I have spent the last 12 months reading a wide range of research spanning the last decade from across the globe in the area of ADHD and careers, and one thing is certain – those with ADHD remain unemployed, and underemployed, in far greater numbers when compared to their neurotypical counterparts, even with the same levels of education, experience and qualifications (Grabarski et al., 2025).
Whilst there remains a 50% employment differential for adults with ADHD, this is even higher for young people transitioning into the work who are 70% more likely to struggle to secure suitable, sustainable employment (Samosh et al., 2024).
Whilst there are multiple factors at play here, one is the graduate recruitment process itself, and interviews specifically. Whilst many organisations state that they are inclusive and disability-friendly (and yes, ADHD is considered a disability under legislation), closer analysis often reveals that their recruitment process does not cater for the ADHD candidate.
Employers may believe they are inclusive
This is often not intentional, in fact quite the opposite – employers often genuinely believe they are inclusive and equitable.
As such, I wanted to lay out what a genuinely ADHD friendly graduate interview process would look like, but first let’s understand a little more about ADHD and its prevalence. For a wide range of reasons, it is hard to exactly quantify how many people have ADHD, although researchers place the global average to sit at around 5%.
Having said this, with 80% of the adult population undiagnosed, rates are likely higher (Hallowell, 2023). 5% does not sound like a lot initially, so let’s put this into perspective.
According to the Department of Education 418,340 students graduated from a degree in Australia in 2024 (Department of Education, 2024). The 2024 QILT survey, stated that 83.4% of Graduate students surveyed were in full-time employment in February 2024 after finishing university.
This means that approximately 17,415 Graduate students in 2024 have ADHD and went through recruitment processes that were not inclusive, equitable, or disability friendly. To put this into perspective, if we asked every single graduate student with ADHD to attend a tennis match at Rod Laver Arena, the Arena would need to increase capacity by 17.5% to accommodate everyone.
Missing out on talent
So, we have an Arena and then some full of candidates who cannot navigate the majority of interview and recruitment processes safely, fairly, and equitably. As a result, many are unemployed, underemployed, and the market is missing out on a great source of talent.
The data shows that when neurodivergent employees are provided with processes and environments that suit them, they are 90% - 140% more productive than their neurotypical peers (Pano, 2022), team productivity increases by 30% (Sniderman et al., 2023), and composite data shows a 93% retention rate over four years. Not a bad return on investment.
How to benefit
So, how can your organisation genuinely be inclusive, disability-friendly, and benefit from this fantastic talent source? It all starts with the interview process.
Interviews are nerve-wracking for everyone. We know this. Those with ADHD can often excel in stressful situations as these activate a dopaminergic response (Pani et al., 2000), however, the differences in executive and pre-frontal cortex functioning in this cohort often results in emotional dysregulation (Turjeman-Levi et al., 2024) increased rates of comorbid psychopathologies such as anxiety (Pehlivanidis et al., 2020, found that this cohort is 72.8% more likely to also have an anxiety disorder) and significantly decreased levels of self-efficacy (Smyth et al., 2015).
In an interview this presents as forgetting part of the question, especially with lengthy behavioural based questions, leading to incomplete interview responses.
Candidates may also feel heightened anxiety, which when combined with existing anxiety disorders and memory issues results in forgetting critical and relevant experiences they wanted to mention, again leading to poorer responses.
Self-efficacy is the belief that ‘I can do this’ (National Careers Institute, 2022). Lowered self-efficacy and self-esteem in this cohort usually presents as a candidate lacking in confidence, using depreciating language, and the inability to adequately showcase their achievements in the interview.
Many think that interviews are a test and that the interviewing team are testing the individual’s knowledge and looking for ways to catch them out. After 14 years in recruitment, it is my view that interviews should provide the candidate with the best opportunity possible to showcase their skills, talent, and experience.
This is best achieved by sending the interview questions ahead of time. I am aware that this is a controversial statement, but the first thing I have to say here is that this a reasonable accommodation, and one widely discussed in neurodivergent circles. Refusing to do so could make your recruitment process discriminatory.
Those who oppose this practice tend to centre their argument on the tenet that if candidates are provided the questions ahead of time, they can prepare and ‘cheat’ in their answers, providing information that they ordinarily would not know, and gaining a graduate role that they do not have the experience for.
I counter this by saying that a few additional probing questions would likely soon separate the wheat from the chaff.
For example, I could read some literature and talk you through the process of building a car engine, but if you were to ask me one additional question, it would soon fall apart, and the fact that I cannot even change the oil in my car would soon become apparent.
To this point, every interview question need not be provided, as we know that sometimes we ask additional questions of candidates according to their background and experience. By providing the main, overarching questions, you are levelling the playing field for those who need it.
Who needs accommodation?
This brings me to my second point - those who do not need the accommodation may not use it.
If you provided the questions to every candidate, not every candidate would read them and prepare. Rather those who do need this accommodation would feel acceptance and relief before even entering your office (or Zoom waiting room).
Finally, some employers do provide the questions if asked. The issue here is that the candidates who do need this accommodation ‘other’ themselves by requesting it.
The majority do not ask as they then must wrestle with whether they disclose their ADHD to their potential employer, and out of fear of discrimination choose not to ask for the accommodation they desperately need (Grabarski et al., 2025).
Whilst many employers’ welcome diversity, those of us with ADHD have experienced so much discrimination and criticism in our lifetime (Hallowell and Ratey, 2021, estimate that the average neurodivergent child experiences 20,000 more criticisms by the age of 10 that the neurotypical child) that we are scared that disclosure will work against us, and potentially cost us the job, a fear which is exacerbated in the highly competitive world of graduate recruitment.
Genuine inclusivity is not having to ask
Genuine inclusivity is an opt out rather than opt in scheme.
As the old adage says, actions speak louder than an inclusion statement at the bottom of a job advert. When designing your graduate recruitment program, sending out the questions ahead of time not only increases your chances of hiring a highly productive and loyal talent, but it sends out the signal that you genuinely are inclusive and neuro-friendly. That is marketing that money cannot buy.
REFERENCES
Department of Education. (2024). Key findings from the 2024 higher education student statistics. Australian Government. https://www.education.gov.au/higher-education-statistics/student-data/selected-higher-education-statistics-2024-student-data/key-findings-2024-higher-education-student-statistics
Grabarski, M. K., Jameson, T. P., & Mouratidou, M. (2025). ADHD and career sustainability: a sustainable career ecosystem perspective. Career Development International, 30(7), 762–777. https://doi.org/10.1108/CDI-03-2025-0150
Hallowell, E., (2023), ADHD Explained: Your Toolkit to Understanding and Thriving. Dorling Kindersley.
Hallowell, E. M., & Ratey, J. J. (2021). ADHD 2.0 : new science and essential strategies for thriving with distraction-from childhood through adulthood (First edition.). Ballantine Books. https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/qut/detail.action?docID=6180356
National Careers Institute. (2022). Australian Blueprint for Career Development. Prepared by CICA, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra. https://www.yourcareer.gov.au/resources/australian-blueprint-for-career-development
Pani, L., Porcella, A., & Gessa, G. L. (2000). The role of stress in the pathophysiology of the dopaminergic system. Molecular Psychiatry, 5(1), 14–21. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.mp.4000589
Pano, G. (2024). 10 Companies Leading the Neurodiversity Movement in Tech. https://www.bestcolleges.com/resources/companies-leading-neurodiversity-movement-tech/
Pehlivanidis, A., Papanikolaou, K., Mantas, V., Kalantzi, E., Korobili, K., Xenaki, L.-A., Vassiliou, G., & Papageorgiou, C. (2020). Lifetime co-occurring psychiatric disorders in newly diagnosed adults with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. BMC Psychiatry, 20(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-020-02828-1
Samosh, D., Lilius, J., Atwood, K. (2024). ADHD and Career Success: Barriers, Facilitators, and Future Research Directions. In Patton, E., & Santuzzi, A. M. (Eds.). Neurodiversity and Work: Employment, Identity, and Support Networks for Neurominorities. (1st ed., pp. 257-281). Springer Nature Switzerland.
Smyth, A., Dipeolu, A., Davies, L., Hargrave, S., & Stevenson, A. R. (2015). LIVING WITH ADHD: The Unique Career Development Challenges Facing Women with ADHD. Career Planning and Adult Development Journal, 31(4), 44
Sniderman, B., Holdowsky, J., Buckley, N., & Buffi, T. (2023). Building the neuroinclusive workplace: Research reveals strong support for neurodiverse talent, but hiring programs are just the first step. Deloitte Insights. https://www.deloitte.com/us/en/insights/topics/value-of-diversity-and-inclusion/creating-neuroinclusive-workplace.html
Turjeman-Levi, Y., Itzchakov, G., & Engel-Yeger, B. (2024). Executive function deficits mediate the relationship between employees’ ADHD and job burnout. AIMS Public Health, 11(1), 294–314. https://doi.org/10.3934/publichealth.2024015
Quality Indicators for Learning and Teaching. (2025). Graduate Outcomes Survey: National Report September 2025. file:///C:/Users/e9405540/Downloads/2024-gos-national-report%20(1).pdf
