Using the COM-B Model and Theoretical Domains Framework to Understand Workplace Disclosure Experiences, Influencers, and Needs Among Autistic Young Adults

Abstract

For autistic young adults, deciding whether to disclose their autism at work is complex. Minimal research explores what they need to support disclosure and what influences decisions. To understand disclosure needs and influencers, we explored (i) disclosure decision-making experiences and (ii) perceptions of the disclosure process among autistic young adults. We conducted focus groups using the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, Behaviour Model and Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). We analyzed data from 23 participants and mapped onto the TDF to develop five themes: (1) workplace environment, (2) perceptions of disclosure outcomes, (3) personal factors and identity, (4) disclosure-related ambitions and determination, and (5) know-hows of disclosure. Future work should prioritize developing disclosure decision-making supports and investigate employer roles in fostering inclusive workplaces. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10803-022-05766-x.

Exploring the working conditions of disabled employees: a scoping review

“…Organizational policies are referenced in thirteen studies. Examples encompass inclusion policies [ 34 , 40 , 41 ], policies for remote work [ 34 ], and policies for workplace accommodations [ 42 ]. Hierarchies and roles are discussed in nine studies.…”

“…A common focus lies on misconceptions and stigmatization directed towards disabled employees [ 31 , 35 , 36 , 47 , 65 , 71 – 73 , 78 , 91 , 98 , 100 , 104 , 105 ]. Moreover, the studies underscore instances of unjust treatment faced by disabled employees, ranging from insulting and bullying [ 36 , 41 , 44 , 58 , 62 , 73 , 82 , 119 ] to incidents of harassment and violence [ 95 , 115 , 122 , 124 ]. Additionally, some studies address the phenomenon of coworker jealousy when disabled employees are granted work accommodations [ 45 , 52 , 53 ].…”

“…As such, negative attitudes are described as posing barriers [ 3 , 77 ] and work difficulties [ 125 ] for disabled employees. Conversely, the studies delineate instances of positive coworker attitudes, manifesting as understanding [ 41 , 62 , 98 ], appreciation and valuing [ 38 , 46 , 99 ], and respect [ 32 , 42 , 63 , 99 , 107 , 113 ]. Support from coworkers ( n = 36) is noted as contributing to a good and empowering social environment for disabled employees [ 63 , 94 ], wherein they can receive help [ 56 , 68 , 112 ], feel secure [ 78 , 90 ], and experience inclusion [ 57 ].…”

“…The dominant focus lies on workplace accessibility, which entails the presence of elevators, ramps, and accessible toilet rooms [ 3 , 50 , 55 , 63 , 77 , 104 ] as well as adaptions made for disabled employees in the physical environment [ 33 , 37 , 75 , 80 , 105 ]. Regarding the sensory environment ( n = 13), frequent topics are noise levels [ 3 , 41 , 48 , 58 , 60 , 73 , 105 , 112 , 125 , 134 ], lighting conditions [ 35 , 41 , 43 , 73 , 105 , 125 , 134 ], temperature [ 58 , 105 , 134 ], and air quality [ 58 , 83 , 125 ] in the workplace. Ten studies address the spatial situation, which involves whether disabled employees occupy single or shared offices [ 37 , 58 , 60 , 68 , 80 , 81 ].…”

“…High work intensity is acknowledged as a challenge for disabled employees [ 51 , 104 ], as it engenders difficulties for the work situation of disabled employees [ 73 , 109 , 120 ] and their mental health [ 36 , 53 , 58 ]. Feasible accommodations described in the studies include the reduction and differentiation of workloads [ 40 , 53 , 72 ], a slower work pace [ 55 , 134 ], less stressful duties [ 55 , 134 ], less pressure [ 63 ], and increased flexibility regarding deadlines [ 41 ]. Concurrently, disabled employees hesitate to voice concerns about high workloads [ 65 ] as they try to embody the ideal worker [ 42 ].…”