Search results

Gender-diverse people experience unique cultural and interpersonal stigma in mainstream society and sometimes within their own communities; they face allegations of inauthenticity based on their nonconformity to either cisnormative or transnormative gender regimes. Based on 21 in-depth life history interviews, we unveil the intricate interactional process of negotiating identity and authenticity in the biographical work of gender-diverse individuals. In this study, gender-diverse people engaged in a “gender audit” with their gender-diverse interviewer. Gender audits yield verbal performances of gender with oneself and others. Ambiguity was “accounted for” or “embraced and created” in their biographical work to organize their life stories and undermine binary essentialism – a discourse that was “discursively constraining.” Gender audits took place in participants' day-to-day lives, either through self-audits, questioning from others, or both. In the final analysis, we assert that we all engage in gender auditing. Gender audits are intersubjective sites of domination, subordination, resistance, and social change. Gender diversity, then, can be viewed as a product of gender in flux.

Neurodivergent employees have atypical needs that require distinctive leadership approaches. In this study, the specific nature of a relationship between neurodivergent employees and their neurotypical leaders is explored through the lens of the leader–member exchange (LMX) theory.

This two-phased qualitative study builds on 12 semi-structured interviews with neurodivergent employees and an unstructured focus group with 15 individuals with professional and/or personal interest in neurodiversity. The researcher spent almost 13 h listening to the lived experiences of research participants concerning neurodiversity and leadership.

Leaders who exhibit empathy and understanding were noted to provide greater support. The findings also highlight the complexity of neuro-inclusion in the workplace. Specifically, the delicate balance between accommodation and avoiding stigmatization is emphasized, addressing the concerns raised regarding the legal risks associated with neurodivergent inclusion. Additionally, the findings underscore the necessity for leaders to avoid patronizing behaviors while catering to the diverse needs of neurodivergent employees. This underscores the importance of supporting both neurodivergent employees and leaders navigating such challenges.

The findings help establish inclusive and accommodating employee relations practices that conscientiously address the requirements of neurodivergent employees while providing support for those in leadership roles.

This study constitutes a direct answer to recent calls to develop a more nuanced understanding of workplace neurodiversity, with a specific focus on neuro-inclusive leadership. Acknowledging that we still use inappropriate, old tools in new situations that require novel approaches to leadership helps set the agenda for future research in this area.