Neurodiversity broadly refers to naturally occurring diversity in human cognition (Singer, 1999). It is frequently used as an umbrella term for a range of neurocognitive developmental disorders (Doyle, 2020; Kapp, Gillespie-Lynch, Sherman, & Hutman, 2013) including Autistic Spectrum Disorder, Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity Disorder or Dyslexia. Recent public dialogue has shifted to the term ‘neurominority’ to sign post that relevant individuals are disadvantaged regarding a range of life outcomes including systemic social exclusion in education and inferior employment outcomes (Carter, Austin, & Trainor, 2012; Snowling, Adams, Bowyer-Crane, & Tobin, 2000). Subsequent restriction of opportunities for a fulfilled working life and career (Holliday, Koller, & Thomas, 1999; Taylor & Walter, 2003) is in contrast to emerging popular narratives about the talent potential of neurodiversity for modern workplaces (Austin & Pisano, 2017; Sniderman, 2014): the ‘diamond in the rough’ (Doyle, Patton, Fung, Bruk-Lee, & Bruyere, 2020).
In this paper, we highlight the inadequate scope and focus of academic attention on neurodiversity and employment to date across the fields of applied psychology and management studies. We contextualise the neurodiversity paradigm from a medical, social and legal perspective in the wider workplace equality, diversity and inclusion agenda. Through a series of ‘Empty Reviews’ defined as a targeted analysis of literature gaps through systematic literature review principles (Schlosser & Sigafoos, 2009; Yaffe, Montgomery, Hopewell, & Shepard, 2012), we illustrate the dearth of tangible evidence. Through due diligence in our conceptualization including definition of gaps in knowledge, we outline a future research and practice agenda to facilitate informed inclusion for a marginalized minority. In other words, it is our aim to support evidence-based practice in this emerging field guiding Human Resources (HR) and employment policy to mitigate labor force exclusio
