Stop making disclosure the doorway to support- A three-layer approach to inclusive work design

By Nat Hawley, Founder – Divergent Thinking

Workplace inclusion often begins too late. An employee struggles, their performance or wellbeing changes, and only then does a manager ask whether there is a health condition or diagnosis behind it. Support becomes something offered after a person has disclosed private information and proved that their difficulty is serious enough.

That sequence puts the burden in the wrong place. It asks the individual to take a personal risk before the organisation examines whether the work itself is creating avoidable barriers.

The alternative is not to ignore individual needs or replace reasonable adjustments with generic wellbeing initiatives. It is to design a more usable baseline, respond early to the barriers people describe and retain a clear route to tailored support. I think of this as a three-layer approach.

Layer one: make everyday work easier to navigate

The first layer is good work design for everyone. It reduces predictable friction without requiring anyone to identify as disabled or neurodivergent.

Consider how work is allocated. A verbal request made during a busy meeting may be clear to the person giving it but difficult for someone else to retain or prioritise. A short written follow-up that names the outcome, owner and deadline improves clarity for the whole team. Advance agendas, recorded decisions and shared priorities can help too.

Choice also matters. One employee may understand a new task through a written brief; another may need an example or a short conversation. Allowing two reasonable ways to receive instructions or contribute does not lower the standard. It makes the standard easier to understand and meet.

Managers can also reduce unnecessary task switching, give notice of material changes where possible and make focused work time legitimate rather than something employees have to negotiate quietly. These changes reduce the energy spent decoding how work is organised.

Layer two: respond to the barrier, not the label

Inclusive design will not remove every difficulty. When a person says that something is getting in the way, the next step should be a practical conversation rather than an informal test of whether their identity or paperwork is persuasive.

Useful questions include: Which part of the task is difficult? When does the problem occur? What has helped before? What could we try now? The answers may point to clearer deadlines, fewer interruptions, an alternative communication channel, assistive technology or a more structured handover.

This approach is especially important when somebody is waiting for an assessment, cannot access one or does not want to disclose personal information. A manager does not need to diagnose the person. They need to understand the work barrier, agree a proportionate response and review whether it helps.

Where a low-risk change can be tried immediately, an agreed trial with a review date is often more useful than waiting months for perfect evidence. It creates real information about what works while the appropriate formal process continues.

Layer three: preserve individual adjustments and specialist support

Universal work design is a foundation, not a substitute for individual reasonable adjustments, occupational health input or specialist support. Treating it as a replacement would simply create a new barrier: “We have made the workplace inclusive, so nobody should need anything different.”

Some people will need equipment, software, changes to duties or working arrangements, or advice that goes beyond a manager’s expertise. Those routes must remain visible, responsive and confidential.

Agreed support also needs to survive organisational change. Too many adjustments depend on the memory of one supportive manager. After a restructure or project move, the employee has to explain everything again. An appropriate record should identify what has been agreed, who is responsible for implementing it and when it will be reviewed, while limiting personal information to those who genuinely need it.

Give managers a system they can use

Managers are often told to be more inclusive without being given the authority, process or confidence to act. Training alone will not solve that. They need a simple operating system:

1. Build clarity and choice into everyday work.
2. Ask about barriers early and without demanding a diagnosis.
3. Trial safe, proportionate changes and review them.
4. Escalate promptly when tailored adjustments or specialist advice are needed.
5. Record responsibilities so agreed support does not quietly disappear.

Workplace wellbeing should include the conditions that make work sustainable: clarity, predictability, manageable transitions, recovery time and confidence that raising a barrier will lead to action rather than judgement.

The UK Government’s September 2026 Keep Britain Working review describes the need to reduce reliance on self-declaration and embed inclusive practice in mainstream workplace systems. In a 2026 Acas survey of 1,000 employees in Great Britain, 35% considered their employer ineffective at training managers to identify and make reasonable adjustments for neurodivergent employees. The practical implication is straightforward: inclusion cannot depend entirely on knowing who has disclosed.

Measure friction, not disclosure

Organisations sometimes treat a low number of declared disabilities or adjustment requests as evidence that few people need support. It may instead mean that people do not trust the route, do not know it exists or have chosen to compensate privately.

A more useful question is where friction is showing up. Are instructions repeatedly misunderstood? Are adjustments delayed? Do employees have to restate needs after every management change? Are people leaving before they feel able to ask for help?

Disclosure can be valuable. It can help an employer understand a person’s needs and agree tailored support in a more open working relationship. But it should be a choice made in a context of trust, not the admission price for understandable instructions and considerate management.

Inclusive work design shifts the starting point. Instead of asking who can prove they need a usable workplace, it asks why the workplace was made difficult to use in the first place—and what can be changed now.

Sources

– Keep Britain Working: a national growth opportunity — September 2026, updated 9 October: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/keep-britain-working-review-update-a-national-growth-opportunity-september-2026/keep-britain-working-a-national-growth-opportunity-september-2026
– Acas: Employers are failing to support neurodiversity at work: https://www.acas.org.uk/employers-are-failing-to-support-neurodiversity-at-work

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this opinion piece are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Well Crowd. This content is for information and discussion purposes only and should not be taken as medical, health, or professional advice.