How to Write Inclusive Job Descriptions for Neurodivergent Candidates

Most job descriptions are written for a candidate who reads between the lines. They scan “must be a great communicator with excellent attention to detail who thrives in a fast-paced environment”, translate it into roughly what the employer probably means, decide they are close enough and apply. A lot of neurodivergent candidates do not read between the lines. They read the lines. And when the lines are vague, contradictory or stuffed with requirements that are not really requirements, they do the logical thing and rule themselves out.

An inclusive job description is one that says what it means. It describes the role honestly and specifically, lists only the criteria the role genuinely needs and does not hide the real job behind generic phrases. That clarity is what lets a neurodivergent candidate work out whether they can do the role and it happens to make the job description better for every other applicant too. With an estimated 15 to 20% of the working population thought to be neurodivergent, the cost of writing people out at the very first step is higher than most employers realise.

This guide is the companion to my broader guide to job descriptions. Here I am focusing specifically on what makes a job description work or fail for neurodivergent candidates and employees.

Why do job descriptions matter so much for neurodivergent candidates?

Because the job description is the first gate and a badly built gate keeps out exactly the people you most want to let in. Neurodivergent candidates often process information literally and precisely, frequently a strength in the role itself but means a vague or overloaded job description does more damage than it would to a neurotypical reader who is comfortable guessing.

Think about what an unclear job description asks a candidate to do. It asks them to infer what “team player” means in your particular culture, to judge whether “fast-paced” is a real warning or just filler and to decide whether “five years’ experience” is a hard rule or an aspiration. A neurotypical applicant makes those guesses without noticing. A neurodivergent applicant may take each phrase at face value and conclude, wrongly, that the role is not for them. You never see the application, so you never know what you missed. The damage is invisible, which is exactly why it persists.

What makes a job description exclude neurodivergent applicants?

A few specific things do most of the damage. They are easy to spot once you know to look.

• Long lists of “essential” criteria that are actually preferences (or not really needed at all). Every item a candidate reads as a hard rule is a potential reason for them not to apply.
• Vague behavioural language like “great communicator”, “self-starter” or “team player” with no explanation of what that looks like in this role.
• Requirements that screen for a way of working rather than an outcome, such as “able to multitask in a high-pressure environment”, when the real need is simply that the work gets done well.
• Culture signals like “we work hard and play hard”, which many neurodivergent readers and plenty of others, read as a warning about long hours, social pressure and a workplace that will not accommodate difference.
• Catch-all phrases such as “and any other duties as required”, which create uncertainty about what the job actually is.

None of these is included with bad intent. They creep in because job descriptions get copied from the last one and nobody questions the boilerplate. ACAS guidance on neuroinclusion advises employers to use clear, specific job descriptions and to focus on the essential skills for the role, avoiding requirements like “must have excellent communication skills” unless they are genuinely needed. The fix is to read every line as though you take it literally because some of your best potential candidates will.

How do you separate genuine essential criteria from preferences?

Ask one question of every requirement: could someone do this job well without it? If the honest answer is yes, it is not essential and it belongs under “desirable” or not on the list at all. This single discipline does more to open up a role than any amount of inclusive-sounding language.

The “years of experience” trap is worth singling out. There is a world of difference between someone who has spent five years doing the same thing the same way and someone who has grown through five years of varied work and neither tells you much about whether they can do your job. Specify the experience of what, the actual capability you need, rather than a number of years. Capability is often transferable in ways that time served is not. Splitting your criteria cleanly into genuine essentials and honest desirables is one of the most powerful inclusion moves available and it costs nothing.

How should you describe behaviours and skills?

Describe what good actually looks like in the role, in plain and specific terms and make sure the behaviours you list are the ones you genuinely reward. This is where I see the most damaging mistake and it is worth dwelling on because it affects retention as much as recruitment.

Take “attention to detail”, which goes into job descriptions almost automatically. Attention to detail and strong pattern recognition are among the strengths widely recognised in the research on neurodiversity at work as a genuine fit for many neurodivergent people. So a detail-focused neurodivergent candidate reads that line, recognises a real strength and applies. Then they arrive and discover the role is actually measured on speed and volume and the careful, accurate work the job description asked for gets them marked down as too slow. They did exactly what the document said and they are penalised for it. The job description and the real measure of success were pulling in opposite directions and a neurodivergent employee is often the one caught in that gap. Before you list a behaviour, check it is genuinely what you reward. If you measure speed, say speed. If you need accuracy, say accuracy. If you need both, be honest about how they trade off. Getting this right is not a nicety. It is the difference between a neurodivergent employee thriving and being managed out of a job they could have been brilliant at.

Does an inclusive job description help with reasonable adjustments?

Yes, directly. The job description is the foundation document for reasonable adjustments because you cannot identify what adjustments a role needs without an honest description of what the role actually demands. If a job description says “manages a team” but the role in practice means chairing three two-hour meetings a week, that detail is precisely what an adjustment conversation turns on.

It is worth knowing that the duty to make reasonable adjustments under the Equality Act 2010 does not begin on someone’s first day. It applies to job applicants too. In AECOM Ltd v Mallon, the Employment Appeal Tribunal upheld a finding that an employer had failed in that duty when its standard online application process put an applicant with dyspraxia at a substantial disadvantage. The case turned on the application process rather than the wording of a job description but the principle reaches back to the very start of recruitment. Notably, the tribunal found the employer had constructive knowledge of the disadvantage, meaning it ought to have realised, even though the applicant had not spelled it out. An honest, accessible job description is part of designing recruitment that does not put neurodivergent candidates at that kind of disadvantage in the first place.

A clear job description also reduces a problem that derails a lot of neurodivergent employees after they start, which is role drift. Where one employee absorbs “and other duties as required” without a second thought, a neurodivergent employee may experience the steady, unspoken expansion of their role as confusion, lost psychological safety or burnout. An honest, specific, regularly reviewed job description is the simplest protection against that and the work that produces it benefits the whole team, not only the neurodivergent members of it.

What does an inclusive job description look like in practice?

It is clear, honest and specific. It leads with what the role exists to achieve. It lists a short set of genuinely essential criteria and keeps preferences clearly separate. It describes behaviours in concrete terms tied to what the role actually rewards. It avoids jargon, avoids culture clichés and avoids requirements that screen for a working style rather than an outcome. And it tells the truth about the job, including the parts that are demanding, so that the person who applies knows what they are saying yes to.

Inclusive recruitment does not stop at the job description, of course. The advert, the application process and the interview all carry their own barriers and there is more on the advert stage in my guide on why your job adverts are putting people off. But the job description is where it starts because everything else is built on it.

Bringing neuroinclusion into your recruitment

Writing inclusive job descriptions is one of the highest-return, lowest-cost things an employer can do to widen the pool of talent they reach. It needs no budget and no new system. It needs you to read the role honestly and write down what is actually true about it. The same clarity that lets a neurodivergent candidate recognise themselves in the role makes the description sharper and fairer for everyone who reads it.

If you want help putting this into practice across your recruitment, my neurodiversity awareness training covers how job descriptions, adverts and interviews work together for neurodivergent candidates and a workplace needs assessment is the route when you have a specific employee whose role and adjustments need looking at properly. If you would like to talk through where to start, you can book a free consultation with me.

Every business and every role is different, so do take advice on your own situation rather than treating this as a one-size-fits-all answer.