Conversations surrounding diversity, equity and inclusion have remained a priority of the Alliance over the past several years, yet one dimension of this topic has historically received less attention. That is neurodiversity.

What is neurodiversity? Although definitions vary, the term broadly recognizes the natural variation in how human brains function, including differences in how we process information, respond to our environments and engage with others.^1-3 Another important term is “neurodivergent,” which is frequently associated with autism and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), but may also encompass dyslexia, dyspraxia, dyscalculia and other neurological or learning differences.

Embracing neurodiversity (and neurodivergence) can truly enrich a workplace environment. This idea came to life during a recent webinar I led for the Alliance Mentorship Program about creating more neuroinclusive CME/CE workplaces. Throughout the session, participants reflected on their perspectives about this topic, providing a useful lens for considering how neuroinclusion can be translated from principle into everyday practice, including in CME/CE workplace environments.

When asked about strengths associated with a neurodiverse workplace, participants identified qualities such as “creativity,” “thinking outside the box,” “diversity in thought and approach,” “new solutions,” “high focus” and “empathy.” Their responses reinforced an important point. Although individuals who are neurodivergent may experience notable challenges in certain domains, they may also exhibit exceptional strengths that can be tapped into and help an organization reach its full potential.

The nature of CME/CE work makes this conversation particularly relevant to our community. Our work often requires us to manage multiple projects and competing deadlines, respond quickly when priorities change, collaborate with numerous internal and external stakeholders, and move between tasks requiring very different types of thinking. For some professionals, this environment can be energizing; for others, it may create barriers for them to produce their best work.

How can we create neuroinclusive workplaces that enable both individuals and organizations to thrive? Importantly, neuroinclusion does not require lowering the bar. Rather, it fosters an environment in which different thinkers have the support and flexibility they need to not only meet but exceed expectations.

Start With the Person, Not the Diagnosis

Autism advocate Dr. Stephen Shore said, “If you have met one person with autism, you have met one person with autism.” This applies not only to autism spectrum disorder, but also more broadly to the many conditions that may lead someone to identify as being neurodivergent.

There is no single set of strategies that will accommodate every employee who is neurodivergent. Even two people with the same diagnosis may have very different hurdles that they must overcome and unique strengths that can lead them to shine.

Therefore, individualization matters. Consider something as routine in CME/CE as assigning a new deliverable. One employee may benefit from a detailed written description of the assignment; another may prefer to talk through the project first and receive a brief written summary afterward. One professional may thrive while simultaneously managing faculty communications, content development and competing priorities; another may produce their strongest scientific work when given uninterrupted time to concentrate.

How can we help different individuals thrive? We begin by recognizing that people differ in how they communicate, process information, organize their work, and perform at their best. Then, we create opportunities for employees to share what helps them succeed, while demonstrating a willingness to listen, respond and adapt when possible.

Next, Cultivate Psychological Safety and Trust

Fostering psychological safety is essential to enabling dialogue that helps organizations better understand and respond to their employees’ needs. This theme also emerged during the Alliance Mentorship Program discussion. When participants considered what helps create psychological safety in the workplace, their suggestions included “sharing our own struggles,” “approaching folks with curiosity,” “being vulnerable to share personal areas of development” and “assuming positive intent from others.”

Collectively, these suggestions point toward a culture in which employees feel comfortable communicating what they need. This is particularly important in the context of neurodiversity. Some neurodivergent professionals openly disclose their diagnosis, but many do not. Moreover, some individuals may have neurodivergent traits despite never having received a diagnosis.

Regardless of an employee’s individual situation, managers can normalize conversations about workplace preferences for everyone, while maintaining openness to support their employees when possible. Examples of questions may include the following:  

• How do you prefer to receive feedback on your work?
• When several project deadlines overlap, what helps you to prioritize?
• Would written follow-up after a project discussion be useful?
• When priorities or deadlines change, what is the most helpful way for me to communicate that?
• Is there anything about our workflow that makes it harder for you to do your best work?

When discussions about work preferences are routine for everyone, asking for support becomes less about identifying oneself as different. In addition, it sets a precedent that an employee may come to you about the things they need to succeed at your company and therefore maximize the potential of your organization.

Build Flexibility Into the Workplace

Creating a neuroinclusive workplace also requires acknowledging that there may be more than one effective way to accomplish the same goal. Flexibility does not eliminate expectations; rather, it provides employees with greater choice in how they meet them.

That distinction was reflected in the Alliance Mentorship Program discussion. When participants considered ways to build greater flexibility into the workplace, they suggested “flexible work hours,” “work-from-home opportunities” and “providing regular breaks.”

These examples highlight an important principle of neuroinclusion: When possible, focus on the desired outcome while allowing flexibility in how it is achieved.

Employees may differ in when they are most productive, the environment in which they can best concentrate, how they participate in meetings, and what they need to maintain focus throughout the workday. If these differences do not interfere with an essential function of the job, allowing some flexibility can help employees work in ways that capitalize on their individual strengths. Rather than defaulting on how work has traditionally been done, we can ask which expectations are truly necessary for the role and in what domains employees can be given more choices.

Putting Neuroinclusion Into Practice

One of the most encouraging takeaways from the Alliance Mentorship Program discussion was how practical many of the participants’ suggestions were. When asked for examples of workplace practices that may help foster neuroinclusion, participants typically did not recommend major structural changes. Rather, they proposed relatively small adjustments to how we communicate expectations, structure work, conduct meetings and interact with our colleagues.

Drawing on the perspectives shared during the webinar and the principles discussed above, here are some practices that CME/CE professionals can begin implementing as soon as tomorrow.

1. Ask employees how they work best. Normalize conversations about preferences for communication, feedback, instructions and workflow rather than assuming the same approach works for everyone.
2. Be clear about expectations, but flexible about the process. When the process itself is not essential, clearly communicate the desired outcome while allowing individuals flexibility in how they accomplish it.
3. Build flexibility into the workday when feasible. Consider options such as flexible hours, remote work, noise-cancelling headphones, camera-optional meetings and opportunities to take ample breaks throughout the day if it does not interfere with essential job responsibilities.
4. Assume positive intent. Create a culture in which differences in communication or working style are not automatically interpreted negatively; instead, consider whether there may be an alternate explanation.
5. Make communication explicit. Provide clear expectations, priorities, deadlines and instructions rather than relying on implied expectations or unwritten workplace norms.
6. Individualize support. Recognize that what helps one employee thrive may not help another, even when two individuals share the same diagnosis or neurodivergent identity.
7. Build awareness through education and training. As the saying goes, “You don’t know what you don’t know.” Provide opportunities for employees and managers to learn about neurodiversity, challenge common misconceptions and recognize how different workplace practices may affect people differently.  
8. Create opportunities for mentorship and peer support. Consider buddy systems, peer mentors or other trusted points of contact who can provide a space for employees to ask questions, navigate workplace challenges and troubleshoot problems.  

Concluding Thoughts

Neurodivergent professionals are already part of the CME/CE community. Our organizations should allow each person to demonstrate value in meaningful ways and create conditions in which different kinds of minds can fully contribute. Doing so may require us to reconsider some of our assumptions about what professionalism looks like. An employee does not need to communicate, interact or contribute in the same way as their colleagues to be an effective and valued member of a team.

CME/CE depends on people who can think critically, communicate clearly, attend to detail and approach complex challenges from different perspectives. When we approach differences with openness and curiosity rather than judgment, we create more opportunities for individuals to contribute their strengths. Creating an environment in which different kinds of thinkers can contribute at their best strengthens our workplace, and, ultimately, the work of our profession.

References

1. Bellato A, Long MRP, Barila M et al. Mapping clinical diagnoses associated with neurodiversity and neurodivergence in mental health research: A scoping review. JAMA Psychiatry. 2025 Sept 16: online ahead of print

2.McLennan H, Aberdein R, Saggers B, et al. Thirty years on from Sinclair: A scoping review of neurodiversity definitions and conceptualisations in empirical research. Rev J Autism Dev Disord. 2025

3. Miranda-Ojeda R et al. The neurodiversity framework in medicine: On the spectrum. Dev Neurobiol. 2025;85(1):e22960

Generative AI was used as an editorial tool during the development of this article, including assisting with refining language, organizing content and improving readability. All ideas, perspectives and conclusions presented are those of the author, who reviewed and revised AI-assisted content and takes responsibility for the final article.

---

Sunali Wadehra, MD, is a senior scientific editor from Research to Practice and a member of the Almanac Editorial Board. She has more than 15 years of combined experience in biomedical research, scientific publications and medical writing. Dr. Wadehra completed her bachelor’s degree in English at the University of Michigan — Ann Arbor. She earned her medical degree from Wayne State University School of Medicine. She is also the President-Elect of the Mid-America Chapter of the American Medical Writers Association (AMWA) and a member of AMWA’s CME Education Committee.