Employee experience is changing.
For a long time, organisations have spoken about employee experience through engagement surveys, benefits, hybrid working, wellbeing initiatives and leadership behaviours.
All of those things matter.
But the next phase of employee experience needs to go deeper. It needs to ask whether people are genuinely able to do their best work in the environment around them.
That means looking at how work is designed. How managers communicate. How expectations are set. How support is offered. How safe people feel to disclose something about themselves. And how organisations respond when someone needs something different in order to perform well.
This is where neuroinclusion becomes central.
Neuroinclusion is often still treated as a specialist topic. Something that sits within diversity and inclusion, disability confidence or reasonable adjustments.
In reality, it is now part of employee experience, leadership capability, retention and organisational risk.
The data tells us this is no longer a marginal issue.
NHS England Digital’s latest ADHD Management Information shows that, in May 2026, an estimated 2.492 million people in England had ADHD, including people without a diagnosis. Of these, around 741,000 were children and young people aged 5 to 24. The same publication reported that, in March 2026, there were up to 803,658 open referrals that may be for an ADHD assessment. [1]
Autism assessment data shows a similar pressure point. In March 2026, NHS England Digital reported 270,701 patients with an open referral for suspected autism. Of these, 242,708, or 89.7%, had a referral that had been open for at least 13 weeks. [2]
These figures matter for employers because many people are either waiting for diagnosis, newly diagnosed, undiagnosed, or trying to understand how neurodivergence affects them in education, life and work.
They also remind us that support at work cannot only begin once someone has formal paperwork.
That point is important.
We need to be careful not to suggest that neurodivergence itself is simply “increasing” as a workplace trend. A more accurate way to describe what we are seeing is increased visibility, increased demand for assessment, greater language around neurodivergence, and growing confidence among employees to talk about the conditions they need to do their best work.
The workplace is already experiencing this shift.
Indeed Hiring Lab found that the share of UK job adverts mentioning neurodiversity-related keywords rose from 1% of all postings in January 2018 to 3.8% in December 2024. When care-related occupations were excluded, the share rose from 0.2% to 2.6% over the same period. [3]
That suggests visibility is increasing.
But visibility is not the same as meaningful support.
The CIPD’s Neuroinclusion at Work report highlights the gap between organisational intent and practical action. While 70% of employers surveyed said equality, diversity and inclusion was a critical priority, and 83% said employee wellbeing was a critical priority, only 60% said neuroinclusion was a focus for their organisation. Even fewer, 33%, said neuroinclusion was included in their EDI strategy or action plan. [4]
For small businesses, the gap appears even more significant. The CIPD found that small businesses, those with 2 to 249 employees, were least likely to say neuroinclusion was an area of focus for their business, at 45%, compared with 65% of organisations with 250 to 999 employees and 75% of organisations with 1,000 or more employees. [4]
That matters because employee experience is not shaped by statements of intent.
It is shaped by what happens in practice.
It is shaped by whether managers feel confident having conversations about support. Whether recruitment processes unintentionally exclude people. Whether employees feel safe to disclose. Whether reasonable adjustments are understood, implemented and reviewed. Whether difference is treated as a difficulty, or as part of the reality of modern work.
This is particularly relevant when we think about the next generation entering and shaping the workforce.
Deloitte’s 2026 Gen Z and Millennial Survey found that younger generations are increasingly seeking progress on their own terms, prioritising stability, skills and wellbeing over fast-paced career growth. The research also highlights the importance of sustainable workload, clear support and achievable pathways to success. [5]
This does not mean younger employees are less ambitious.
That feels far too easy a conclusion.
It may mean they are more deliberate.
They are looking at work differently. They are asking whether a workplace is healthy, sustainable and psychologically safe. They are more likely to expect conversations about wellbeing, identity, inclusion and flexibility. They may also be less willing to tolerate cultures where masking, burnout or silence are treated as normal.
But this is not only a generational issue.
Many people are receiving diagnoses later in life. Others may never have a formal diagnosis but still experience work in ways that require support, flexibility or adjustment. Some employees will have spent years masking, overcompensating or quietly managing barriers that others cannot see.
So the question for organisations is not simply:
“How do we support the next generation?”
The better question is:
“How do we create working environments where different ways of thinking, processing, communicating and contributing are understood, supported and valued?”
Because neuroinclusion is not about lowering standards.
It is not about removing accountability.
It is about understanding what helps people meet expectations well.
Sometimes that is clearer communication. Sometimes it is written instructions after a meeting. Sometimes it is flexibility around environment, structure, technology, deadlines or how feedback is given. Sometimes it is simply creating enough trust that an employee can say, “This is what helps me work at my best,” without worrying that they will be judged.
These may sound like small things, but they have a significant impact.
When support is missing, organisations often see the consequences elsewhere.
A performance concern may actually be a communication issue.
An absence pattern may be linked to burnout, anxiety, sensory overload or exhaustion from masking.
A conflict may have grown because expectations were not clear.
A disengaged employee may be someone who has spent too long trying to fit into a working style that was never designed with them in mind.
There is also a risk factor when disability inclusion and reasonable adjustments are not handled well. Acas has reported an increase in disability discrimination cases in recent years, which reinforces why organisations need to take reasonable adjustments, manager capability and early resolution seriously. [6]
This does not mean every workplace issue becomes a formal claim. Most will not. But when support is unclear, delayed or inconsistent, the impact is not only personal. It can become cultural, operational and legal.
Acas has also highlighted a practical capability gap. In March 2026, Acas reported that 35% of workers thought their employer was ineffective at training managers to support neurodiversity at work. Only 32% thought their organisation effectively trained managers to make reasonable adjustments for neurodivergent colleagues. [7]
That finding should make organisations pause.
Because managers are often the point where policy becomes experience.
An organisation may have a reasonable adjustments policy. It may have an EDI statement. It may have values on the website. But if a line manager does not know how to respond when someone asks for support, the employee experience can quickly become inconsistent, stressful or damaging.
This is why neuroinclusion should matter to HR Directors, CEOs and senior leaders.
It connects directly to retention, engagement, productivity, wellbeing, leadership confidence and organisational risk.
For small and medium-sized organisations, the challenge can feel even more immediate. There may not be a large HR team, an inclusion specialist or a formal reasonable adjustments process. Managers may be trying to do the right thing but lack confidence. Employees may not know how to ask for support. Decisions may be made inconsistently because there is no clear framework.
That does not mean organisations need to have everything perfect.
But they do need to move from awareness to action.
That includes recruitment processes that do not unintentionally exclude talented people. Onboarding that gives people clarity, structure and confidence. Managers who know how to have supportive conversations without becoming overly formal or fearful. Reasonable adjustment processes that are timely, person-centred and easy to navigate. Assistive technology understood as a productivity tool, not a last resort.
It also includes leadership culture.
Because employees remember how they were treated when something was difficult.
They remember whether their manager listened.
They remember whether they had to fight for support.
They remember whether their needs were treated as a problem, or as part of a practical conversation about how they work best.
Acas guidance is clear that employers should offer support whether or not someone has a diagnosis for their neurodivergence, including making reasonable adjustments. Acas also notes that lack of support can affect performance and lead to increased sickness absence, and that neurodivergent workers may be more likely to experience burnout at work. [8]
This is why neuroinclusion cannot sit quietly in the background.
It is not just about compliance, although compliance matters.
It is not just about policy, although policy matters.
It is about the everyday experience of work.
Many neuroinclusive practices are simply good people practices: clear communication, psychological safety, inclusive recruitment, better manager conversations, thoughtful work design and reasonable flexibility.
When organisations get this right, neuroinclusion does not sit on the edge of the people strategy.
It becomes part of how the organisation thinks about performance, culture and employee experience.
It moves the conversation away from:
“What is wrong with this person?”
And towards:
“What conditions help this person perform well?”
That shift matters.
It matters for individuals who may have spent years feeling misunderstood at work.
It matters for managers who need confidence to lead fairly and practically.
And it matters for organisations that want to retain talent, reduce risk and create cultures where people can contribute fully.
The future of work will not be built around one type of employee, one way of thinking or one model of success.
The organisations that will stand out are the ones that understand difference not as a difficulty to manage, but as part of the reality of modern work.
Neuroinclusion is not a trend.
It is part of building inclusive, healthy and high-performing workplace cultures where people can be their best selves, and where organisations perform better because employee experience and business outcomes are considered together.
That is the future of employee experience.
And it is already here.
References
[1] NHS England Digital, ADHD Management Information, May 2026. [2] NHS England Digital, Autism Statistics, April 2025 to March 2026. [3] Indeed Hiring Lab, Neurodiversity inclusive postings are rising, but untapped potential remains in the UK labour market, February 2025. [4] CIPD, Neuroinclusion at Work Report, 2024. [5] Deloitte, 2026 Gen Z and Millennial Survey. [6] Acas, Characteristics and drivers of disability discrimination employment tribunal claims, 2024; Acas Annual Report and Accounts 2024 to 2025. [7] Acas, Employers are failing to support neurodiversity at work, March 2026. [8] Acas, Adjustments for neurodiversity: reasonable adjustments at work, January 2025.
Data note
The NHS England Digital ADHD Management Information for May 2026 was updated on 25 June 2026 following additional Psych UK Limited data. The figures used in this article reflect the updated publication.
NHS England Digital also notes that ADHD data from February 2025 onwards is not directly comparable with previous months because new independent sector providers began submitting data to the Mental Health Services Dataset.
The NHS autism statistics are described as experimental statistics and should be interpreted with that in mind.