New Survey Finds Most Managers Lack Confidence Navigating Autism Workplace Accommodations

National research finds that although 61% of managers feel prepared to support neurodivergent employees, only 33% feel confident guiding them through workplace accommodations.

NEURO NEWS | NEWS & COMMENTARY | NOVEMBER 3, 2026

A new national survey examining how American managers support neurodivergent employees has identified significant gaps in workplace accommodation knowledge, manager training, and understanding of autistic employees’ experiences. Released October 27 by nonprofit organization NEXT for AUTISM, the report, Autism at Work: Are Managers Ready?, surveyed 521 U.S. managers responsible for supervising at least one employee. The research found that 61% of respondents considered themselves prepared to support an employee who disclosed neurodivergence. However, only 33% expressed confidence in guiding an employee through the formal accommodation process. The results indicate that managers’ general confidence in supporting neurodivergent workers does not consistently extend to understanding how workplace accommodations are requested, evaluated, and implemented. The survey was conducted in partnership with research firm Sago and funded by the Anita Bhatia Foundation for Tomorrow.

Managers Report Limited Training and Organizational Support

The survey found widespread uncertainty about supporting neurodivergent employees, even among managers who expressed a willingness to do so. According to the findings, 78% of managers worried about saying or doing something inappropriate when supporting neurodivergent team members. The same percentage wanted additional training. Among managers who had previously supported a neurodivergent employee, 48% reported relying on the employee for guidance. By comparison, 28% had relied on formal employer training, while 27% had turned to their human resources departments.

These responses suggest that many managers are developing their understanding of neurodivergent workplace needs through individual interactions rather than established organizational training programs. The findings also identify a dependency on employee disclosure and self-advocacy. Nearly one-quarter of surveyed managers, 24%, reported adjusting their management approach only after an employee explicitly requested a change. The report found that adjustments involving schedules, tasks, feedback, and physical workspaces were frequently initiated following employee requests. For workers who have not disclosed a diagnosis or who are unfamiliar with accommodation procedures, this approach can leave workplace barriers unaddressed.

Autistic Masking Remains Poorly Understood

The research also examined managers’ familiarity with autistic masking, the practice of concealing or modifying autistic traits to meet social and workplace expectations. In a separate survey of 417 autistic adults conducted earlier in 2026, NEXT for AUTISM found that 79% reported difficulties involving masking and associated exhaustion. Among managers surveyed for the October report, only 37% described themselves as very or extremely familiar with masking. The researchers also found that 33% of managers felt confident identifying and supporting an employee who appeared exhausted from repeatedly adapting their behavior to fit workplace expectations.

Another 36% expressed confidence in recognizing and supporting employees who rarely spoke up or raised concerns. These findings identify differences between the experiences autistic employees report and the workplace behaviors managers understand. Masking can involve suppressing repetitive movements, changing communication styles, monitoring facial expressions, or consciously adjusting social behavior. The demands associated with these behaviors vary between individuals and workplace environments. Low manager familiarity with masking also limits the usefulness of informal observations as a means of identifying workplace needs. An employee’s outward behavior does not reliably establish their internal level of stress, fatigue, or need for support.

Experience With Disclosure Improves Manager Confidence

Managers who had previously received a disclosure of neurodivergence reported greater familiarity with accommodation procedures. Among those with disclosure experience, 43% felt confident navigating accommodation options. That figure declined to 23% among managers without such experience. A similar difference appeared in familiarity with neurodiversity-related concepts. Nearly half of managers with previous disclosure experience, 48%, reported greater familiarity, compared with 18% of managers without that experience. The survey suggests that direct experience may improve managers’ confidence, although its design does not establish that disclosure itself caused the difference.

Generational differences also appeared in the findings. According to the report, 76% of Generation Z managers had experienced an employee disclosing neurodivergence, compared with 48% of Millennial managers, 41% of Generation X managers, and 28% of Baby Boomer managers. Despite these differences in exposure, younger managers did not consistently demonstrate greater confidence in addressing more complex workplace situations involving masking or less visible support needs. The findings indicate that experience with disclosure and understanding of accommodation procedures are related but separate aspects of managerial preparedness.

What Workplace Accommodation Law Requires

In the United States, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires covered employers to provide reasonable accommodations to qualified employees and applicants with disabilities unless doing so would create an undue hardship. Reasonable accommodations may include adjustments to schedules, workplace policies, communication methods, or other employment practices, depending on the employee’s needs and job responsibilities. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) explains that employees do not have to use specific legal terminology when requesting an accommodation. A request generally involves informing the employer that an adjustment is needed for a reason related to a medical condition.

An employee also does not necessarily have to identify a specific accommodation in advance. Employers and employees may need to participate in an interactive process to identify an effective adjustment. Employers may request reasonable supporting documentation under certain circumstances, particularly when a disability or the need for accommodation is not obvious. The legal duty to provide reasonable accommodations differs from an organization’s voluntary efforts to improve workplace accessibility for all employees. Employers can adopt accessible communication practices, provide written instructions, or offer flexible work arrangements without requiring every employee to disclose a disability. Individualized accommodations must still be assessed according to applicable legal requirements.

A Separate 2026 Survey Identified Similar Concerns

The NEXT for AUTISM findings align with other research examining workplace experiences among neurodivergent adults. In May 2026, Understood.org released its annual Neurodiversity at Work survey, conducted by The Harris Poll among 2,073 American adults. That research found that 85% of respondents believed employers needed better education about accommodations for neurodivergent employees. Among neurodivergent employees surveyed, 70% reported that they did not know which workplace accommodations they were entitled to request. Another 60% said they did not know whom to approach about requesting accommodations.

The survey also found that 70% of neurodivergent employees worried that disclosing their neurodivergence would negatively affect them at work. These findings provide additional context for the manager readiness survey. Employees may encounter difficulties identifying available accommodations while the managers responsible for responding to requests report uncertainty about how those procedures work. The surveys involved different populations, methods, and research questions. Their percentages should therefore be interpreted separately rather than treated as directly comparable measurements.

What the Research Suggests for Employers

NEXT for AUTISM identified several organizational changes that could address the gaps documented in its research. The report calls for better manager education concerning neurodivergent communication and workplace experiences, clearer accommodation procedures, more flexible management practices, and structured professional development. The findings support closer examination of how employers communicate accommodation policies to employees and train supervisors to respond appropriately. Written meeting summaries, clear task expectations, predictable communication procedures, and accessible feedback systems are examples of workplace practices that organizations can make available more broadly.

These measures may improve access without requiring employees to identify themselves as neurodivergent. However, general accessibility measures do not replace the legal obligation to consider individual accommodation requests. Organizations also need procedures for receiving requests, maintaining confidentiality, assessing reasonable adjustments, and communicating decisions.

Limitations of the Survey

The NEXT for AUTISM findings are based on responses from 521 managers participating in a national online survey. The results describe participants’ reported knowledge, experiences, and confidence. They do not directly measure whether managers correctly implemented accommodations or whether employees received effective support. The companion survey of 417 autistic adults was conducted independently. Because the two samples were not drawn from the same workplaces, the findings cannot establish how specific managers responded to the employees represented in the earlier research. Differences in confidence also should not be interpreted as direct measurements of legal compliance. The research identifies areas requiring further investigation, including the relationship between manager training, employee disclosure, accommodation outcomes, and long-term employment experiences.

Workplace Inclusion Depends on More Than Manager Awareness

The October survey documents a substantial gap between managers’ reported willingness to support neurodivergent employees and their confidence in applying accommodation procedures. It also identifies weaknesses in organizational training and the continued reliance on employees to explain their own support needs. The findings place additional attention on employers’ responsibility to establish accessible workplace practices and reliable accommodation processes. For neurodivergent employees, those systems can influence whether workplace adjustments are understood, requested, and implemented. For employers, the survey provides evidence that general disability awareness does not necessarily translate into practical knowledge of accommodation procedures. The report’s central finding is measurable: nearly two-thirds of surveyed managers expressed preparedness to support neurodivergent employees, while approximately one-third felt confident navigating formal workplace accommodations.

References and Further Reading

NEXT for AUTISM. (2026, October 27). National survey reveals a hidden “readiness gap” among managers supporting neurodivergent employees. https://nextforautism.org/updates/national-survey-reveals-a-hidden-readiness-gap-among-managers-supporting-neurodivergent-employees/

NEXT for AUTISM. (2026). Inside the autistic workforce: A national survey. https://nextforautism.org/inside-the-autistic-workplace/

Understood.org. (2026, May 12). Understood.org survey: Neurodiversity at work (2026). https://www.understood.org/en/research-and-surveys/understood-org-survey-neurodiversity-at-work-2026

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (2002). Enforcement guidance on reasonable accommodation and undue hardship under the Americans with Disabilities Act. https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/enforcement-guidance-reasonable-accommodation-and-undue-hardship-under-ada