Neurodiversity and HRM: a practice-based review and research agenda
Open accessAbstract
Purpose This article provides an overview of lessons we can learn from human resource (HR) policies and practices related to neurodiversity. Design/methodology/approach We conducted a practice-based review using information obtained from organizations’ websites, summarized the information and reflected on how scholars can continue to advance this area of research based on what is happening in practice. Findings The review provided a selective overview of programs and practices per HR cluster: selection and recruitment; onboarding, integration and retention; job design; flexible work options and working remotely; training; employee resource groups (ESGs) and support. The review provides a description of practices and policies implemented within organizations that focus on neurodiversity among employees. Originality/value Our review showed that organizations have a multitude of HR practices and policies in place to include neurodivergent individuals in their workforces, though many of these have not been empirically investigated. Sharing this knowledge is important so that research insights and practice can reciprocally influence one another.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Reviews of policies and practices designed to support neuro-divergent workers report that flexible work arrangements, including homeworking, are among the most common practices to accommodate employees.
“Reviews of policies and practices designed to support neuro-divergent workers [9,10] report that flexible work arrangements, including homeworking, are among the most common practices to accommodate employees [10].”
From Homeworking experiences of neuro-divergent workers: systematic review (2024) · cites this paper as [10]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 19 · Cited by 63
- Authors
- Hennekam, S., & Follmer, K.
- Affiliations
- Audencia Business School (FR)
- West Virginia University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Hennekam, Sophie
- Venue
- Equality Diversity and Inclusion An International Journal
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2024-02-12
- Volume
- 43
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1119-1129
- ISSN
- 2040-7149 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4392731472
- Cited by
- 63
- References
- 19
- Citations by year
- 2026: 34 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 7
- FWCI
- 26.02
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- hal.science
- Licence
- Locations
- Equality Diversity and Inclusion An International Journal (publishedVersion)
- HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Disability Education and Employment
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Human Resource and Talent Management
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Employer Branding and e-HRM
- Keywords
- neurodiversity, neurodivergent employees, human resource management practices, personnel policy, job design, flexible work arrangements, remote work, employee training, employee resource groups, workplace inclusion
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
