Nearly every company is looking for innovation, adaptability, and creative problem-solving. They want visionaries, strategic thinkers, systems builders, people who can challenge assumptions, lead through uncertainty, and imagine what comes next.

But the bait they’re using?

Still designed to catch people who color inside the lines.

That’s why so many organizations say they want one kind of talent, but consistently hire another. It’s not a pipeline problem. It’s not a shortage of qualified neurodivergent professionals. It’s a recognition problem. The systems meant to identify potential aren’t built to detect differences. They’re built to reward conformity.

I’ve seen this firsthand – in my work, hiring journey, and kids' lives. But what prompted this reflection now was reading Gallup’s newly released Neurodiversity in the Workplace report (April 2025), which pairs rigorous data with a message companies can’t afford to ignore:

Neurodivergent talent is not a niche population. It’s a strategic advantage. But only if you know how to recognize it.

1. The Innovation Employers Say They Want

Neurodivergence — a broad term encompassing ADHD, autism, dyslexia, and other natural variations in cognitive processing — doesn’t mean someone is less capable. It means they think differently. They may communicate differently. Prioritize differently. See patterns others miss.

And that difference is precisely what companies say they’re looking for.

We’re in an era of disruption and reinvention. Across industries, leaders are desperately searching for:

• People who can reimagine broken systems
• Think strategically under pressure
• Adapt quickly without losing the plot
• Generate novel solutions in complex environments

But here’s the paradox: while the job descriptions use terms like visionary, self-starter, creative, and strategic, the hiring processes used to find those candidates still rely on outdated filters that disproportionately favor neurotypical behavior:

• Time-pressured interviews
• Conformity-based personality tests
• Standardized expectations for verbal fluency and social signaling
• Ambiguous definitions of “culture fit”

The result is a talent search that asks for one thing but screens for another.

2. What the Research Actually Shows

The newly released Gallup study builds on the foundational work of the EY–Made By Dyslexia report, which is still one of the most unapologetic and well-evidenced arguments for the value of cognitive difference.

Published in the early 2020s, the EY report flipped the deficit-based narrative around dyslexia. It reframed it as a distinct thinking style with inherent value in the modern workplace. Rather than focusing on the difficulties dyslexic individuals may face in traditional academic or work settings, like spelling, rote memorization, or short-term recall, it asked a far better question:

What natural strengths do dyslexic individuals bring that the future of work depends on?

The report found that dyslexic thinkers routinely outperform in domains like:

• Big-picture reasoning – identifying connections across disparate information
• Visualizing and imagining – mentally modeling systems, outcomes, or opportunities
• Storytelling and empathy – conveying ideas with emotional intelligence and narrative clarity
• Simplifying the complex – distilling overwhelming inputs into what matters most
• Exploratory problem-solving – using trial, error, and curiosity to challenge assumptions and iterate

These aren’t soft skills. They are deeply human, non-linear, and resistant to automation. They’re also essential for teams navigating complex change.

EY went even further, mapping dyslexic strengths directly to the World Economic Forum’s top 10 skills for 2025 and beyond — skills every company claims to be hiring for.

The conclusion of the EY report was bold and clear:

“Dyslexic Thinking = Valuable Thinking.”

It wasn’t rebranding. It was a strategic correction to a decades-long misunderstanding of intelligence and competence in evolving, uncertain environments.

So, if I may flex a bit, here’s how my profile, backed by my Top 10 CliftonStrengths and highest-scoring EQ-i domains, aligns with the World Economic Forum’s top 5 future-critical capabilities:

• Active Learning — Learner (1), Input (3), Intellection (4) I don’t just absorb information; I seek it, process it deeply, and thrive in environments that encourage constant growth.
• Systems Thinking — Strategic (2), Context (5), Analytical (6) I see patterns, connect past to present, and anticipate downstream impacts that others miss.
• Cognitive Flexibility — Ideation (9), Arranger (10) I pivot without panic, juggle variables efficiently, and embrace creative reconfigurations in real time.
• Emotional Intelligence — Self-Actualization (1), Reality Testing (2), and Stress Tolerance (3)* I’m purpose-driven, grounded in facts, and able to stay calm and think clearly under pressure.
• Innovation and Creativity — Strategic (2), Input (3), Context (5), Ideation (9) I remix ideas across disciplines, generate original insights, and translate complexity into novel, strategic solutions.

* These are my EQ-i 2.0 scores ranked; the rest are my Clifton Strengths and rankings.?

3. What Gallup’s Data Makes Impossible to Ignore

While EY zeroed in on dyslexia, Gallup’s 2025 study expanded the scope, looking at neurodivergent professionals broadly, including those with ADHD, autism, dyspraxia, and other cognitive differences.

They analyzed over 30,000 participants using CliftonStrengths themes, workplace engagement data, and self-reported workplace challenges. What they found wasn’t just compelling — it was confirming.

Key insights:

• Neurodivergent professionals score higher in Ideation, Strategic, and Command – themes tied to innovation, vision, leadership, and complex decision-making.
• Neurotypical professionals score higher in Discipline, Achiever, and Responsibility – themes associated with consistent execution and linear task management.

Both groups bring strengths. But the difference is how they’re seen, supported, and used.

Gallup also asked both groups to identify the most challenging parts of their workday. The answers were familiar:

• Unclear expectations
• Loud or overstimulating environments
• Lack of autonomy over how or when to complete work

But neurodivergent professionals felt these stressors more intensely, often because systems weren’t built to include them. Accommodations weren’t offered. Managers weren’t trained. Flexibility wasn’t standard – it had to be asked for (often at the risk of stigma).

Neurodivergent individuals aren’t “alien minds” — they’re human minds with different access points, priorities, and sensitivities. The talent is already there. What determines success is whether the system allows it to thrive.

4. The Visibility Gap

If you’re designing hiring systems to find someone who makes great eye contact, speaks in structured bullet points, and responds quickly under pressure, you may be filtering out some of your strongest thinkers without even realizing it.

Because the person who:

• Needs a little extra time to process a question
• Struggles to sit still in a 90-minute panel interview
• Writes ideas out better than they say them aloud
• Questions the interview itself …might also be the person who can completely rethink your business model.

This isn’t theory. It’s already playing out in real life.

But hiring systems haven’t caught up. They still default to:

• Timed cognitive assessments that reward speed over substance
• Interviews that test social comfort more than strategic depth
• “Culture fit” filters that penalize anyone who challenges the status quo
• Compliance-only accommodations that feel like exceptions rather than options

The result? Up to 90% of neurodivergent adults remain unemployed or underemployed, according to multiple studies, not because they lack talent, but because they don’t pass a series of tests designed for someone else’s brain.

5. What This Looks Like in Real Life

I’m not writing this as a detached observer. I’m neurodivergent – and so are my three kids. One of my daughters is autistic. The others, like me, move through the world with brains that ask unusual questions, see unusual connections, and resist the obvious.

In our house, we joke that we’re wizards in a world of muggles.

But it’s not just a joke. It’s shorthand for a very real experience: living in — and trying to succeed in – systems that weren’t designed with you in mind.

School systems. Hiring systems. Corporate systems.

We don’t always move the way those systems expect. And when we don’t, we’re often misread as defiant, challenging, disorganized, or distracting.

And that misreading doesn’t stop in childhood. It follows us straight into the workplace.

6. About That Checkbox

On nearly every application, there’s a question:

“Do you have a disability?”

Under U.S. law, neurodivergence qualifies. I usually check the box—not out of shame, but because I believe in transparency, and frankly, I have nothing to prove at this stage of my career. With decades of leadership, strategy, and instructional design experience behind me, I’m comfortable owning my wiring and how it helps me lead, build, and solve in ways others don’t.

But I think ahead (hello Strategic).

I think about my kids, also neurodivergent, and how they’ll soon be entering the workforce.

And the idea that they’ll be asked, right out of the gate, to check a box labeling themselves as “disabled”? Honestly, it worries me.

Not because they aren’t capable – they’re brilliant. However, the label still carries a weight that doesn’t reflect who they are or what they can do. It suggests a deficiency. And the systems they’ll be stepping into may still read that word – and make assumptions that block their light before it even has a chance to shine.

We shouldn’t ask 22-year-olds with big ideas and different brains to flag themselves for exclusion just to get in the door.

That’s not inclusion. That’s a warning sign — about the system, not the person.

7. What Employers Can Do — Starting Now

This isn’t about charity. It’s not about compliance. And it’s certainly not about lowering standards.

It’s about finally aligning your systems with the talent you say you want.

According to both Gallup and EY, here’s where employers can start:

1. Update job descriptions - Strip the jargon. Focus on outcomes. Clarify essential vs. non-essential skills.
2. Rethink hiring assessments - Replace timed puzzles with work-relevant simulations. Offer written or asynchronous options.
3. Normalize accommodations - Don’t wait for people to ask. Offer choice in format, pace, and environment from the start.
4. Train your managers - Give them tools to support cognitive differences, not misinterpret them.
5. Ditch “culture fit” in favor of “cognitive contribution” - Ask not “Will they blend in?” but “Will they broaden our thinking?”

This is the future of hiring—not just for neurodivergent talent but also for building better, more adaptive teams overall.

8. We’re Not the Exception. We’re the Edge.

Neurodivergent professionals are not liabilities to be managed.

We are often the most capable of helping you imagine, build, and lead what's next.

So, suppose your organization is serious about innovation, complexity, and building teams that can handle disruption instead of being broken by it. In that case, you need to take a hard look at your systems.

Because neurodivergent thinkers…

• We’re not hiding.
• We’re not broken.
• We’re just not baited by what you’ve been putting on the hook.

And if you really want what you say you’re looking for?

You’ll need to change the bait.