In Brief

This study investigates neuroinclusive hiring practices in academic libraries, focusing on best practices for designing hiring experiences that are inclusive to autistic and ADHD job seekers. Our research team conducted a survey of 51 academic libraries in the United States, examining job advertisements, interview formats and practices, and general human resources (HR) practices as they relate to inclusion for neurodivergent job seekers. While the relatively small sample size precludes us from making generalizable statements about the field’s adoption of neuroinclusive practices (or lack thereof), our results brought to light a significant consideration: while some inclusive practices were adopted among survey-taking institutions, many libraries still lack inclusive practices that can specifically benefit neurodivergent candidates. The study demonstrates the need for more comprehensive and proactive measures to support neurodivergent individuals in the hiring process.

Background Information

Language Note:

In this paper, we will be using identity-first language to refer to autistic people. Identity-first language is the preference of many autistic self-advocates, including those at the Autistic Self Advocacy Network (Brown, 2012). Furthermore, we refer to autism as either autism or autism spectrum disorder (ASD) rather than Asperger’s syndrome, an outdated term for a “mild” or “high-functioning” form of autism. Asperger’s syndrome was eliminated in 2013 from version 5 of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) and is considered to be a fraught term given the problematic legacy of Hans Asperger, the namesake of Asperger’s syndrome, in Nazi Vienna, specifically with his research into and treatment of disabled children (Czech, 2018). We also refer to Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder as ADHD throughout the paper.

Definitions

Neurodiverse: A group of people where one or more members have differing neurocognitive functioning. Some members might be neurotypical, others neurodivergent (Walker, 2021).

Neurodiversity: The diversity of all human minds; the variation of neurocognitive functioning across the human population (Walker, 2021).

Neurodivergent: A person whose mind functions in a way that diverges from dominant societal norms (coined by Kassiane Asasumasu in 2000) (Walker, 2021).

Neurodivergence: The state of being neurodivergent. Forms of neurodivergence can be innate or acquired, and include but are not limited to dyslexia, autism, depression, and epilepsy. Autism is an innate form that has a pervasive impact on “an individual’s psyche, personality, and fundamental way of relating to the world” (Walker, 2021).

Neurotypical: A person whose mind functions in ways that fall within dominant societal norms. It means the opposite of neurodivergent (Walker, 2021).

Neuroinclusive: Practices, processes, and policies that create welcoming and safe spaces for people of all neurocognitive functions (Neurodivergent Rebel, 2024).

Ableism: A system that assigns value to people based on constructed ideas of normalcy, productivity, and fitness – rooted in eugenics, racism, sexism, colonialism, and capitalism – and manifests as discrimination and prejudice against people with disabilities. This can range from lack of ADA compliance, refusing to provide accommodations, failing to incorporate accessibility to overt discrimination and seclusion (Lewis, 2022; Eisenmenger, 2019).

Positionality Statement: “Nothing about us without us”

Our team of authors consists of a mix of neurotypical and neurodivergent library workers; those who are neurodivergent represent various conditions including ADHD and autism spectrum disorder. Among our neurodivergent research team, one is Latine and another is transmasculine. To mitigate potential biases from relying solely on our own experiences in the academic library hiring process, we grounded our work in literature on neuroinclusive hiring best practices. However, our experiences of being job candidates ourselves also supplemented the research in our literature review. We address in our paper how the best practices we outline can be especially beneficial for those who are uncomfortable disclosing a disability or even the undiagnosed. Given the intersectionality between underdiagnosis in various marginalized communities such as racialized minorities, gender minorities, and those with lower socioeconomic status we feel this study appropriately addresses concerns for many marginalized groups.

Introduction

The application and interview process for academic library positions, especially those at the non-staff, librarian level, are often quite demanding and frequently require candidates to engage in processes that are particularly distressing to those with certain neurodivergent conditions, such as ASD or ADHD. As such, the barriers to entry into the profession are often larger for this population, and this can lead to underrepresentation within the academic library workforce. With fewer neurodivergent voices at the table, academic libraries will find it harder to identify the particular challenges that neurodivergent individuals face and the accommodations that could increase their recruitment, thus perpetuating a cycle of exclusion.

Neurodivergence in libraries remains an area of study that needs further development. In particular, there are few papers that examine neuroinclusion in the context of academic library hiring practices. Librarians with disabilities are generally an overlooked group, so the exact percentage of neurodivergent library workers is unknown. However it is estimated that 15-20% of the world population, or 1 in 5 adults are neurodivergent, and 3.7% of library staff in the United States and 5.9% in Canada has some form of neurodivergence (Doyle, 2025; Khan et al., 2022).

In response to this dilemma, we wanted to further explore the topic of neuroinclusion in academic library hiring practices, focusing on the barriers and difficulties that are often present for individuals with ASD or ADHD. We chose to focus on surveying hiring managers, library administrators, and others who have decision-making power when it comes to hiring, in order to get a sense of where the profession currently is in terms of its inclusiveness to neurodivergent job seekers. As part of the study, we conducted a literature review of best practices for neuroinclusive hiring, drawing mostly from fields studying disability and human resources. Further information was gathered by means of a survey sent to academic libraries across the United States, designed to examine how well academic libraries are currently engaging in those best practices in order to accommodate neurodivergent candidates during the hiring process. This study can serve as an exploratory baseline measure of how neuroinclusive the field is in its hiring practices.

What is Neurodivergence?

Neurodivergence can encompass a range of neurological conditions that impact how individuals experience and interact with the world around them. There are a number of conditions that are commonly included under the neurodivergence label such as autism and Attention-Deficit Disorder/Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADD/ADHD). Many neurodivergent self-advocates favor an expansive definition that is inclusive of most neurological conditions. This can make conducting research on the neurodivergent community challenging, as researchers may need to review literature utilizing a wide range of terminology. For this study, we primarily focus on the experiences of autistic job seekers, and those with ADHD. While we did not specifically address the intersection of AuDHD (autism with ADHD), we believe many of the best practices reviewed in our study are applicable to that convergence.

Higher Education, Libraries, and Neurodivergence

Libraries are often proclaimed to be “safe spaces” for all, including autistic individuals, those with ADHD, or other neurodivergent conditions (Lawrence, 2013, p. 99), and it is colloquially presumed that libraries should be a natural fit for neurodivergent job-seekers (Enna, 2023; Grandin, 1999; Zauderer, 2023). Indeed, for many reasons, it makes sense that the work of libraries would appeal to those who think differently from the norm. Libraries can be a place where being process- or detail-oriented, analytical, committed to follow-through, and wary of the spotlight (common ASD traits) is welcomed (Attar, 2021; Eng, 2017; Maddock, 2022). Those who can make sense from disparate ideas, share deeply in others’ enthusiasms, and quickly read the emotional tenor of a room (common ADHD traits) may also find themselves able to thrive in the field (Swick-Jemison, 2023). However, research featuring the lived experiences of neurodivergent academic library workers paints a more nuanced picture of how prepared the field is to make space for anyone who is not neurotypical.

Experiences of Neurodivergent Academic Librarians

Looking to scholarship written by and/or studying neurodivergent librarians, as well as our own experiences, the academic library can be a challenging place for neurodivergent individuals who staff it. While positive experiences in academic librarianship have certainly been had by neurodivergent employees (see selected passages in Anderson 2021, Eng 2017, Giles-Smith & Popowich 2023), on the whole the literature suggests that the profession tends to be inclusive in words alone to neurodivergent workers. E.E. Lawrence’s “Loud Hands in the Library,” the first article to acknowledge and address the experience of neurodivergent library workers as opposed to patrons, noted in 2013 that there are likely many autistic librarians who feel unsafe being forthcoming about their diagnosis at work. Since then, studies have shown that neurodivergent library workers face many challenges related to the physical and social environments of their workplaces (see Anderson 2021; Camp & Finlay 2025; Eng 2017; Giles-Smith & Popowich 2023; Haire 2025; Swick-Jemison 2023). In some cases, the library can be seen as an unsafe space, as noted in Giles-Smith and Popowich (2023), one where neurodivergent employees can feel “marginalized,” “dismissed,” or even “targeted” (Giles-Smith & Popowich 2023, p.7). There is a fear among neurodivergent individuals on the tenure track or in contract positions that they will be ultimately rejected from being able to stay in their roles because their condition “mak[es] it impossible to conform to the norms necessary to be accepted into the group” (Swick-Jemison 2023 p. 8; see also Giles-Smith & Popowich 2023).

Masking Neurodivergence

Special consideration must be paid to the added labor that neurodivergent library workers must put in to be seen as “normal” in a workplace that is not welcoming of neurodivergence. A 2025 study by Amelia Haire surveyed autistic academic librarians on the efforts they took in their workplaces to learn about its norms in order to survive and be successful. The survey found that autistic librarians often take significant measures to fit into their neurotypical-coded environments, such as going to great lengths to choose just the right method and style of communication when speaking to coworkers, uncovering and studying unwritten rules of the workplace, and even modifying their facial expressions. In an effort to depict a collected (read: neurotypical) exterior, autistic library workers frequently undertake this additional labor in secret, on top of performing their regular job duties (Haire 2025). The masking required to appear calm and on top of things, while below the surface struggling, can be extremely distressing to autistic and other neurodivergent individuals and lead quickly to burnout (Giles-Smith & Popowich 2023; Haire, 2025).

The common urge to mask or to put forth great effort to study the norms of the workplace almost certainly stems from the aforementioned neurotypical coding of the typical library workplace. The unifying call among most literature speaking to the experience of neurodivergent individuals at work is that much greater awareness of neurodivergence is necessary, so that neurodivergent individuals can simply exist as themselves in their workplaces (see Camp & Finlay 2023; Giles-Smith & Popowich 2025; Lawrence 2013).

Hiring Practices as Exclusionary

The hiring procedures for academic libraries are typically similar to the professoriate: a two-part process including phone or video interviews, followed by an on-campus interview that generally begins with a dinner the day before and a day-long interview that includes a presentation, various meetings with teams, a formal interview with the search committee, tours, a lunch, and sometimes more interviews sprinkled throughout the day. For anyone, it can be an anxiety-inducing and exhausting process. For neurodivergent individuals, it can be an even worse experience. Studies with neurodivergent individuals have documented how traditional hiring practices can be barriers to their success. Job advertisements filled with jargon and unnecessary qualifications, hectic interview schedules, broad and ambiguous interview questions phrased in a way that are difficult for neurodivergent candidates to answer, accommodations available only upon disclosure of disability, ableist assumptions regarding fit and ability, and unconscious bias of hiring committees hinder their successful employment (Anderson, 2021; Betz, 2022; Dali, 2019; Haire, 2025; Hyde et al., 2024; Khan et al., 2022; Lau, 2022; Maras et al., 2021; Oud, 2019; Russo et al., 2022; Tomczak et al., 2021; Whelpley & May, 2023). The typical interview process is a natural outcome of the neoliberal ideas underpinning academia, which promote ableist values supporting hyperproductivity and “the fittest” candidates (Cunningham et al., 2019; Dali, 2019; Lau, 2022; Oud, 2019). It is not surprising to learn roughly 85% of autistic people are unemployed and about 46% of those employed in any industry are underemployed (Maras et al., 2021; Russo et al., 2022; Tomczak et al., 2021; See also: Khan et al., 2022). Traditional hiring practices were developed for neurotypical, abled individuals and thus are exclusionary of all others (Khan et al., 2022).

Methodology

Our survey questions were designed to capture the ways and the extent to which libraries take neurodiversity into account when developing and enacting their hiring practices. The bulk of the survey questions were informed by the literature on neuroinclusion in the workplace, and in higher education, drawing from Betz, 2022; Bruyère et al., 2020; Maras et al., 2021; and Saleh et al., 2022. The survey questions can be found in Appendix A.

Based on the best practices covered in the literature, we divided the survey questions into five conceptual categories: the job advertisement, the format of the interview day, the procedural aspects of the interview day, the candidate presentation during the interview day, and general human resources practices. For each of the concepts, we asked two questions. For the first question, we identified relevant “best practices” from the literature (outlined more fully in Appendix B) and asked which of the practices respondents had engaged in. We then followed up with a second question asking, for those practices selected by the respondent in the first question, when would those practices be employed? For the latter question the choices were: “Used by default,” “Used upon request,” and “Used sporadically.” Lastly, we closed the survey with three additional questions that either did not fit neatly into the conceptual framework described above or that allowed respondents to address a more expansive view of neurodiversity in their hiring practices than we chose to focus on in the other survey questions.

We compiled a list of the academic libraries that had posted openings for full-time positions on higheredjobs.com for the period July 1, 2021–October 1, 2022. We ultimately sent out our survey by email to hiring officials or administrators for 369 libraries via Qualtrics in October and November 2022.

Limitations

Based on the low (13.8 %) response rate and incomplete nature of many of the responses received, our sample size was too small to make claims of statistical significance or generalizability. Additionally, the data was collected in Fall 2022 and may not reflect the status quo in 2025 or beyond.

Results

With 51 institutional responses to the survey, the study provides an overview of engagement with best practices across five key areas and offers valuable insights into the current landscape of inclusive hiring in academic libraries.

Most Frequently Used Hiring Practices

Across all categories, five practices emerged as the most frequently used by institutions, both in terms of overall engagement and default implementation:

Writing job descriptions to be short and skills-focused

This practice was adopted by 87% of respondents, with 24 institutions reporting they use it by default.

Creating a deliberately quiet, unrushed interview environment

Used by 81% of respondents, this practice was implemented by default in 27 cases.

Providing information about the interview format in advance

This practice was used by 71.4% of respondents, with 30 institutions implementing it by default.

Introducing the presentation room prior to the interview presentation

88.2% of responding institutions engage in this practice and 26 use it by default.

Regularly updating interview processes to reflect best practices

This general HR procedure was the most widely adopted across all categories, with 93% of respondents reporting its use and 20 institutions implementing it by default.

Least Frequently Used Hiring Practices

Conversely, several practices were rarely used, indicating areas where academic libraries may need further development or support:

Providing alternatives to the standard job talk

20.6% of institutions used this practice and just two use it by default.

Providing training on neurodiversity to HR professionals and hiring managers

Only 10.7% of institutions engage in this practice, and just one reported using it by default.

Using direct and inclusive language about neurodiversity in job ads

This practice was used by just 10% of respondents, with minimal default implementation.

Allowing interviewees to bring support workers or companions

11.9% of institutions engage in this practice and just two use it by default

Keeping the number of interviewers to one or two per session

This practice was used by only 4.1% of respondents, with two institutions implementing it by default.

Additional Observations and Qualitative Insights

The qualitative portion of the survey, though limited in response rate, provided valuable context. Respondents noted that accommodations designed for autistic individuals often benefit candidates with other neurodivergent conditions, such as dyslexia or bipolar disorder. Moreover, several respondents expressed a willingness to expand their practices and explore new accommodations. This openness suggests that while some practices are not yet widespread, there is institutional interest in improving hiring equity for neurodiverse individuals.

Discussion

Based on our survey results, it appears libraries engage in some best practices for hiring neurodivergent candidates; however, given the small sample size and our own experiences interviewing, the results don’t necessarily paint a complete picture of how well the practices are implemented. Additionally, the lived experiences of having gone through the academic library hiring process within our neurodiverse group diverge in some significant ways to the stated common practices of survey takers, calling into question the truthfulness of what hiring institutions are actually doing.

The most widely adopted initiatives tend to be those more “low-hanging fruit” that can be done with minimal effort or consensus building. Over 80% of survey respondents reported creating an unrushed interview day by including breaks between sessions. We know this can be done well, as one of our researchers, Michael, was fortunate that he interviewed for his current position entirely over Zoom during the early lockdown of the COVID-19 pandemic. His breaks consisted of snuggling his dogs and silence, without the small talk often necessary during in person all day interview sessions! As an autistic person, this was very helpful and less stressful for him. But from our experience we also know scheduled interview breaks can be treated as inconsequential buffer time and easily removed when things go over schedule – or be required to serve double-duty as presentation set-up time, bathroom breaks, or yet another moment for small-talk with the search committee.

Over 90% of our respondents say they regularly update hiring practices to mirror best practices. Several of us have seen this practice in action. One member of our team, Alex, reflected on how her department adapted the interview process based on past experiences to remove one of the two presentations required of candidates – a change that felt like a true “lift as you climb” moment as the improvements were made, not as a reactionary necessity, but to create a better, fairer experience for future candidates. While we’ve had successful conversations about changing hiring practices, we also know that it can be tricky convincing people to stop an interview practice that has always been done – or worse, has become almost a hazing ritual. Mary had an interview that included role playing in a group interview with other candidates for teaching positions in non-library academic units. When she gave her solicited and honest feedback about the stressful nature of the experience, she was told, “this is the way we’ve always done it and if we went through it, it can’t be that bad.”

It is encouraging to see that some best practices are regularly employed according to our survey takers. However, we noted the most commonly adopted best practices benefit all job seekers, including the neurotypical, rather than those that can be especially inclusive to those who are neurodivergent, such as implementing training on neurodivergence for search committee members. This is important to note, because it might meet minimum legal requirements without moving beyond it and doing the hard work of truly creating a welcoming experience.

When considering practices that could directly support neurodivergent candidates, we find that these measures have the lowest adoption rates. For instance, allowing for an alternative to the traditional “job talk,” (20.6% adoption) does require more effort and creativity to allow for parity among candidates, but they are achievable depending on the position. We need to ensure that hiring interviews don’t needlessly require candidates to perform and be evaluated on tasks that aren’t expected of the position they are applying for. In one member of our team’s experience, they were applying for a librarian position focused on technical services. The interview process required them to give an oral presentation to the entire library’s staff, and yet the actual job did not require the incumbent to be involved in giving presentations as part of their job duties. Our researcher felt very uncomfortable with the presentation part of the interview and did not feel that it accurately helped to assess how they would have performed in the position itself. In talking with others about these best practices, we’ve experienced the most pushback with presentation alternatives; however, if outreach, teaching, or talking/presenting to stakeholders is not essential to a position, it shouldn’t be an interview requirement.

Those involved in hiring must remember that hiring is a two-way street. If academic libraries want neurodivergent prospective library workers to feel that they will be supported on the job, they have to show that support during the hiring process itself and be aware of – and amenable to fixing – the invisible barriers turning neurodivergent job seekers away. Unintentionally excluding neurodivergent individuals from the candidate pool not only limits the diversity of perspectives within the organization but also overlooks the valuable contributions that neurodivergent individuals can bring to the workforce, and do when given the chance to work.

Finally, while two-thirds of survey respondents noted that they have provided candidates with information about how to request accommodation, this differs significantly from actively making accommodations a standard part of the hiring process. To truly move the needle on being inclusive of neurodivergent library workers, we must consider how to sustainably incorporate all of the best practices outlined in this article. Libraries and universities often espouse values of inclusivity, aiming to serve diverse communities. However, if their hiring practices do not reflect these values, it creates a dissonance between organizational rhetoric and actions, potentially eroding trust and credibility. Furthermore, while some libraries are engaging in best practices that benefit all job seekers, it’s crucial to recognize that simply meeting ADA requirements, that is, the bare minimum required of institutions to avoid litigation, is not enough. In fact, libraries can adhere to ADA standards and still not employ many of the best practices outlined in this paper. By settling for the legal minimum, libraries and institutions perpetuate the very inequities they claim to oppose. We have the opportunity to push beyond these minimal requirements and create the inclusive and welcoming environment that libraries claim to maintain. It is also worth noting that some of the qualitative questions were framed as such that responding negatively could be interpreted as an admission of noncompliance with ADA requirements and federal law, potentially influencing how participants answered.

The responses to the qualitative questions of our survey reflect a desire on the part of employers for inclusivity and accommodation in the hiring process, yet the survey results suggest an unfortunate reality that many of these valuable practices are not being widely implemented. This must raise the question of why academic libraries are not pursuing or succeeding in advocating for their implementation during the hiring process? There are certainly structural barriers in place that make it difficult to effect change in hiring, such as red tape in human resource hiring procedures; indeed, “navigating bureaucracy” was a key factor found by Houk and Nielsen in their 2023 study on factors confounding the inclusivity of academic library hiring practices. Additionally, search chairs may feel the need to conserve their efforts and strategically “pick their battles” instead of advocating for potentially controversial hiring practices. Staff time and financial resources are always limited, and with university budgets tightening, there may be little hope for increased financial resources to address the changes necessary to approach hiring in a more neuroinclusive way (especially with regard to upgrades to the work environment that better accommodate diverse sensory needs). Fortunately, there are barriers that can be overcome with minimal resources. If search committees are not engaging in best practices due to dogmatic mindsets (e.g. “If I had to endure an exhausting interview day, you do too,”), these are attitudes that must be challenged and discouraged by institutional leaders. If the issue is simply a lack of awareness about neurodivergent individuals and their needs, training on neurodivergence should and can be provided at relatively low cost. Fundamentally, we must ask ourselves, to borrow a term from engineering, “what is the desired result?”. Is it to find the person who can do the best job, or merely the person who can best jump through the many hoops of the academic interview? We assume that libraries would universally state that their goal is the former; it’s time to reconsider hiring practices which favor candidates who can do the latter.

In summary, while some academic libraries are engaging in some inclusive hiring practices, the results highlight potential shortcomings in best practices within certain institutions. These shortcomings may perpetuate systemic inequalities, limit diversity, and hinder organizational innovation and effectiveness. Addressing these issues is essential for promoting fairness, diversity, and inclusivity in the workplace.

Future Research and Conclusion

Future Research

Due to the relatively new attention that neurodivergence has garnered in recent years, the potential for future research in this area is extremely wide-ranging. We have identified the following as starting points, but as demonstrated in our review of existing library scholarship, there are gaps in our collective knowledge around neurodivergence and disability that abound in our field. We can think of a number of reasons why this is so, such as the dearth of openly neurodivergent academics and the fraught nature of doing research in fields that some would regrettably consider to be controversial. We owe much to the researchers before us and hope our contribution to this matter will continue to spur further research and understanding.

The hiring process from the perspective of neurodivergent job seekers.

It would be worthwhile to see the inverse of this study, viewing the hiring process from the perspective of neurodivergent library workers. While the authors of this study are a mix of both neurodivergent and neurotypical librarians, we acknowledge that by focusing on hiring practices of library search committees, the current study only presents one side of the story. To best ensure that academic libraries are equitably hiring neurodiverse candidates, it is vital to understand what it is like to be a candidate, asking questions such as when/if neurodivergent candidates choose to disclose their disability during the process, what their expectations are for hiring committees, and what the job search process is like for them overall.

Retention of neurodivergent library workers, particularly those on the tenure track.

While “getting in the door” is a crucial first step for neurodivergent librarians seeking work in academic libraries, there is a need to also study the retention of neurodivergent employees. As JJ Pionke notes in his 2019 Library Trends article, individuals with job needs that diverge from the so-called norm cannot necessarily expect that their time at work will be free of stress related to their condition once they’ve received a job offer. It would be worthwhile to know what practices academic libraries can put in place to increase retention and morale of neurodiverse workers. Particularly in the world of academia, the tenure system is historically ableist (Lindsay & Fuentes, 2022). Studying the experiences of neurodivergent librarians as they navigate the workplace and/or their efforts to receive tenure would give the field insights that might allow libraries to ensure that they are doing more than just lip service to efforts to increase diversity among their workforce.

Workplace support for neurodivergent library workers.

While examining the aggregate experiences of neurodivergent library workers is useful, it is important to remember that no one neurodivergent person will have the same support needs. More study is needed to illuminate how to best support neurodivergent library workers with specific conditions such as ADHD and ASD. From a diversity, equity, and inclusion perspective, this is vital for combating ableism within librarianship and academia. There are some excellent resources already in existence that provide information on these topics, such as the Job Accommodation Network’s website: askJAN.org. Christine Moeller’s (2025) research on the marginalization of neurodivergent librarians provides additional strategies that employers could adopt to improve their recruitment, on-boarding, retention, and advancement (see chapter 4). However, more research in this area would certainly be a welcome development.

Impact of neuroinclusive awareness training on hiring practices and retention.

Creating an inclusive working environment requires efforts that go beyond just revising hiring practices, it also necessitates training managers and administration, investing in accessible equipment and spaces, and creating equitable practices that will signal a commitment to supporting the diverse needs of all employees. Future research could examine whether awareness of autism and/or ADHD and training on supervising neurodivergent individuals creates proactive and not reactive managers, supervisors, and administrators. Initial research suggests clear feedback to reportees as well as creating space to seek clarification in tasks, feedback, and job duties improves the success of neurodivergent employees (Anderson, 2021; Khan et al., 2022; Oud, 2019; Russo et al., 2022).

Conclusion

In closing, while this study sheds light on some factors that impact the hiring practices for neurodivergent candidates in professional academic librarian positions, more study is needed to see how we should best support them.

Although the practices highlighted in this study can benefit a broad spectrum of candidates, it’s important to recognize that accommodating the diverse needs of all job seekers cannot be encompassed in one set of guidelines. Encouraging a supportive community and environment where individuals feel safe to disclose neurological conditions, without fear of negative repercussions, is key to providing people the support they need to navigate the job search successfully.

The findings from our research reveal a distinct and compelling aspiration among our respondents for inclusivity in the academic library LIS hiring process. Survey participants expressed a clear preference for practices that foster an inclusive environment, emphasizing the importance of creating a workplace that caters to diverse needs. However, an unfortunate reality emerges from our study: these desired practices are not readily implemented unless expressly asked for (and sometimes not even then). This is particularly problematic, as requiring candidates to ask for accommodations can force them into a situation in which they must disclose their condition or jump through extra hoops in order to obtain them. As one of our researchers can describe, getting an ADHD diagnosis as a cisgender adult woman can be extremely slow, costly, and inaccessible – even with decent comprehensive health insurance and the advantages of working in higher education. Another of our researchers encountered similar challenges in seeking an Autism diagnosis as an adult, as evaluations often require childhood documentation or the involvement of family members, not to mention a high price tag. The prospect of diagnosis is fraught: because of societal stigma, one may conclude that the risks and burdens of pursuing a diagnosis outweigh the benefits, or only feel comfortable disclosing their needs to a small degree (like using fidgets or noise-cancelling headphones) after feeling they’ve proven themselves enough professionally. These experiences emphasize the point that not every person is comfortable – or safe – disclosing their condition, and that many are left to struggle or mask their needs rather than seek accommodations. For this reason, best practices are better implemented as the default so that all candidates, regardless of whether they are neurodivergent or neurotypical, can benefit without the added burden of disclosure at potential personal risk.

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank our Internal Peer reviewer Jess Schomberg; External Peer reviewer Christine Moeller; and Publishing Editor Jaena Rae Cabrera for their assistance with this work, as well as our colleagues Candice Benjes-Small, Rick Mikulski, and Jessica Ramey who provided feedback on early drafts of our article. We also want to thank our library’s Inclusive Excellence Committee for holding a W&M Libraries EDI Summer Conversation Series investigating disabled voices in libraries which included the Lead Pipe article, “Neurodiversity in the Library: One Librarians’ Experience,” by Alice Eng featuring Charlie Remy.

References

Anderson, A. (2021). Job seeking and daily workforce experiences of autistic librarians. The International Journal of Information, Diversity, & Inclusion, 5(3), 38–63.

Attar, K. (2021). Autism, librarianship and their fit. Good Autism Practice (GAP), 22(2), 32–39.

Baumer, N., & Frueh, J. (2021, November 23). What is neurodiversity? Harvard Health. https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/what-is-neurodiversity-202111232645

Betz, G. (2022). Navigating the Academic Hiring Process with Disabilities. In The Library With The Lead Pipe. https://www.inthelibrarywiththeleadpipe.org/2022/hiring-with-disabilities/

Brown, L.X.Z. (2012, March 2). Identity-first language. Autistic Self Advocacy Network. https://autisticadvocacy.org/about-asan/identity-first-language/

Bruyère, S. M., Chang, H.-Y., & Saleh, M. C. (2020). Preliminary report summarizing the results of interviews and focus groups with employers, autistic individuals, service providers, and higher education career counselors on perceptions of barriers and facilitators for neurodiverse individuals in the job interview and customer interface processes (Phase 1 Final Report). https://ecommons.cornell.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/24b341ac-fc9e-4d8d-8a5c-3739436508ed/content

Cunningham, S., Guss, S., & Stout, J. (2019). Challenging the ‘Good Fit’ Narrative: Creating Inclusive Recruitment Practices in Academic Libraries. Recasting the Narrative: The Proceedings of the ACRL 2019 Conference. ACRL 2019, Cleveland, OH. https://alair.ala.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/e155955e-c706-4198-aabd-84aaf1c496ba/content

Czech, H. (2018). Hans Asperger, national socialism, and “race hygiene” in Nazi-era Vienna. Molecular Autism, 9(1), 29. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13229-018-0208-6

Dali, K. (2019). Avoiding a senseless endurance test: Hidden disabilities and interviewing in LIS. The International Journal of Information, Diversity, & Inclusion, 3(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.33137/ijidi.v3i1.32265

Doyle, B. (2025, February 18). Neurodiversity and libraries: Terms, tools, and strategies for creating more inclusive experiences for staff and patrons. WebJunction. https://www.webjunction.org/news/webjunction/neurodiversity-libraries.html

Eisenmenger, A. (2019, December 12). Ableism 101 – What is Ableism? What Does it Look Like? Access Living. https://www.accessliving.org/newsroom/blog/ableism-101/

Eng, A. (2017). Neurodiversity in the library: One librarian’s experience. In The Library With The Lead Pipe. https://www.inthelibrarywiththeleadpipe.org/2017/neurodiversity-in-the-library/

Enna. (2023, July 14). Unleashing potential: Great jobs for autistic adults. Enna. https://enna.org/unleashing-potential-great-jobs-for-autistic-adults/

Giannantonio, C. M., & Hurley-Hanson, A. E. (2022). Recruitment strategies: Generating a neurodiverse workforce. In S. M. Bruyère & A. Colella (Eds.), Neurodiversity in the Workplace: Interests, Issues, and Opportunities (1st ed., pp. 60–97). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003023616-3

Giles-Smith, L., & Popowich, E. (2023). Autistic employees in Canadian academic libraries: barriers, opportunities, and ways forward. Canadian Journal of Academic Librarianship / Revue Canadienne de Bibliothéconomie Universitaire, 9, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.33137/cjal-rcbu.v9.39994

Grandin, T. (1999, November). Choosing the right job for people with autism or Asperger’s syndrome. Indiana Resource Center for Autism. https://iidc.indiana.edu/irca/articles/choosing-the-right-job-for-people-with-autism-or-aspergers-syndrome.html

Haire, A. (2025). What does it mean to be information literate for an autistic librarian in the academic library workplace? Journal of Information Literacy, 19(1), 27–47. https://doi.org/10.11645/19.1.723

Hendricks, D. (2010). Employment and adults with autism spectrum disorders: Challenges and strategies for success. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 32(2), 125–134. https://doi.org/10.3233/JVR-2010-0502

Houk, K., & Nielsen, J. (2023). Exploring academic librarian candidates’ experiences on the job market. Forging the Future Conference Proceedings, 153–168.

Hyde, R., Albert, A., Emery, J., & Fancher, S. (2024). Inclusive Interviewing: Leveraging the Virtual Format to Demonstrate Care for Future Colleagues. University Libraries Publications. https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/lib_papers/36

Khan, M. H., Grabarski, M. K., Ali, M., & Buckmaster, S. (2022). Insights into creating and managing an inclusive neurodiverse workplace for positive outcomes: A multistaged theoretical framework. Group & Organization Management, 1339 – 1386. https://doi.org/10.1177/10596011221133583

Lau, T. C. W. (2022). “Undisciplined cognators”: Invisible disability and neurodiversity on the academic job market. In C. McGunnigle (Ed.), Disability and the Academic Job Market (pp. 53–71). Vernon Press.

Lawrence, E. (2013). Loud hands in the library. Progressive Librarian, 41, 98–109.

Lewis, T. A. (2022, January 1). Working Definition of Ableism—January 2022 Update. Talila A.

Lewis.

http://www.talilalewis.com/1/post/2022/01/working-definition-of-ableism-january-2022-update.html

Lindsay, S., & Fuentes, K. (2022). It is time to address ableism in academia: A systematic review of the experiences and impact of ableism among faculty and staff. Disabilities, 2(2), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.3390/disabilities2020014

Maddock, K. (2022). To what extent are autistic library staff in the UK supported in their workplace? [Master’s dissertation, University of Southampton]. OpenEd@UCL. https://open-education-repository.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/902

Maras, K., Norris, J. E., Nicholson, J., Heasman, B., Remington, A., & Crane, L. (2021). Ameliorating the disadvantage for autistic job seekers: An initial evaluation of adapted employment interview questions. Autism, 25(4), 1060–1075. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361320981319

Moeller, C. (2025). “Begging to be heard”: The professional exclusion and marginalization of neurodivergent librarians [Dissertation, University of Washington]. https://hdl.handle.net/1773/53006

NeuroDivergent Rebel. (2024, December 11). What is Neuro-Inclusion? [Substack newsletter]. NeuroDivergent Rebel’s Substack. https://neurodivergentrebel.substack.com/p/what-is-neuro-inclusion

Oud, J. (2019). Systemic workplace barriers for academic librarians with disabilities. College & Research Libraries, 80(2), 169–194. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.80.2.169

Russo, E., Ott, D. L., & Moeller, M. (2022). Is there a place for neurodiversity in the talent pool? In M. Latukha (Ed.), Diversity in Action (pp. 265–285). Emerald Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-80117-226-420221014

Saleh, M. C., Chang, H.-Y., Susanne M. Bruyère, & Vogus, T. J. (2022). Neurodiverse applicant screening, interviewing, and selection. In S. M. Bruyère & A. Colella (Eds.), Neurodiversity in the Workplace: Interests, Issues, and Opportunities (1st ed., pp. 98–123). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003023616-4

Swick-Jemison, J. (2023). ADHD and the early career teaching librarian: An autoethnography. Canadian Journal of Academic Librarianship / Revue Canadienne de Bibliothéconomie Universitaire, 9, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.33137/cjal-rcbu.v9.40953

Tomczak, M. T., Szulc, J. M., & Szczerska, M. (2021). Inclusive communication model supporting the employment cycle of individuals with autism spectrum disorders. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(9), Article 9. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18094696

Walker, N. (2021, August 19). Neurodiversity: Some basic terms & definitions [Blog]. Neuroqueer. https://neuroqueer.com/neurodiversity-terms-and-definitions/

Whelpley, C. E., & May, C. P. (2023). Seeing is disliking: Evidence of bias against individuals with autism spectrum disorder in traditional job interviews. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 53, 1363–1374. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-022-05432-2

Zauderer, S. (2023, July 28). 30 great jobs for people on the autism spectrum. Cross River Therapy. https://www.crossrivertherapy.com/autism/best-jobs

Appendix A

Survey Questions

Interview & Hiring Practices

The following hiring procedures have been identified in HR literature as best practices for hiring neurodiverse individuals that diverge from typical practices

Which of the following are you aware of your workplace engaging in under any circumstance, whether one-off or regularly?

Job Ad/Description (Please select all that apply)

Writing job descriptions to be as short and skills-focused as possible
Writing job ads as clearly as possible (e.g. “able to regularly provide research assistance on the desk” instead of “being service oriented”)
Using direct and inclusive language about hiring neurodiverse individuals in job ads
Utilizing autism hiring networks or disability-focused hiring networks to post jobs and recruit candidates
Don’t know / Unsure

Interview Practices: Format of Interview Day (Please select all that apply)

Creating a deliberately quiet, unrushed environment during the interview day (i.e. breaks between interview sessions)
Providing information about how to request adjustments/accommodations to the interview day
Allowing interviewees to bring support workers/companions (i.e. mentors or job coaches) for the interview day
Allowing a camera-off or phones-only interview setting for remote interviews
Don’t know / Unsure

Interview Practices: Interview Procedures (Please select all that apply)

Providing information about the interview’s format prior to the interview (i.e. the number of interviewers and questions, whether there will be questions only or practice/test scenarios, etc.)
Introducing the interview room prior to the interview itself
Allowing for breaks within interviews themselves
Providing alternatives to the standard interview (e.g. skills demonstration, prerecorded video answers, portfolios of work)
Keeping the number of interviewers to one or two people maximum per session
Providing interview questions in advance
Shortening interview sessions to 20-30 minutes (Interview sessions being those in which the candidate is interviewed, e.g. with search committee, library director, etc.)
Limiting number of interview sessions to those with essential stakeholders
Including guidance in interview questions to prompt for more specific information and self-reflections (e.g. What is your approach to answering a research question?)
Don’t know / Unsure

Interview Practices: Presentation Procedures (Please select all that apply.)

Introducing the presentation room prior to the presentation
Providing alternatives to the standard job talk (e.g. technical skills demonstration, prerecorded job talk)
Don’t know / Unsure

Interview Practices: General HR Procedures (Please select all that apply.)

Regularly updating and/or modifying interview processes to mirror best practices so that evaluation is based on a candidate’s qualifications for job, rather than subjective judgements about social skills or “soft” skills
Providing training on neurodiversity and how to support it in hiring to HR professionals and hiring managers prior to conducting interviews
Don’t know / Unsure

Additional Questions

Please use this space if you would like to provide any commentary or context about any of the procedures your workplace utilizes.
Are the accommodations you provide informed by university-wide policies for hiring neurodiverse individuals?
If you accommodate for other neurodiverse conditions that are not autism or ADHD (e.g. dyslexia, bipolar disorder, etc) in your hiring process, please explain or expand upon that.
Please describe any other accommodations you provide not already addressed in the survey.

Appendix B

Inclusive Hiring Practices

While best practices for diversifying the workforce by empowering neurodivergent applicants have not been formally codified in the academic library literature, we can draw from the broader field of human resources to better understand how to make hiring processes more inclusive and accessible.

Revising Job Descriptions

State only the necessary skills the person needs and the specific tasks that this position will perform. Include phrasing that signals your organization is looking for neurodivergent candidates, and encourage individuals to apply even if they do not have some or all of the preferred qualifications (Bruyère et al., 2020; Giannantonio & Hurley-Hanson, 2022; Saleh et al., 2022, 2022; Tomczak et al., 2021).

Revisiting Interview Practices

In revisiting interview practices, it is important to look at the interview questions, interview environment, and interview schedule. Hiring committees should provide interview questions to candidates in advance; studies show neurodivergent individuals are more successful when given the opportunity to provide thought-out responses. This also helps with responding to questions that force recall or are “personality questions” (ex. Tell us about yourself). Create detailed, clearly formatted, and unambiguous interview questions. As much as possible, questions should avoid being generic or open-ended (ex.Tell us about a time you encountered conflict). This prevents candidates from needing to mask and alleviates stress and anxiety over needing to interpret what type of response interviewers are looking for (Bruyère et al., 2020; Giannantonio & Hurley-Hanson, 2022; Houk & Nielsen, 2023; Hyde et al., 2024; Maras et al., 2021; Saleh et al., 2022; Tomczak et al., 2021). Some studies have found that structured interview questions (multi-part questions are broken out and asked in sequence) lead to more successful interview responses, while others have found less-structured questions are better (Bruyère et al., 2020; Maras et al., 2021; Tomczak et al., 2021). While there is a debate about structure, there is agreement that avoiding cohort interviews or interviews with large panels of interviewers is important, as it creates a stressful environment for candidates (Bruyère et al., 2020; Saleh et al., 2022).

In addition to examining interview questions, review the schedule of the day and information provided to the candidate. Provide an interview schedule that includes start and end times, a list of the events throughout the day, information about the environment they will be in, and dress expectations. When bringing candidates into new environments (e.g. the presentation space), ask them if they need any environmental changes to the space, and if any scheduled environmental changes are likely (e.g. construction), warn the candidate in advance (Bruyère et al., 2020; Giannantonio & Hurley-Hanson, 2022; Hendricks, 2010; Saleh et al., 2022).

As the interview day is scheduled, include break times to allow the candidate to get a snack and/or water and bathroom breaks. Plan to offer candidates a space to store their belongings and when touring, offer elevators and walk slowly. Other accommodations that can be default include providing a seated option for presentations, using a microphone for questions from the audience, limiting the interview schedule to only the essential events, and leaving meals for eating, not interviewing (Dali, 2019). The goal is not to require people to disclose a disability before receiving accommodations, but to provide accommodations as part of your normal interview processes (Anderson, 2021; Dali, 2019; Giannantonio & Hurley-Hanson, 2022; Khan et al., 2022; Lau, 2022; Saleh et al., 2022).

Training on Neurodiversity

Training on inclusive hiring, neurodivergence, and disability is essential for hiring committees, supervisors, and administrators as part of redesigning the recruitment and hiring process. Unconscious bias, stereotypes about disabilities and accommodations, and a lack of understanding about neurodivergence result in hiring selections that are preferential to those who match anticipations of “fit” and “proper” social presentation (Bruyère et al., 2020; Hendricks, 2010; Khan et al., 2022; Oud, 2019; Saleh et al., 2022; Tomczak et al., 2021). This includes hostile views toward neurodivergence by, for example, assuming all accommodation-seekers are looking for special treatment (Oud, 2019) or refusing to allow a candidate to progress to a new stage of the hiring process because they seemed to have “unlikable” body language (Giannantonio & Hurley-Hanson, 2022; Lau, 2022; Saleh et al., 2022; Whelpley & May, 2023).

academic libraries, hiring, neurodiversity