From Deficit to Difference: A Cross-Cultural Communication Approach to Neurodiversity in the Workplace

“Imagine that you are in a different country and you are physically unable speak their language, other than some very basic phrases. And imagine that whenever you try speak to the natives, they burst out in random emotions, and you have no idea what you said to make them react that way. The consequence of this will be that you become cautions and try to cope by memorizing what phrases to use or not to use in certain situations (essentially a mental instruction manual) and this in turn makes it very tiring when you are among people.” (Tyler, personal communication, March 13, 2020)

Individuals living with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) are often described as being anti-social, lacking empathy, and being deficient in non-verbal communication (Baron-Cohen, Tager-Flusberg, & Cohen, 1993; National Institutes of Health, 2005.; Wing, 1992). Yet, more recent studies have confounded inaccurate stereotypes that portray ASD individuals as simply disinterested in social interaction and connection (Brownlow & O’Dell, 2006; Jones & Meldal, 2001; Müller, Schuler, & Yates, 2008; Sperry & Mesibov, 2005) . To the contrary, studies reveal that AS individuals do indeed desire close interpersonal relationships, but they lack the “fluency in the foreign language of social interaction” (Sperry & Mesibov, 2005, p. 363). This foreignness metaphor is aptly captured in the opening quote, which was shared with me when asked to describe what day-to-day life is like for people who identify as being on the spectrum.  The quote gives voice to the challenge, frustration, and mystification felt by many individuals on the Autism spectrum as they attempt to navigate the foreignness of a neurotypical social world.

To help construct more inclusive and equitable workplace environments, this article offers a cross-cultural communication approach that recognizes ASD communication as a difference rather than a deficit and provides a framework for understanding how these differences might be bridged.  The first step in this approach is de-naturalizing the dominant norm of neurotypical communication because one’s own cultural communication norms are often invisible until we learn to see them through another cultural perspective.

Neurotypical Communication: A Cultural Perspective

In resistance to the Diagnostic Statistical Manual (DSM)[1] label, pervasive developmental disorder, ASD self-advocacy activists use the term atypical neurological development to describe their neurological difference. By locating themselves as atypical, they also mark those who are neurotypical (NT) which destabilizes the naturalness of that which is dominant or considered normal.  From this perspective, neurological differences are understood as normal human variations or neurodiversity.  These advocates reject the term ‘disorder’ and call for recognition and acceptance of neurological differences, as well as an end to their discrimination and marginalization in social life (Baker, 2011; Jaarsma & Welin, 2012; Ortega, 2009).  The following section provides a counter-story to the framing of ASD communication as deficient by denaturalizing NT communication.

Neurotypical Syndrome

Clinical descriptions of ASD focus on “deficits in social communication and social interaction” and “restricted, repetitive patterns of behavior, interests, or activities” (American Psychiatric Association, 2013).  In an effort to illustrate the offensive and subjective nature of this description of ASD communication, an Autism self-advocate designed a webpage that parodies the language about ASD (specifically, Asperger’s Syndrome) by turning the diagnostic lens on NT communicaiton. The website describes Neurotypical Syndrome as follows:

Neurotypical syndrome is a neurobiological disorder characterized by preoccupation with social concerns, delusions of superiority, and obsession with conformity. Neurotypical individuals often assume that their experience of the world is either the only one, or the only correct one. NTs find it difficult to be alone. NTs are often intolerant of seemingly minor differences in others. When in groups NTs are socially and behaviorally rigid, and frequently insist upon the performance of dysfunctional, destructive, and even impossible rituals as a way of maintaining group identity. NTs find it difficult to communicate directly, and have a much higher incidence of lying as compared to persons on the autistic spectrum (Institute for the Study of the Neurologically Typical, 2002).

This description recasts neurotypical social behaviors as the ones that are pathological or not normal. In this version of reality, ASD communication is the lens through which NTs are judged and found to be deficient. For example, while the DSM asserts that ASD individuals have a deficiency in “adjusting behavior to suit different social contexts” (American Psychiatric Association, 2011), a neurotypical diagnosis marks “obsession with conformity” as problematic.  Additionally, according the Neurotypical Syndrome diagnostic criteria, NT’s suffer from a “social delusion” that is the “illogical belief that they have already communicated with each other, before any actual communication has taken place.” For example:

[NT’s] think (erroneously) that they are alike, that they have already communicated and that no more communication is necessary. If no more communication is necessary, then any attempt at communication is a step in the wrong direction. If someone greets me at work with "How are you today?" and I tell them that my allergies are making me upset, this is WRONG. I'm supposed to say "Fine" -- which is neither true nor meaningful. (“Institute for the Study of the Neurologically Typical,” 2002)

This excerpt highlights the absurdity, from an ASD perspective, of one of the most common socially normative exchanges.  Perhaps it also forces us to examine the logic of other socially normed rituals such as little white lies meant to spare feelings (rather than provide truthful or helpful information); asking someone “if they mind” doing a particular favor (even though there is only one type of socially acceptable response “not at all, no problem”); or the belief that if someone loves you, they should say it often (even though saying something that is already known to be true can be seen as unnecessary) (Ariel, 2012).  From an ASD perspective, which is based on logic and individualism (Baron-Cohen et al., 1993), none of these polite or ritualized communicative behaviors make sense.  And yet, from an NT perspective, these communicative niceties are part of the glue to our social cohesion.  

By comparing the DSM description of ASD to the parody description of NT communication, neuronormative assumptions are illuminated and brought into question. The difference between the two documents (the DSM and the parody website) is that the DSM is the privileged perspective.  It delineates who is ‘normal’ and who is not.  However, if we can accept that communication problems between NTs and ASD individuals are really about differences rather than deficits, then we have a path forward towards a more inclusive discourse about ASD in the workplace, one that embraces communicative differences and focuses on ways to bridge those differences.  A cross-cultural approach to ASD/NT communication provides a useful framework.

ASD/NT Cross-Cultural Communication

As the opening quote of this paper indicates, ASD individuals struggle with a sense of foreignness in an NT world. Many try to adapt, with varying degrees of success.  Failure of AS individuals to adequately adapt to NT communication can result in frustration, misunderstandings, and even conflict. This is not unlike what a traveler to a new country might experience if they fail to communicate in culturally appropriate ways.  Therefore, the cross-cultural metaphor sheds light not only on the problem of interpersonal communication between ASD and NT individuals, but also on a solution.  Barna (1998) discusses several “stumbling blocks” that often lead to disappointment and frustration in intercultural interactions. These same issues can aptly be applied to understanding and overcoming ASD/NT interpersonal communication problems.

Assumption of Similarity

Barna (1998) argues that people (particularly from the United States) tend to operate under the assumption of similarity (“people are people”) which minimizes or ignores differences and reduces the discomfort of not knowing.  This ethnocentric view is problematic in cross-cultural communication because assumptions of sameness in the encoding and decoding of messages is likely to result in confusion and miscommunication, or potentially serious conflicts.  Barna suggests that an interculturally competent approach would start with an assumption of difference rather than similarity.  Such an approach entails refraining from judgments, assuming more explanation and information is needed, and tolerating the uncertainty or anxiety that comes with not knowing.  If ASD and NT individuals approached each other with this type of understanding, then they might become sensitized to the need to figure out how the other person functions in order to communicate. 

In a workplace environment, work style, personality style, and communication style assessments (e.g. Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, DiSC Assessment, True Colours Test) can be used to help coworkers develop a value-free understanding of their different approaches to work, relationships, and communication.

Direct vs. Indirect Communication Styles

The second area Barna (1998) highlights is language differences.  Even when ASD and NTs speak the same language, their use of language can be dramatically different.  Generally, as a form of politeness, NTs tend to use indirect language in which a big part of the meaning is implied in the context and are based on normative customs such as responding to the question “How are you?” with “I’m fine, thank you.”  NT language also involves innuendos, irony, and sarcasm, which are largely not understood by ASD individuals who tend to aim for clarity and use direct unambiguous language (Müller et al., 2008).  ASD communication is very direct and honest, which NTs find to be blunt, rude, or strange. Barna argues that differences in language style can lead to “wrong interpretations of intent and evaluations of insincerity, aggressiveness, deviousness, or arrogance” (p.180).  A cross-cultural perspective draws attention to how these misinterpretations go both ways.  

Learning about and labeling communication styles as direct or indirect helps build understanding for more effective and less judgmental communication between NT and ASD individuals. For example, if an ASD individual does not pick up on the subtlety implied request for help behind their coworker saying “I don’t know how I will get that grant proposal done by the deadline,” the cross-cultural communication framework might lead them to ask “I don’t understand why you are saying that to me, is that indirect communication?” Or the NT intends to ask for help of their ASD colleague, they might consider using a more direct approach.

Non-Verbal Communication

 ASD and NTs function very differently in terms of non-verbal communication.  For example, in the U.S., lack of direct eye contact while talking draws suspicion. However, for many ASD individuals, it can be too distracting to look someone in the eye while talking. As alluded to in the title of his memoir, Look Me in the Eye: My Life with Asperger’s, John Elder Robinson recounts his years in school being scolded by teachers and garnering suspicions of authority figures because of his inability to look them in the eye.

Facial expressions are another problematic communication area between ASD and NT individuals.  ASD individuals tend to have great difficulty interpreting facial expressions, nor do they tend to be emotionally expressive through facial gestures.  Many ASD individuals have practiced and learned how to interpret facial expressions, but it does not come naturally.  In other words, some ASD individuals have learned to adapt to NT communication by enhancing their capacity to read facial expressions. A cross-cultural approach entails some mutual adaptation, which in this case might mean, for example, that an NT might learn to be aware that if an AS individual is not smiling, it does not imply unhappiness or anger. This awareness may be particularly important during initial meetings with people on the spectrum such as job interviews.

 Another aspect of ASD non-verbal communication that NTs negatively react to are the coping mechanisms employed by ASD individuals to manage their heightened sensitivity to sensory input including light, noise, touch, and smell (Dunn et al., 2002; Hilton et al., 2007).  Some ASD individuals have only low-grade sensitivity to certain inputs and can tolerate the discomfort (up to a point), while others have more extreme levels of sensitivity and must create strategies for relief when the sensory input becomes unbearable, such as repetitive motions, sounds, or movements. These strategies enable them cope with the sensory overload, but such coping mechanisms can be viewed as “weird” by NTs.  As a result, ASD individuals are often teased, ridiculed, or bullied for enacting their adaptive strategies (Sinclair, 2009).  Being ASD in an NT world means “being subjected to noxious sensory stimuli as the price of social participation” (Sinclair, 2009, para. 16). This quote highlights the inequity of ASD/NT communication in which it is usually contingent upon the ASD individual to attempt to adapt.

Conclusion: A Call for Mutual Adaptation

The starting point to a cross-cultural approach requires accepting both ASD and NT communication styles as valid and appropriate, but different.  Enhancing one’s cross-cultural awareness involves increasing positive attitudes towards the other culture, awareness of the problems that arise in communication, understanding of one’s own cultural values and unstated assumptions, as well as increasing understanding of the other culture’s values and communication styles (Kohls & Knight, 1994). This same approach would be an effective starting point to help bridge understanding and guide processes of mutual adaptation between NTs and ASD individuals.  Mutual adaption requires an attempt on both sides to change their communication with and perception of the other (Korhonen, 2010).  In so doing, both NTs and ASD individuals would enhance their understanding of their own cultural assumptions and learn more adaptive ways of working with those who are different in all kinds of ways.

A cross-cultural approach first requires being able to identify the other as a member of a different cultural group.  ASD individuals already tend to operate from this assumption because they feel like the foreigners in the NT world.  What remains to be addressed then is how to increase NTs interest in and capacity to recognize and acknowledge ASD cultural norms. By giving voice to and legitimizing ASD ways of communicating and being in the world, scholars and practitioners can help increase NTs awareness and understanding of ASD communication and build their capacity to approach these cultural differences more effectively.  

[1] The 4th Edition of the Diagnostic Statistical Manual (DSM IV) indicated four independent diagnoses: autistic disorder, Asperger syndrome, pervasive developmental disorder-not otherwise specified (PDD-NOS), and childhood disintegrative disorder. The DSM-V combined all four diagnoses under one label: Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). However, many of the previous labels are still in use by individuals, but not clinically.

References

American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-5 Task Force. (5th ed.). American Psychiatric Publishing, Inc.

Ariel, C. N. (2012). Loving someone with Asperger’s syndrome: Understanding & connecting with your partner. New Harbinger Publications.

Baker, D. L. (2011). The politics of neurodiversity: Why public policy matters. Lynne Rienner Publishers.

Barna, L. (1998). Stumbling blocks in intercultural communication. In M. J. Bennett (Ed.), Basic concepts of intercultural communication: Selected readings (pp. 173–189). Intercultural Press.

Baron-Cohen, Simon., Tager-Flusberg, Helen., & Cohen, D. J. (1993). Understanding other minds: Perspectives from autism. Oxford University Press.

Bernick, M. (2022, February 16). Is Your Company Inclusive of Neurodivergent Employees? Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2022/02/is-your-company-inclusive-of-neurodivergent-employees

Brownlow, C., & O’Dell, L. (2006). Constructing an autistic identity: AS voices online. Journal Information, 44(5).

Clouder, L., Karakus, M., Cinotti, A., Ferreyra, M. V., Fierros, G. A., & Rojo, P. (2020). Neurodiversity in Higher Education: A Narrative Synthesis. Higher Education: The International Journal of Higher Education Research, 80(4), 757–778. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-020-00513-6

Dunn, W., Saiter, J., & Rinner, L. (2002). Asperger Syndrome and Sensory Processing A Conceptual Model and Guidance for Intervention Planning. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 17(3), 172–185. https://doi.org/10.1177/10883576020170030701

Hilton, C., Graver, K., & LaVesser, P. (2007). Relationship between social competence and sensory processing in children with high functioning autism spectrum disorders. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 1(2), 164–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2006.10.002

Institute for the Study of the Neurologically Typical. (2002, March 18). [Parody]. http://isnt.autistics.org/

Jaarsma, P., & Welin, S. (2012). Autism as a natural human variation: Reflections on the claims of the neurodiversity movement. Health Care Analysis, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10728-011-0169-9

Jones, R. S. P., & Meldal, T. O. (2001). Social Relationships and Asperger’s Syndrome. Journal of Intellectual Disabilities, 5(1), 35–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/146900470100500104

Kohls, L. Robert., & Knight, J. M. (1994). Developing intercultural awareness: A cross-cultural training handbook (2nd ed.). Intercultural Press.

Korhonen, Vesa. (2010). Cross-cultural lifelong learning. Tampere University Press.

Müller, E., Schuler, A., & Yates, G. B. (2008). Social challenges and supports from the perspective of individuals with Asperger syndrome and other autism spectrum disabilities. Autism, 12(2), 173–190. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361307086664

National Intitute of Child Health and Human Development. (n.d.). Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASDs). Eunice Kennedy Shriver: National Institute of Child Health & Human Development. Retrieved April 9, 2012, from http://www.nichd.nih.gov/health/topics/autism/Pages/default.aspx

Ortega, F. (2009). The cerebral subject and the challenge of neurodiversity. BioSocieties, 4(4), 425–445. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1745855209990287

Sinclair, J. (2009). Being autistic together. Disability Studies Quarterly, 30(1).

Sperry, L. A., & Mesibov, G. B. (2005). Perceptions of social challenges of adults with autism spectrum disorder. Autism, 9(4), 362–376. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361305056077

Wing, L. (1992). Manifestations of social problems in high-functioning autistic people. In Eric. Schopler & G. B. Mesibov (Eds.), High-functioning individuals with autism (pp. 129–172). Plenum Press.