The power of neurodivergence in the workplace (w/ Master Fixer Ludmila Praslova) - Part 1

Please note the following transcript may not exactly match the final audio, as minor edits or adjustments could be made during production.

Anne Morriss: Hello everyone. Welcome back to Fixable from the Ted Audio Collective. I'm your host, Dan Morris, and I'm your co-host Frances Fry. We got a really interesting call from a listener with a challenge we think every workplace can learn from, and it's such an important topic in our view that we decided to bring in another master fixer to join us.

And help us tackle his question together.

Frances Frei: I feel like one of our superpowers is that we phone friends when we don't know.

Anne Morriss: Yeah, we have no problem. We have no problem phoning a friend. And since there's so much to say about this topic, we decided to turn it into a two-parter. So today we're gonna hear from our expert, and next week we're all gonna gather and bring in the caller and see if we can be helpful to him together.

Oh, it's so good. Let's listen to the voicemail.

Hugo (Caller): Hi, Anne and Frances. Um, so recently I discovered that I'm on the autism spectrum after 51 years on this planet, and this unlocked quite some interesting insights and at the moment I'm looking for a new job. Besides looking for the type of job and the type of environment, I'm also considering when to disclose this to.

Employers and colleagues, and I would really welcome your input as well.

Frances Frei: Frances, what do you think? Oh, well, I get why, why we have this as a two part episode. Because with a, it's a seemingly simple question, but there is so much to it and so much to be considered, uh, in this, the, the question of when to disclose is a really important one.

Yeah. And it's gonna be great. Yeah. It's gonna be a great conversation.

Anne Morriss: We knew immediately we wanted to take it on, but we're not experts on neurodiversity.

Frances Frei: Well. I mean, you know, ex there is, there is learned expertise and there is lived expertise. I feel like we have some lived expertise.

Anne Morriss: Well, my love, with your blessing, we wanna make this a bit personal and, and dial up the stakes here a little bit.

Let's just say that a number of the people we love most in this world may or may not be on some kind of spectrum. Yes. I a cliffhanger.. Yeah. We're gonna, we're gonna, we're gonna find out and we're gonna find out on this call because I, well, I think we've lived this topic in some ways, but we haven't studied it.

Yeah. So today we're talking to Ludmila Praslova. She's a professor of organizational psychology, the author of a really terrific. Book called The Canary Code, A Guide to Neurodiversity, dignity and Intersectional Belonging at Work. And next week, we'll hear from Hugo again and work out his issue alongside M.

We love this conversation

Frances Frei: so much and we hope you do too.

Ludmila Praslova: Welcome to Fixable. Thank you. I'm so thrilled to be here. I've been a long time fan of yours.

Anne Morriss: Oh, we're so flattered to hear that. We really loved your book and, uh, everyone listening should read it. And we are really moved and inspired by all the work you're doing to educate the world on neurodiversity.

Ludmila Praslova: Well, thank you. It means a lot coming from you with all your storytelling expertise, and I definitely want to educate world about neurodiversity, and I hope to see some change in my lifetime. Sort of selfishly, but for everyone. Well, you beautiful are

Anne Morriss: wildly optimistic because of you and, and the work you're doing.

And just for the record, this is a somewhat personal conversation for us. We have a number of loved ones on the autism spectrum. The exact number is not totally clear. They may or may not be on this call with us.

Ludmila Praslova: And I know how that works.

Anne Morriss: Okay. Um, and so I think this is gonna be really a really rich discussion on a whole bunch of levels.

You, yourself, were diagnosed with autism as an adult. So maybe just to kick us off, can you share a little bit about what that was like for you?

Ludmila Praslova: It was pretty surreal. Because I tried to figure out what is quote unquote wrong with me For a very long time, people were trying to figure out what is wrong with me.

I was diagnosed with depression for 20 years. Many people go through, let's say, highly sensitive person route or a few other things. Other people get diagnosed officially with anxiety, except it doesn't quite fit. I have a degree in psychology, but even the way we were taught, even if I suspected that I have some autistic characteristics, it just didn't fit enough.

That classic 4-year-old boy right idea, which really most diagnostic criteria are based on. And just eventually I just ran into a situation like many people. Something changes in your work life and something that you've been doing your entire life. All of a sudden you can't just because people changed your environment and they changed rules and it's not what you signed up for.

And I just, the wall and I was searching and I came across the work on autistic women. And obviously 4-year-old boys and adult women are gonna have very different patterns. So when I started looking into this emerging, relatively still recent research on how adult women, highly intelligent women experience autistic characteristics.

Perfectly.

Anne Morriss: First of all, thank you for sharing your story. Super powerful. Where were you experiencing the most friction in your work life, specifically on the way to this diagnosis?

Ludmila Praslova: Well, being a university professor really aligns with my strengths. Uh, a writing is always something I've been very good at.

Do not have the energy to always be on socially, but I can't do it for enough length of time to teach. But then there was just a period of organizational life when things became much more political, and so that's where the friction was because I just don't do politics, even if I understand it, I can't bring myself.

To do certain political things.

Anne Morriss: And so you then, you stumbled on this, the literature on adult autistic women, and you recognize yourself in those stories. Exactly. So this is just one type of neuro divergence. There's mm-hmm. Many other A DHD dyslexia. Directionally, what percentage of the human population probably fits into this category of neurodivergent?

Ludmila Praslova: More than people think. And the typical estimate is approximately 15 to 20% of humanity,

Anne Morriss: 15 to 20% of humanity. Beautiful. Mm-hmm. And then many of these conditions, if that's even the right word, in some ways it just differences. Yeah. It just feels like these are just neurotypes. Yeah. Neurotype. Different experiences of being human express themselves on a spectrum.

So how do you wrestle with this kind of variability in the work you do and how do you advise leaders and organizations to to think about it?

Ludmila Praslova: Well, again, even within one label, there's a lot of variability and sometimes we think about spectrum as a circle rather than a line. So it's a spectrum, and one autistic person is going to have extreme sensory sensitivities.

Another person is going to have. More of a language and communication difficulty. One person is going to really, really, really need their routine, but most people are not going to have all of it. So some people are going to have more of a sensory sensitivity, um, side of, um, manifestations. So let's say I have through the roof sensory sensitivities, I don't necessarily need quite as much routine as some other people.

But there are people who do not necessarily have huge sensory sensitivities, but they have more of a communication difficulties. So even within the label, the spectrum is actually going in different directions. So

Anne Morriss: like a linear spectrum is, is too limited a way to think about it.

Ludmila Praslova: Yeah, exactly. And especially now when.

We expand the diagnostic criteria at least a little bit to understand that there are cultural differences, there are gender differences. We're seeing more and more individual variability. But yes, obviously there are some. People who would stick with medical criteria and they will talk about level oh one, level two, level three.

Uh, other people say this is an oversimplification because someone who generally doesn't have very high support needs in some circumstances is going to have. Very significant differences. So it even varies not just by the individual, but within individual by circumstances stage in life. Many people say that, let's say hormonal fluctuations can also interact.

With neurodivergent characteristics to create more or less struggle during particular times. So sometimes people talk about dynamic differences or dynamic conditions or dynamic disabilities depending on their preferred language. So even within the person, the, the pattern is different. And then obviously you met one autistic.

Or dyslexic or any kind of neurodivergent person you met one, one person with that particular label. I love that Still. Trying to really create, okay, here's the rigid list of rules for everybody and this is how you work with them. It's just not going to happen. Beautiful. Uh, people need to individualize.

Anne Morriss: Love it. When we were preparing for this conversation, one thing we learned was that autistic people can be as much as. 140% more productive than neurotypical employees when they're in the right role and in the right environment. First of all, that's an astonishing number, and yet the majority of college graduates who are autistic.

Up to 85% by some measures actually struggle to find employment. So help us understand that gap.

Ludmila Praslova: Yes, that is definitely a major paradox. And the 140% numbers come from JP Morgan. They obviously were very selective.. And then they created very supportive environment where they really tried to match people with the right job.

And so those are impressive numbers, but we always try to warn people. Don't expect that you just hire artistic people and make them do two people's jobs, because that's not exactly the business case we want to make. Even so, people have made it because there is a significant level of desperation. And you will, people will take any business case we can because of those unemployment numbers.

And obviously people who are not diagnosed or people who are not disclosed would not be, uh, included in those numbers. But still, there are many frustrations within the community and many stories that are just absolutely heartbreaking. So when the way I talk about it in my book, there are. Issues with access to jobs and the traditional interview process is just absolutely brutal for autistic people because what hiring managers are looking for eye contact for, for handshake, and ability to sell yourself.

Very few organizations actually test your performance, your actual job knowledge, which is where autistic people excel. If you just look at a product of work of an autistic person, the scores tend to be higher than the neuro, than neurotypical product of work in studies. But when you introduce the tone.

External hints that really have nothing to do with work, then that's where artistic people lose. So the way we. Is a problem. Mm. And then of course, work environment, noisy places, managers who don't know how to work with neurodivergent people, bullying. There's a whole set of issues within organizations that further prevent autistic people from thriving, even if they are able to get over the hybrid hurdle.

Anne Morriss: And listeners, Frances is sitting back and smiling. I'm not gonna project onto her emotions right now. I feel seen. Yes. That's a fair statement. Uh, so Mila, this feels like a really nice bridge to your book and your method. You have some really actionable advice for how leaders can make their organizations more inclusive of neurodiversity and more inclusive.

Period, which is one of your key insights that resonated with us so much so. But first, can you, we love the title, we love the metaphor at the heart of it. Can you share that with our listeners?

Ludmila Praslova: Of course. So, Canary Code comes from the actual canaries in coal mines through 1980s in the uk. Every coal mine was required to employ two.

And indeed they were taken down into the mines because they would be, uh, showing the effect of toxic gases before humans. So now we have electronic detectors, but for a very long time for. Centuries people have been taken, taken canaries to the coal mines and they, they actually tried to take as good of a care of them as they could.

They even had resuscitation devices and tiny oxygen cylinders to give them oxygen. So some people think, oh, you're using this horrible thing. They were dying Actually, they try to take as good care of them as possible. So the sensitivity of Canary, it's not a. It's something that also allows them to fly and to function as a proper bird.

It's not actually weakness, it's a side effect of a strength and the sensitivity. It doesn't mean that canary is broken. So when we say, oh, those autistic people or non divergent people, they're broken. We don't wanna know them in our organizations, also means. You do have this detection and then your organizations grow increasingly toxic and that eventually effect of that stress cultures that are unhealthy, non-inclusive of many.

Types of humanity or bullying thrives. It eventually is going to catch up with everyone. Like what we had seen during the great resignation when people were just hit with effects of the years and years of stress. And then eventually many people just said, I'm done. Right.

Anne Morriss: And is it autistic people are the metaphorical canaries in organizations because of their sensitivity to toxicity?

They, they're, they're gonna be the alarm system that when it doesn't Exactly. If it doesn't work for your autistic employee, it's eventually gonna catch up with everybody else. Is that part of your point? Yes.

Ludmila Praslova: That's exactly the point. Yeah. So , it's, it was kind of a precursor of the book and of the early version.

And, um,

Anne Morriss: wait, mil, let me make a statement. Um, and, and I just wanna see if you agree with it. Um, is it fair to say, based on your work, that if you make the world better for neurodiversity, you're making the world better for everyone?

Ludmila Praslova: That's pretty much the summary of my book and there is, there is a line that's very similar to that.

Yes,

Anne Morriss: I wanna get into some of your Canary code principles 'cause I think they're really powerful and it really reinforces that point. So one of our favorites and something we also talk a lot about in our work and, and Frances has gone really deep on, is this idea of participation. So. Employers and employees co-producing solutions, what does that look like in practice, in your experience?

Ludmila Praslova: Yes. That is the first principle of the Canary Code because you really cannot, let's say, create good environment for every neurodivergent people person without talking to them, but really for any human without talking to them and.

Best organizations practice anyway. Best organizations have chop crafting. So this is just taking it to the next level, making it available to maybe people, uh, not just. Typically somewhere toward the top of the chain in organizations, but making it available to people in variety of situations earlier in their organizational entry, and, uh, creating those, uh, circumstances early for success.

On early, rather than you pay your dues and suffer, and then maybe we'll allow you to do some job crafting, a little agency. Yeah. So if you can think about it as job crafting

Anne Morriss: on steroids. Beautiful. Uh, the next two are outcomes focused and flexibility. Both of these are about setting meaningful goals and letting people meet them in ways that work for them.

One of the lessons from. Covid in our experiences, how much people value flexibility, particularly women. What do you advise people when they run into legitimate friction around this one? So, for example, company is trying to. Build a more collaborative culture and mandating, you know, three days a week in the office if I'm someone who's not loving that, what, what, what counsel would you give me on how to work with my employer on this one?

Ludmila Praslova: Well, collaboration is a very good goal. But why are we doing collaboration and how exactly do we define it? That's a question. Is it possible to have effective virtual collaboration? Many people argue yes, and in fact we do know that, uh, face-to-face collaboration and brainstorming meetings are only effective for some people.

Uh, for brainstorming meetings face-to-face, you'll get input from extrovert. And, uh, you are not actually gonna hear everyone. You'll get a lot more input if you allow additional written virtual collaboration. And the same thing people were bringing, um, you know, everyone into the open office with the idea that it will enhance collaboration.

But we do know from research that. Open offices start emailing each other from the same room talking.

Even. Even the most extroverted per person can only handle so much stimulation, and in those environments most people become overloaded and they actually do not want to talk to each other. So perhaps some of those ways that, or trying to achieve collaboration are counterproductive. Even though we say we do those things in the name of collaboration, beautiful.

But if we create collaboration that works for different kinds of people, we'll bring in much more of the talent,

Anne Morriss: super persuasive, and even, even three days a week in the, it's a very blunt instrument. And I think to your point, often without deep clarity around what the. Kind of trade offs. What the payoffs here, what are we trying to solve for?

When people wanna start a conversation about these principles at work, say it's flexibility or um, participation, how do you advise people to get in there and start this conversation thoughtfully.

Ludmila Praslova: Well, one way to do it is not to ask for a permanent commitment. It can be an experiment. Mm. Let's just do it for a month for whatever you think reasonable amount of time is.

Um, let's say we'll set our outcomes. Because you're focusing on outcomes, give people flexibility and look at outcomes. Uh, we do know that, let's say when Iceland and, uh, many European countries and, uh, really many countries around the world experimented with four day work week, for example, uh, they didn't jump into it.

They tried it. And then many countries, there are many organizations decide to stick with it because it worked so. Let's try it. Let's evaluate outcomes and then see what makes sense and what's reasonable.

Anne Morriss: Beautiful. I love that. Okay. The other principles you explore are organizational justice, just about measuring fairness and what we call the HR lifecycle transparency.

And finally, valid measurement, which is about reducing bias. These principles, all of them really, but these in particular. Seem critical to building an awesome organization. Period. Why are these three particularly important for neurodiversity?

Ludmila Praslova: Well, organizational justice, because very often the most.

Disempowered and the most marginalized are getting triple and quadruple wami from organizational injustice. And then also neurodivergent people are particularly sensitive towards injustice. So, uh, there are additional. Psychological costs in terms of moral injury, for example, that they carry. So organizational justice is necessary for everyone, but let's say for people who are naturally wired to tell the truth and getting punished for it, the.

Payoff from creating just systems is really even more significant. So just again, the sensitivity of neurodivergent people to injustice and unfortunately, the likelihood that they're ones who are going to be targeted, bullied, and treated and unjustly, um, make this an even more important point for neurodivergent people.

While also being important for everyone,

Frances Frei: I definitely rings true. Uh, being more sensitive to injustice, I feel seen again, uh, on that part.

Anne Morriss: I'm just buying time with all my questions. so I can get you in here, Frances.

Frances Frei: And

Anne Morriss: it's not

Frances Frei: just that we will get bullied. I am like hypersensitive to the bullying of others.

I am hypersensitive to organizational injustice that doesn't ar around, isn't around me. In fact, it, I'm scarcely bullied. I, there's, I'm scarcely impacted by organizational justice, although my meter goes off the chart when I witness it. Sometimes refer to myself as a justice warrior, just playfully. But now I know, ah, there's a reason for it.

And it's not actually that much of a surprise, and maybe we are justice warriors. I hadn't thought of the burden of holding it, but so that, that feels really amazing to me.

Ludmila Praslova: Yes, there is research that shows higher justice sensitivity in autistic people, and there's also some research on ADHD.

Frances Frei: so, so when somebody calls a tennis ball out that was in, it's not, for example, unreasonable that I might react strongly than my, more strongly than my partner does.

Ludmila Praslova: Absolutely. It's just, it's just a fucking game, Frances.

Anne Morriss: But it's not just a game to you.

Frances Frei: Thank you. Yeah. Now I’m getting, now which version of you is gonna show up the, it's just a fucking game. Or it's not a game? Because I like the ladder. I'm gonna be super honest. I like the ladder.

Anne Morriss: Frances. What other

Questions do you have for our expert? Uh, well, I mean the, the or or comment or comments on

Frances Frei: this conversation? Yeah, I mean on the comments, I very much like we make the world better for that. Autism is a feature, not a bug. , we are toxicity meters. We are hypersensitive. To that. I mean, it's part of the work I have chosen to do, right?

I go into organizations that have toxicity and rid it out in a way to make the world better for everyone. And so all of this is just making a lot of sense to me. I can also imagine that as adults, so I'm in my early sixties learning about this. It gives. Credibility just makes us features not bugs. When it's a bug, it's a silent bug.

I wish it would go away and I'm probably not gonna talk about it, but when it's a feature, well, holy moly. And then I can also see putting us to really good use. So, um, I. I used to joke that the only way I would leave the Harvard Business School is if I would go to prison. Wow. And the reason I would go to prison is if someone bullied one of our children now that story like this now makes sense why I have held on so tightly to that story.

'cause I'm super sensitive to it and that doesn't make me, it's not idiosyncratically me, it's people like me feel this way. So I'm, I'm really, I'm really appreciating this conversation.

Ludmila Praslova: It is incredibly validating to meet other adult autistics and see that, okay, this really is a feature and this feature serves a purpose in the scale of humanity because humanity needs people who will fight for justice like that.

Even if people call us names. In the long run, it's actually good for everybody that we exist.

Anne Morriss: Uh, the understatement of the year. I'm biased. You know, Frances is the love of my life, but I could not agree more.

Frances, I'm curious, what are you feeling in hearing this conversation?

Frances Frei: Um, that there's it, that sunlight is around. It's that kind of sunlight that makes you look good. a little filter. A little filter just to feel, just feeling like I got a glow, got a nice glow around me, but I feel lighter. I. As a result of hearing it, because in my own private mind, I don't know what are features and what are bugs and, and I don't know what I have to endure.

Like even when you're saying brainstorming is only useful for extroverts, I hear all the time people are saying, oh, come into the office more, do this more. And I'm like, you have no idea how exhausting it is for me. I'll do it, but only if it's purposeful. But sometimes they're purposeful is not my purposeful.

And what this does is. Now it lets it be discussable and then we have to use our words and, and figure it out. Um, I want to be helpful, um, but I can't, I have to do it in ways that, um, that work for me and I want it and just like I wanna do it in ways that work for other people. I'm so. Good at being inclusive of others, but I'm not sure I was totally inclusive of me or people like me growing up.

I had a lot of siblings and when they wanted to insult me, they would call me sensitive. I. And now it makes perfect sense. And I try to, um, appear less sensitive so that I wouldn't get that, but now I'm gonna be like, damn Right, , and you're lucky for it. , like, so that's, you're what? I'm, you're welcome everyone.

You're welcome. Is what I, is what I'll say now. You're welcome.

Anne Morriss: Okay, that's it for now, but don't worry, we're gonna meet our caller next episode and we're gonna keep Lam here with us too. We love this conversation and can't wait to keep it going next week. I wanna keep Lam with us for all conversations.

We loved having you with us on this ride. We would love to hear from you directly. If you wanna figure out your workplace problem together, send us a message. If we think it's outside of our specific wheelhouse, we're co, we're phoning a friend, we're phoning, a friend. You can email us at fixable at ted. com or call or text at two three four fixable. That's two three four three four nine two two five three.

This episode was produced by Rahima, Nasa from Pushkin Industries. Our team includes Constanza Gallardo, Izzy Carter, Banban Cheng, and Roxanne Hai Lash. This episode was mixed by Louis at Story Yard.