16 Mar 2026

Neurodiversity Week 2026

For Neurodiversity Week 2026, Zoe Andrews, EDI representative for the South West for IBMS, looks at how organisations create practical changes and ensure inclusion is practised.

Neurodiversity Week 2026

This year, Neurodiversity Celebration Week highlights the theme “From Awareness to Action: Making Organisational Change Happen.” The focus moves beyond recognising neurodiversity and asks a more important question: how do organisations create practical changes and ensure inclusion is practised?

Laboratory science relies on standardisation. We validate assays, follow procedures and investigate variation when results fall outside expected parameters. Accreditation frameworks and quality control, traceability, accountability and continuous quality improvement. These principles reflect the broader professional responsibilities of biomedical scientists, in which clear communication and consistent practice underpin both patient safety and effective teamwork. Guesswork has no place in analytical processes. Yet when it comes to communication, leadership practice and organisational behaviour, variation can still occur.

Neurodiversity is not a niche issue within healthcare workplaces. NHS Employers estimates that around one in seven people in the UK are neurodivergent, while Acas estimates that 15–20% of UK adults are neurodivergent. Within laboratory teams, neurodivergent professionals are already present across all career stages. However, prevalence is likely to become more visible among younger workers entering the profession, reflecting increasing awareness and identification of neurodivergent conditions.

Biomedical scientists work in environments where precision matters. Clear expectations, structured processes and defined procedures support safe practice. However, when expectations are unclear, rules appear inconsistently applied, or informal practices override written procedures, staff may be left trying to interpret organisational dynamics rather than focusing on the work itself. Many laboratory staff will recognise moments where expectations feel unclear, even in environments built around accuracy. For neurodivergent professionals, particularly those who rely on clarity and defined rules, this can create unnecessary cognitive load.

Workplace research suggests organisational knowledge remains limited. Acas polling of more than 1,600 line managers found that 59% reported a lack of knowledge about implementing reasonable adjustments, while 45% believed their organisations lack sufficient understanding of neurodiversity. These findings suggest organisational systems, rather than individual capability, are often the limiting factor.

SOP

Standard Operating Procedures underpin safe laboratory practice. They ensure consistency, reduce variation and protect both patients and staff. Yet the principles that govern laboratory work are not always applied to organisational behaviour. If rules are interpreted differently by individuals, expectations shift based on who is supervising, or communication relies on assumptions rather than clarity, then variation exists.

In a laboratory setting, unexplained variation would prompt investigation, root cause analysis and corrective action. Organisational practice should be subject to the same reflection. Policies describe how work should happen, while everyday practice reflects how tasks are actually carried out. Informal expectations can also emerge about how individuals prefer tasks to be completed. When these expectations are not documented, staff seeking clarity may question processes or suggest alternative approaches that achieve the same validated outcome. In a scientific profession built on analysis and evidence, these questions should be seen as opportunities for improvement rather than sources of conflict. Many strengths associated with neurodivergent thinking align closely with biomedical science, including analytical reasoning, pattern recognition and attention to detail. Organisations that create psychologically safe environments where questions are welcomed are more likely to benefit from these perspectives.

Leadership, Training and Culture Change

Many organisations demonstrate commitment to neurodiversity through policies, awareness campaigns and mandatory e-learning modules. While these initiatives introduce important concepts, organisations must move beyond awareness alone and focus on how leadership translates understanding into everyday practice.

Are communication expectations clear and applied consistently?
Are reasonable adjustments discussed openly and implemented fairly?
Do managers model inclusive behaviour within their teams?
Do staff feel safe asking questions or providing feedback?

Recognising knowledge gaps and inviting staff feedback creates a constructive and safe environment. Those who experience workplace systems directly are often best placed to identify where communication, training or processes could be improved. As the workforce evolves, openness, adaptability and collaboration across generations will be essential to support neurodivergent professionals. In the lab, continuous improvement relies on feedback, audit and reflection. Cultural development should follow the same principle. Organisational culture leaves evidence in staff wellbeing, retention and trust; indicators that are just as important as laboratory quality metrics.

For biomedical science, moving from awareness to action means applying the same commitment to clarity, consistency and improvement to workplace culture as we do to laboratory practice.