How do you quantify the impact of neuro-inclusion in organizations? (with video)
Published on 25 April 2024 • Written by Dr Lisa Colledge
Hi, I'm Lisa. I'm the CEO and founder of Lisa College Consulting, and I work with organizations to transform their cultures into competitive assets using the principles of neurodiversity inclusion.
What I want to do in this film today is to elaborate on an article that I've published called “How to measure the impact of a neurodiversity inclusion program” by sharing an example that's not drawn from the workplace. I want to share an example drawn from my personal life. And the example is me getting fit.
Let me start by giving you a bit of context about me getting fit. I've always been fit in my life, until I wasn't. I've done all kinds of different fitness. I used to do ballet. I've done rowing. I've done a lot of weight training. I've done a lot of fitness classes and I used to give fitness classes to supplement my income as a postdoctoral researcher. I've done all kinds of things.
During my second pregnancy, my pelvis fell apart too soon and too far. It was extremely painful and I was happy if I could walk at that point. Exercise was completely out of the question. So that was a point when I stopped feeling fit. And since then I've been on a bit of an up and down quest to get fit again. At first it was about building up some core strength. And then it was about flexibility and increasing the range of motion in my hips again. Those were the up points. The down points have been, you know, I didn't really want to do any exercise when I was being bullied by my manager, and it was difficult to motivate myself when we found out that our son is autistic with learning difficulties and that needed a lot of mental work. But now I'm in a phase where I'm focusing on getting fit again.
So hopefully you can see from what I've told you that me getting fit is a long term program. It's not something that's going to happen in a few weeks or a few months. This is a really long term program, which I'm going to need to invest in and keep myself motivated in. It's a good parallel to an inclusion program - also not something that's going to happen in a couple of weeks or a couple of months. This is something that you need to invest in seriously for the long term.
All right, so we know what our programs are. Let's start by thinking about what the goal is.
So if I say I want to get fit, I don't think that's a very good goal at all. Getting fit is the way that I'm going to achieve something else. And I need to define what something else is. So I already mentioned that something else after my pregnancy was building up core strength or building up flexibility. Now what I mean when I say I want to get fit is that I want to have more clearly defined muscles. So that means that I need to have some muscle tone and I need to lose some fat so that you can see those beautifully toned muscles. That's my goal - you can see my muscle tone and the means is getting fit.
Equally with your inclusion program, I'll always ask, what do you want to do an inclusion program for? You might want to do it to attract top talent. You might want to do it to engage your employees to a greater degree or to retain your employees if they're leaving too rapidly. The example that I use in the paper was that you want to run an inclusion program to improve your innovation culture.
So there are programs, me - getting fit in order to have muscle tone, and you - inclusion program in order to improve your innovation culture. Great.
Now to measure the impact, we're going to start by working out what we actually want to achieve and that will tell us what we want to measure. So let's go back to my efforts to build muscle tone. That tells me that I need to do exercise which is a combination of strength training, weight training, and cardio if I want to build muscle tone and lose fat. Now how, how can I tell whether I'm succeeding in that?
The gym that I go to has a few metrics that it measures with you every three or four months. One that it measures, you can probably predict, and which I don't want to use is weight; for me personally, weight is an absolutely useless metric. I'm not saying it's useless to everybody, but for me personally, it's useless. And the reason is that I've done a lot of weight training in the past and I've also done a lot of step aerobics, which builds up the big, heavy muscles in your legs. So even though I don't feel very fit now, my body is heavier than the average body of a person of my age and my weight. So if I use weight to see whether I'm making progress, it's always going to look bad. It's not really going to motivate me or tell me anything useful because the conditions are not correct. For the same reason, the body mass index, the BMI, that the gym measures is also not really useful for me because it's very heavily impacted by weight. So I don't use either of those metrics.
The one that they do measure that is useful to me is body fat percentage. This is a great metric for me. So, body fat percentage is my metric, which is going to tell me whether I'm on the right track of whether I've achieved my goal or not.
For you with your innovation program, you might decide that you want to measure revenue from new products and services, and let's say that we're going to define new products and services as ones that have hit the market in the last three years. There’s some kind of definition that has to go there.
Great. So we have our program and we have our goal and we know how we're going to measure that goal.
We also need to make sure that we know how we're progressing in our long term program and that we keep ourselves motivated, and for that purpose, we need metrics that do something a bit different than measuring body fat or measuring revenue from innovative products. We need metrics that are responsive to what we're doing, that we can link to an action that we've taken, so that change pretty quickly. And that also means that we need to be able to measure them pretty easily. Body fat percentage is absolutely useless for that purpose. It doesn't change quickly enough for me to be able to link it to anything that I've done; if I haven't been to the gym for a couple of weeks, then my body fat percentage probably hasn't changed that much, but other things will have changed and it's other things that I want to look for.
So it could be that I can do 15 repetitions instead of 13, or it could be that I can do heavier repetitions or whatever it may be, but I need to find those metrics with which I can see I'm making progress towards my long term goal of reducing my body fat.
For you and your innovation program, equally, starting off by measuring changes in the amount of revenue that you get from innovative products and services is not going to tell you whether your program's being useful because a change in that metric is going to be quite a way away. We want to find something else. So you might start off by measuring whether people feel comfortable or safe to share their ideas. Or you might start by measuring the amount of time or the number of meetings in which people from different functions are collaborating as a forerunner of creating new ideas. You might start off by measuring something like that.
I think that's really important. The thing to remember is that the metrics that we use to report or to note the ultimate success of our programs are different from the metrics that we use to monitor our progress through a program.
The next point is that we shouldn't be scared to adjust the metrics that we use to monitor. As I've been talking, you, you've probably noticed that my goals change over time, and that's true of any long term program. In my quest to get fit, to build muscle tone, in the beginning I might be looking at a number of repetitions or amount of weight, or length of time that I can keep going on the cardiovascular machine or something like that. But I can't keep increasing those forever, plus it doesn't stay motivating forever. I get bored. So I might look for something else instead of time on the cardiovascular machine, I might look for power; instead of, can row for 10 minutes?, maybe I'm going to say, I want to see how quickly I can row a kilometer or something like that. So the metric's going to change.
Equally with your program, you can't stick with cross-functional collaboration and willingness to share ideas forever. You need those as a foundation for your innovation program, but I mean, you're only going to get an outcome when you actually get value to market that customers are willing to pay for. So at some point you want to start also to measure ideas: number of ideas that you're getting, or maybe the quality of those ideas perhaps by how customers respond in initial tests that you do on concepts. A little bit further on, you might want to look at how quickly you can get a minimum viable product to market.
So you're going to add on these metrics. I think it's important to retain the early metrics that you had, because if they start to go wrong, that's a very, very clear clue that you need to do something to correct that situation before it gets to be a real problem, but you're going to add on metrics. That will let you see if you're progressing and eventually that reporting metric, revenue from your innovation program, will become relevant and you'll start to see a change.
The last point that I want to make is that you shouldn't rely on metrics for everything. No matter how well thought through your measurements are, and no matter how complete and current your data are, and no matter how beautiful your dashboard is, it won't tell you everything. A couple of reasons.
It'll let you see what's going on, but it won't tell you why it's going on.
And it'll also only tell you about the things that you're measuring. So for example, if you're building new products and services, it's only going to tell you about the stuff that's there. Not about the stuff that is not there yet.
So you also always need to supplement your metrics, your quantitative analysis of what's going on, with a qualitative analysis of asking people how they feel, how they think, and also by looking around you – whether that's in a physical office or looking at how people are interacting in meetings or whatever, what kind of clues can you get from what you can see and from what you can understand when you ask people what they think?
If you ask people questions like that in an open and safe environment, what you'll find is that somebody in your organization might actually just want you to take their idea seriously. It’s not necessarily about building it. It might just be about listening to it and giving you a reason why you are or are not going to go ahead. That might be all that they want.
And if I ask myself, you know, what do I actually want from my quest to get fit? The honest answer is that I want a flat stomach.
If you just stick with the metrics, you would never know those things.
I hope this was useful. Thanks for listening. Set up a meeting with me if you'd like to explore further what this kind of thinking could mean for your organization.
I hope to see you soon.
The lack of accurate data about the proportion of neurodivergent employees is often cited as a barrier to improving neuro-inclusion. However, I do not believe that it is a useful way to measure the behavioral changes we want to embed, or that this approach is effective in helping convince organizations to invest in neuro-inclusion as a strategic priority.
In this article, I propose that when our goal is driving organizational change, neuro-inclusion is best considered as the means rather than the end. I illustrate a best practise approach in identifying metrics to measure the impact building a better innovation culture, which is achieved by establishing neuro-inclusion-inspired best practise.
Three key takeaways
Focusing on the proportion of neurodivergent employees does not tell us much about neuro-inclusion. We already know that neurodiversity is present in any organization, and the presence of diversity is not the same as the presence of an inclusive culture that engages neurodivergent employees just as much as it does neurotypical colleagues. Instead, define the outcome that neuro-inclusion is driving, and measure that.
This article identifies metrics to effectively report on improvements in an organization’s innovation culture, that have been driven by better neuro-inclusive behavior. The purpose of measuring a metric can differ between program phases, and new metrics are added as the program progresses. Reporting metrics are almost useless for monitoring the progress of a program and for helping to motivate the program team. We select a second set of metrics that are responsive to the team’s actions, and easy to connect to those actions.
In this article, we select meaningful metrics for our innovation program that is powered by neuro-inclusive best practises. But no set of metrics can give us all the answers we want, and they will never tell us about things we don’t know to measure. It is always critical to complement metrics with insights into the new innovation culture gained by talking to employees and customers.
— — — — — — — — — — — — — -
I often hear people discussing the difficulties of measuring an organization’s neuro-inclusion. Quite often, this centers around the desire to capture accurate data on the proportion of neurodivergent employees, which is rarely available. But let’s consider what we could actually learn from these data.
The data would confirm that neurodivergent people were working at the organization. This isn’t really a very useful piece of information, because we can already be reasonably sure that there is at least one neurodivergent member of any group of 10 or more people. It isn’t even very useful in saying what proportion of neurodivergent employees an It’s also unlikely to be accurate, firstly because of the personal considerations that determine whether someone reveals their neurodivergence, and secondly because many people simply don’t know that they are neurodivergent. It is a waste of collecting data simply to say what we already know is true: that improving neuro-inclusion is relevant to every organization.
The data might also reveal changes in the proportion of neurodivergent employees over time. This might hint that the organizational culture was becoming more or less attractive for neurodivergent people, but similar changes could be driven by many factors. An apparent increase might reflect greater awareness of neurodivergence, and confidence in claiming this identity, that has been driven by a new employee resource group (ERG) or network. A decrease might reflect a down-sizing of the technology department, which is likely enriched in neurodivergent people.
Capturing the proportion of neurodivergent employees confirms only that there is diversity in neurotype, but it doesn’t tell us what we really want to know: is this a neuro-inclusive organization where the 30% neurodivergent employees — those who are autistic, dyslexic, dyscalculic, or have ADHD and Tourette’s, for example — can feel a sense of belonging, and contribute their personal brand of skills and experiences to the collective success, just as effectively as neurotypical employees?
Measure the organizational benefits that are driven by improved neuro-inclusion
Neurodivergence is so prevalent that I believe that neuroinclusion is most relevant to large organizations when considered as the means to achieve another outcome. “Being more neuro-inclusive” is a laudable social goal, but it is unlikely to make it onto an organizational strategic priorities list: that organization has a responsibility not only to its employees, but also to its owners or shareholders, and customers or members, to generate enough value to sustain itself. An initiative is most likely to gain strategic priority status if it will have a significant impact on the success of the organization as a whole, while also being considered a better use of resource than other initiatives under consideration.
Any strategic initiative will be designed and executed according to the particular culture, industry and profile of the organization investing in it. This leads us to a customized approach to quantify the impacts of neuro-inclusion per organization, rather than a one-size-fits-all way, but there is a set of considerations that we can apply to do this effectively.
Step 1: define the outcome that neuro-inclusion is driving for the organization
We start by defining the organizational outcome(s) that improving neuro-inclusion will drive. Let’s consider a typical scenario: as a corporate organization, I want to improve our innovation culture so we can address our customers’ pain points more quickly and effectively.
This goal will require a significant program in any organization, whose current culture and innovation status will determine the exact phases and workstreams, and, in turn, what is measured. But let’s imagine that the program is structured like this:
Phase 1. Establish the foundational behavior of working within and across teams that will enable improvements in our innovation culture.
Phase 2. Focus on our innovation culture by building real solutions to customer pain points.
Phase 3. Embed our innovation culture within the organization’s processes and policies to ensure that it is sustainable while responsive to change.
Step 2: identify metrics suitable to demonstrate ongoing and eventual success of this neuroinclusion-powered program
An obvious metric to target is the percentage of revenue generated from new products and services. This metric will realistically only start to increase during Phase 2. It would still be useful to measure it during phase 1, but as a baseline to evaluate later changes rather than to tell us anything about current program success. The purpose of reporting a metric throughout a program may change.
The Program Lead might decide to develop an innovation index that is a composite of key business and people outcomes and holistically embodies the innovation culture. Components might include effective idea generation, implementation rate, and employee engagement. This index would not be available at the start of the program; it might be developed as a program deliverable, and introduced in phase 3.
What metric could we use at the outset of the program? Employee Net Promoter Score (eNPS) is suitable in our scenario, showing the balance of employees who would and would not recommend their organization as a place to work. It can easily be generated by survey, if the engagement software is not already in place.
The metrics to be introduced at each stage of our imaginary neuro-inclusion-powered innovation program are:
Illustrative metrics to report on success of innovation program that is powered by neuro-inclusive best practise.
Step 3: identify metrics to make sure this neuroinclusion-powered program stays on track
Now let’s think about the program work itself. The Program Lead needs metrics that help them to monitor ongoing progress and flag problems, while also helping to ensuring that their team stays motivated. The three metrics we listed above are almost completely useless for this purpose because they are complex, and depend on many variables, making it difficult to unpick the causes of any change. Although these metrics are effective for reporting, we need to identify other metrics for effective monitoring and motivation.
Metrics that are useful to help monitor progress and motivate people are responsive to actions, and easy to connect to those actions. A planned action will hopefully cause a positive effect, which motivates the team while enabling them to confidently change focus to their next action. An unexpected effect reveals something unforseen that could be boosted if the effect was positive, or avoided if it was negative, and it is critical to know exactly which action to target.
These kinds of metrics are simple. Their simplicity means they can be flexibly sliced and diced for the different teams contributing to the program, and aggregated to program level, and that they can be updated at a speed that can keep pace with the rate of the project.
For phase 1, a suitable metric might be the extent and effectiveness of cross-functional collaboration, which reflects foundational changes in behaviour that enable teams to better work outside silos. Improved employee satisfaction and retention is a realistic early outcome of embedding this collaborative behaviour. Adding metrics for monitoring and motivating, alongside the reporting metrics, for each phase might look as follows.
Illustrative metrics to monitor and motivate progress through the innovation program that is powered by neuro-inclusive best practise, shown alongside metrics for reporting.
I am intentionally suggesting at least two monitoring and motivating metrics for each program phase for two reasons. Firstly, the simpler metrics each capture only a part of the overall phase, so more are needed to give a complete picture. Secondly, it reduces the likelihood of stimulating one type of behaviour at the expense of others that are also desired. For example, organizing lots of cross-functional workshops would boost the collaboration metric, but it wouldn’t say anything about the behavior of participants within those workshops; this is reflected in satisfaction and retention. Tracking two or more metrics makes it much more difficult for employees to game the system, and to miss things; the complexity of the reporting metrics inherently addresses this point.
Step 4: get a more complete picture of your program by using qualitative inputs to complement your metrics
We have chosen our metrics well for our imaginary innovation program that is powered by neuro-inclusive best practises. They are meaningful, both relating to the reasons that the organization made this program a strategic priority, and helping us to monitor progress and keep the team motivated for its duration. But while metrics give us clues about the reason for something going well or not, they won’t give us the full answer. They also don’t tell us about things we don’t know about.
Metrics don’t tell us everything, and never will. It is perilous to rely on metrics alone, regardless of how well thought through they are. It is always critical to complement them with qualitative insights gained by talking to employees and customers, and by observing what takes place in meetings.
An off-the-shelf approach that generates bespoke metrics for any program that employs neuro-inclusion to drive organizational benefits
Following the steps described in this article will ensure that you have a solid starting point to report on the success of your program that is being driven by best practise in neuro-inclusion.
I'm Lisa, and I help leaders create inclusive cultures that embrace all neurostyles. By empowering every team member to contribute at their best, while fostering mental well-being, you will boost innovation, retention, and talent acquisition—leading to enhanced business performance.
Click here to learn more about how my services can transform your team.
