This month’s newsletter is inspired by a conversation I had with a member of our Women in Engineering events.
It all began when an Engineering Leader, recently diagnosed with ADHD, bravely shared her personal journey, discussing the support that would have made a difference earlier on in her career and how these experiences have reshaped her approach to interviewing candidates.
Neurodivergent individuals, including those with autism, ADHD, dyslexia and other cognitive differences, often bring the skills engineering teams value most:
Deep technical focus
Pattern recognition
Creative problem-solving
Attention to detail
Yet traditional hiring processes often don't play to the strengths of this talent pool as they're designed with a 'one size fits all' approach centred on neurotypical communication styles.
Companies that adapt their processes to empower neurodiverse candidates see productivity jump by up to 30%, alongside stronger innovation and lower turnover. The changes needed are super simple, and can unlock talent that other teams miss entirely.
We’ve pulled together the most useful takeaways from this discussion for our People & Talent network, to help you avoid missing out on exceptional hires.
If you’d like to hear more about our Women in Engineering Leadership community, or know someone who’d love to join, please connect with me on LinkedIn. I run these events quarterly, offering Engineering Leaders a safe space to share ideas, connect with peers, and sense-check what’s working (and what’s not!).
Is your hiring process neurodiversity-friendly?
Interviewing tips from Engineering leaders:
Inclusive hiring doesn’t need to be a big and time-consuming project. Leaders in our network recommend starting with small, deliberate changes to make interviews fairer, and better at spotting exceptional talent:
➡️ Software Engineering Manager @ Beauty Pie
Ask upfront: "What do you need to do your best work in this process?"
It's a simple question that builds trust, reduces anxiety and enables you to make small, reasonable adjustments like sharing questions in advance, to help candidates perform at their best.
➡️ Engineering Manager @ Monzo
Bring in a 'bar raiser' from another team to offer an unbiased lens. During debrief, ask:
“Would you want to work with this person?”
“If this person was (or wasn’t) successful in six months, what would be the reason?”
“Did you like this person?”. There’s nothing wrong with liking someone, it's usually a good signal, but pairing gut instinct with clear, structured criteria helps surface bias and keep decisions fair.
➡️ Engineering Manager @ Novata
Never skip the debrief. Even small talk or a slightly awkward start can affect perception. Talking it through as a team helps separate the candidate’s true performance from first impressions or distractions.
➡️ Engineering Leader @ Meta
Score the work, not the delivery. Use structured rubrics to assess technical quality rather than presentation style. It's scalable, creates consistency and gives clear criteria for extracting signal from each response.
Where are you losing great candidates?
You don't need to overhaul your hiring process. First, pause and assess where you might be losing great people. Ask yourself: Would your best engineer pass your current interview process as an external candidate?
Even the strongest teams unknowingly lose talent at every stage, from job descriptions to final interviews. Use this quick audit to see where you stand.
Inclusive Hiring Audit Take two minutes to score your process. For each question, give yourself:
1 point = Yes, consistently
0.5 points = Sometimes
0 points = No or unsure
Add up your score out of 6 to see where you stand.
Are your job descriptions written in plain, specific language - free from jargon, vague terms, or unnecessary requirements?
Do you share interview formats, timelines, and prep materials with every candidate before each stage?
Are your assessments focused on job-relevant skills and problem-solving, rather than presentation or performance under pressure?
Do interviewers receive training to spot bias?
Do you track candidate drop-off at each stage and know where most drop-offs happen?
Do you offer reasonable adjustments - like sharing questions in advance, flexible scheduling, or letting candidates choose how they’re assessed - without waiting for them to ask?
Scoring:
🔴 0–2 points: You could be missing out on great candidates.
🟠 3–4 points: Some good practices in place, but room to improve. 🟢 5–6 points: Strong foundation - the next step is making it consistent across every hire.
💡Not everyone thinks or processes information the same way, so build your processes to reflect that. Avoid making assumptions and talk to neurodivergent employees and leaders when shaping your hiring and workplace practices.
TL;DR: Accessing neurodiverse talent
💡 Neurodivergent talent is a missed opportunity. Candidates with autism, ADHD, and dyslexia often excel in technical focus, problem-solving, and pattern recognition, but many hiring processes unintentionally filter them out.
💡 Small changes make a big difference. Run a quick internal audit to spot where candidates drop out. Collect feedback, and offer reasonable adjustments proactively rather than waiting for candidates to ask.
💡 Make your process scalable and consistent. Use structured rubrics to assess technical quality consistently across interviewers. Bring in “bar raisers” - neutral interviewers from outside the process - to reduce bias and add perspective.
Engineering leaders share how to better support team members with different cognitive styles, challenge common misconceptions, and create an environment where everyone can do their best work.
That's all for now!
— The Talent Crunch team
Next issue: What makes an excellent hiring manager
You’re receiving this email because you subscribed to Talent Crunch via Burns Sheehan. We send one newsletter per month. You can update your preferences at any time using the link below.
