd like to get your perspective on this too. So on the one hand, it can be a great leveler, but access is clearly, you know, something that we've got to think about there too. I came across the other day a story where somebody had told me about a candidate who had applied to a big law firm, one of the magic circle, and had then started and had been rejected from it. And when, and it was a she, and when she pushed a bit more as to why she'd been rejected, she was told it was because she had used AI in the recruitment. process.
And this is how I heard about the story because she was then ringing around other law firms to ask did they use detection tools for the job application. Because if they did then she wouldn't be applying for them because she'd been rejected for using AI. When she hadn't used AI she was simply neurodiverse and didn't disclose what element of neurodiversity there. But what's your take on that, because I do worry a bit about these sort of detection tools that would be out there or even worse hiring managers going, Oh, I can detect if somebody's used AI because they use language in this way, because it's very neurotypical. know, the language in LLMs is trained on neurotypical. We're looking at things for a neurotypical. And so if something is outside of that, we can't automatically assume that AI is being used and that's bad.
Theo: I mean, the amount of examples of this, when I was using a new car the other day, it had a fatigue detection on and it constantly told me I was suffering from fatigue. My assumption is my eyes are all over the place, I flicker a lot, I'm processing lots of information. Just a great example of where technology has been built to recognise whether somebody's not focusing, whether they're fatigue, somebody fidgeting, historically they're not focusing, somebody looking the other way, they're not focusing.
So now, already we're building or our companies are building into technology that we're using, it's determining whether we are focused or whether we're suffering from fatigue or not. And I'm like, wait a minute. So what if we haven't got the option to turn this off? So there's a wonderful example you've mentioned there. My belief in this is the organisations are very quick and institutes now very quick to go, right, we're thinking about the impact on us. And the impact on us is if you use AI, that is bad for us, right?
Rather than thinking, right, where are candidates using AI? Why are they using AI? And then how can that… positively affect us and negatively affect us and how can we lift, elevate the candidate through that process to use AI or just to be themselves in this instance, because they may be autistic and support that whilst also putting protections in place for any risks associated to us.
And the great human example, non-technical example of this is quite a few years ago, I had somebody come up to me in a vent and go, I got an interview tomorrow with somebody who's divulged their autistic. They want to bring their mum to the interview and I just didn't know what to do. And I'm like, okay, what's the problem? And they were like, oh, you know, their mum can't stay on day one with them at work. And they were listening out all the reasons why they couldn't do this. And I was like, well, there's the problem immediately. All you're doing is finding all the reasons why this is not possible and why it's a
Robert: Or it's problem for you as opposed to how you might be supportive for them.
Theo: Absolutely. When in reality we now know, well, you know, depending on what you read, we now know that job coaches have been invested in by the government, especially for individuals with an educational health and care plan. So those who have had barriers within the education system and got support through government intervention, it is enshrined in law, they can access these coaches. They will look at the recruitment process, the onboarding process, because it doesn't just stop at the recruitment process or application process or even the content, it goes right through.
And the majority of individuals are failing in that onboarding piece because they may need extended periods of time and support, right? So we're constantly not thinking about the individual. We are thinking about ourselves in that situation. And then we wonder why we have more candidates using AI, more candidates fighting the system that we're building to stop them doing the things that they're telling us they need to do, without fundamentally understanding why they're trying to do it.
Robert: Exactly.
Theo: And I love that as a point though that sometimes we see then those who are honestly trying to show their best selves in the way that they know how to as cheating. And we've had the same in universities where lecturers have said the same about students you've not written that or you've used AI to create and generate.
Robert: Because your language doesn't fit the normal.
Theo: It's unusual. It's your language. You're coming to university, you're using this language that just, it doesn't look like a human. They're not truly understanding the complexities around the way that this individual's brain works. So I think that is one of the big areas of crisis and issues we're going to see increase over the coming months and years, more and more people challenging that and saying, actually, no, I'm going to legally challenge you on that. Yes. Because that's not fair.
Robert: No, it's not fair, Theo. And you're right. And I don't think it is. And that's why we've got to kind of bring some of these things to light. And the forward-looking companies are ones that are going, actually, we're to be using AI all the time. So let's embrace it.
And let's think about how technology can make the recruitment process better. And just on that note of making it better, there are lots of different elements, some of which use AI, some of which are just automated, around screening candidates. And so what's your take on things like video interviews and AI avatars as something that is either beneficial for neurodiverse candidates or is it not? Or maybe it's a bit of both, and there needs to be a bit more thought than currently there has been about how to address the things that people may be worried about.
Theo: Yeah, so choice is the thing that should be at the front of everything. And I think that's often what we're not providing job seekers and candidates with enough of. So, you know, we provide them with video interviewing because…
We've done a deal with the video interviewing company, and therefore, right, we're putting it out across all roles and everybody will do it because that's gonna make most sense. And I think we still need to look at how we democratise some of these solutions across that process or get some kind of collaboration of services, I think, that will really make the longer-term impact, positive impact that we want to. And that's gonna require a little bit of a gear shift change, I think, from both suppliers and organisations to find a way to make that happen.
And so I think that's the first thing, right? Choice, I honestly believe, because it's not about back to the, there's not like a line of autistic people that you're going to help in a very particular way. Because they're not just autistic. They have a whole other life experiences and co-occurrence. And there may be other disabling factors that come into it.
Robert: Yes. And just sorry, just on that one, when you're talking about choice on this, what you're saying is choice about how they're either… able to interact with the technology or maybe not interact with it at all because for whatever reason it causes anxiety and it's not right for them. Is that what you mean by choice here? A choice of how to participate in the process?
Theo: Absolutely. I did extensive work with a health and social care company. We audited their systems, their processes, we interviewed their people, we did surveys, we came up with loads of data and insights around the organisation and structure. We surprised them because they had 40 % of their individuals came out saying they were responsible for somebody who's impacted by neurodivergence.
Now that's not putting a single label that is somebody who has barriers because of their neurological makeup and the employee had some responsibility for them like a child for example. And their mind was blown away that four in 10 of their employees were impacted in that way. Now it's huge, right? From not knowing anything, one in 10 of them had a diagnosis, two in 10 more suspected that they were impacted but couldn't give you the, I have a diagnosis.
So big numbers in this organisation, and they've made loads of headway now in trying to make positive changes. But one of the things recently I spoke to them that they've done, and I think this is just a great example of choice, is they offered walk-around interviews and you didn't have to have that. So you could walk around. And obviously, for somebody who's ND, a lot of individuals who are neurodivergent, may struggle just being sat down in this situation. They may need movement. They may need to be stimulated by external factors. That may be something to fidget with. But in actual fact, it may be the ability to connect with the things that we're talking about.
So, hey, I'd like to ask you a question about that there, you know, and you're like, oh, that, oh, yes, well, in actual fact, you know, or this environment, when I've worked in this environment before, we found that these really bright lights that you have actually had a real negative impact. What, these lights that we've got? So all of a sudden you open up the conversation without going into that environment, that individual couldn't have necessarily been triggered to have those conversations. So it just creates a different experience. when you give an individual choice, it's not… everybody has to do that. Someone else might like to sit down and have to face to face interview. Someone else might like to send in the video because they're okay when they're doing their role, whatever that may be. But in terms of that very strange interview environment system process, they really struggle. So enabling them to do the video interview is incredible.
The avatar piece. It's interesting because, there's been studies into avatars for quite some time. So 10 years ago, there's a study into avatar use online and the impact that it had on confidence, how calm you were, et cetera. This US study found that people generally online who chose their own avatar were generally much calmer, much more confident. And therefore...
Robert: Oh, well, that's interesting because you've actually got... I hadn't thought about that. You've got two lots of avatars here. You could have an avatar representing you. Yes. As opposed to at the moment, what I'm seeing most of is an avatar representing the company. Ah, OK. So now you're interacting with technology that you know to be technology that doesn't provide any of the chemistry, the normal feedback that… you most of us, you know, react to and have a chemistry about. so that that yeah, so I was on, I think that's an interesting point about, you know, choice. I'm not sure we're quite there yet for that. but what's your take on the company using an avatar to interview somebody?
Theo: Let me challenge that, because that's interesting. We come back to the same thing. It's organisations thinking about themselves, right?
And okay, they may say, were putting avatars in place because it's better for the candidate or it's options or it's neuro-inclusive, blah, blah, blah. When actual fact, it means they don't have to use another human to say, you know, they can capture the data, the insights. It is much more effective for them as an organisation to do that. There's some risks associated with that. The avatar doesn't recognise the nuance of what's happening in situation.
The avatar has inbuilt bias in terms of assumptions around the fatigue of the car, as I mentioned. So if we build something with only ourselves in mind, we risk real significant bias that can massively impact on those people we really need to help at the sharp end. So my challenge is yes, maybe. Um, those avatars can help individuals possibly. Um, but if the primary focus of that organisation is not to do that, then I suspect we're going to hit some sticky situations pretty rapidly.
Robert: Good thought on that. And I think it comes back to your point about why we're doing this, whose benefit, and you're quite right in saying that there has to be a balance between both what the organisation needs in terms of efficiency, but also what the individual needs in terms of respect for their choice, their situation in all of this. So my final question for you around this too is how, because I know you've been giving this some thought and I think it's an important story to bring to light…
is how technology can be brought to play to help people who are neurodiverse better prepare for the application process. So we've got a bit in the process itself, but actually a lot of the activity and work happens pre-application. So if you've got some thoughts on how technology can help improve that area of the recruitment process and make it easier for neurodivergent candidates to show them their best selves and be supported before they get into the application process.
Theo: Absolutely. It's getting harder. It's not getting easier. I'm hearing stories of young people getting together on a Friday each week to apply to jobs in teams together with their friends on the radio recently, because they are really struggling to motivate themselves to apply to the hundreds of jobs. Graduates with very specialised, you know, academic qualifications that should be getting into it and they can't.
Robert: And it's that constant rejection. so after a while you just go, gosh, how do I motivate myself to keep going on this?
Theo: Absolutely. And then you pick whatever job you can get, and you may get into a cycle of being in a space or place that is not productive for you, ultimately falling off the wagon and may never get back into employment. so the thing that I fear about that is those individuals are not getting support. And what one of these individuals said is, we applied for hundreds of jobs and then somebody said, did you know that AI is making a decision in some of these organisations at the top end of the funnel? And they're like, what? And the structure of your CV and the content and stuff may not be optimised in a way that technology can extract the right information. as an example, it might be that they require Spanish as a language and you've put it in a little box that is not accessible as part of the analysis of technology so the Spanish gets lost, so you don't get the job. It's such a simple thing, but you did not get that job because they did not see that you spoke Spanish.
And so think about that. I mean, it's such a barrier to most candidates. Now think about individuals who are already struggling to understand the complexities around the language of what employers are saying. And I was invited -
Robert: job description or a job advert.
Theo: Exactly. So this is right at the beginning. This is the basics and you think we've got it right. I've analysed hundreds of job adverts now and we're still doing a really bad job of it and which is surprising in the advent of AI and we're getting it wrong because we're still using language that is really complex.
So when we talk about complex language in the medical world, the UK has kind of an average reading age of something between like eight and 11. I'm not an expert in this, but it's approximately around that space or place. So from that perspective, it's communicating in a language in a way that the majority can understand. And if we want to get people back into work across the spectrum, we need to use language that people, English may be a second language or they may be dyslexic or they may be reading challenges, for example.
We need to ensure that we can gain access to what that job is and what they need to provide. The other thing I saw in these adverts is a lot of the what, but not much of the why and the how. So I'm like-
Robert: And I think that's one of the biggest failings of most job adverts is just a list of things. And the language in there is one thing, but the other is just a list of experiences that we know is gonna put a lot of people off or a lot of people go, well, I can't relate to that or I've only got a little bit of that rather than all of it.
And it's not looking at the skills or the capabilities that actually underpin that list of activities, what rather than the how.
Theo: Yeah. And then we may help the employer. So there may be some support mechanisms. There may be some organisations that will help with content. There may be consultancies or whatever, but it's still in the minority of organisations. And we're thinking about the biggest organisations that may tap into that. And then the quality of that and how diverse it is in terms of the neurological makeup. Is it neuro-inclusive or is it just mainly focused around gender or so how broad is it in terms of its understanding and support to everyone who makes, face barriers at any point in their life journey?
So it may be because they're now coming to a time where perimenopause, menopause are impacting them. So changes in the support that they may need to work or they may have children or they may have a number of other factors, like they may have broken an arm and it's a period of time where they now can't do a job in the same way.
So many different elements that you are impacted cognitively by these changes and we've not considered it. So I think moving away from just focusing on the employer why are we not going much further down to support the job seeker in those instances to empower them with not just, okay, you know, use AI to get the job, but specifically guide them in let's help you understand what the job is. Let's understand how that job relates to you. Let's understand where the inherent biases within that job, the risk factors for you as an individual.
And if we can help individuals who may not know that about themselves, because nobody ever gifted that information to them, you know, they weren't blessed with the ability to get a diagnosis or they didn't have a family that was nurturing or caring or an environment or education system that gave a... Exactly. So they don't know this. why, if we really want to get people into work, why are we not doing better by human beings, by job seekers is early on in that process.
And by the way, adding technology and innovation and structured LLMs with the right prompts and the right support, and then the right additional intervention. If somebody presses a panic button, a human being can come in like a coach and support them, or they can go and utilise this type of technology and innovation in the community spaces and places so they don't need a mobile phone and they may be human to help 20 people access this type of technology.
So that by the time they get to the point of application, they're misusing AI or not using AI or, you know, we're leveling the playing field as early as possible whilst also upskilling organisations to also be doing the same thing on the other side of that. And so we just create this bridge that allows more people into work more people to not use AI at the wrong point. And they don't mean too often. Like even AI is probably telling them to do stuff they shouldn't do. Like why don't you say this interview? This would be great. Without understanding that the AI model is feeding off their level of enthusiasm and it's like almost mirroring back to them. And that is not necessarily the right thing that you want. So I think there's all these things that we can now do as a human race to better support individuals, especially and always at the sharp end of these challenges.
Robert: Theo, that's a wonderfully positive note to end on. As always, your insights, your thought, your care for how people on the neurodiverse spectrum should be treated, should be seen, should be supported, is hugely valuable. And it's been great having you on the podcast, and thank you for all your thoughts.
Theo: Real pleasure. Thank you, Robert