When we talk about workplace inclusion, the phrase “reasonable adjustments” often appears quickly. It’s written into policy. It’s included in job adverts. It sits comfortably in equality statements.
But in practice, reasonable adjustments are still widely misunderstood.
Too often, they are treated as reactive — something requested after a problem occurs. Or worse, something viewed as inconvenient, costly, or exceptional. In reality, reasonable adjustments are neither special treatment nor organisational generosity. They are the practical tools that allow talent to participate fully, safely, and fairly.
And importantly — they don’t begin on day one of employment. They begin at recruitment.
The Legal Foundation — and the Cultural Gap
Under the Equality Act 2010, employers have a duty to make reasonable adjustments where a disabled person would otherwise be placed at a substantial disadvantage.
The law is clear. What is less clear — and less consistently applied — is how that duty plays out during recruitment and interview processes. There remains a quiet assumption in many organisations that adjustments are a “workplace issue” rather than a hiring issue. But if recruitment processes themselves create barriers, then talent is filtered out long before employment even begins.
The most inclusive organisations understand this: Accessibility is not something you add later. It is something you design from the start.
What Are Reasonable Adjustments in the Workplace?
In employment settings, reasonable adjustments are structural changes that allow for high-level performance. They may include:
Flexible working patterns: Remote or hybrid options.
Alternative communication methods: Using emojis or written instructions rather than verbal-only guidance.
Environmental adaptations: Quiet workspaces or modified lighting.
Assistive technology: Software or hardware designed for neuro-accessible work.
Structured task management: Clear, predictable workflows.
Many of these adjustments cost little — sometimes nothing. What they require most is flexibility, predictability, and a willingness to move away from "the way we've always done it."
Adjustments are not about lowering standards. They are about removing unnecessary barriers so standards can be met.
Adjustments Don’t Start on Day One — They Start at Interview
One of the most overlooked stages for reasonable adjustments is recruitment. Traditional interviews are often built around assumptions of fast processing speed, strong verbal recall, and high social fluency.
These traits are not always measures of competence; they are often measures of how comfortable someone is in a particular environment. And for many neurodivergent candidates, that environment is disabling.
Adjustments during recruitment may include:
Interview questions provided in advance.
Extra time for assessments or alternative formats for tasks.
Online interviews instead of in-person (or vice versa).
Allowing notes, prompts, or a support person during questioning.
Practical work trials instead of panel interviews.
None of these adjustments change the job itself. They simply allow candidates to demonstrate ability in a way that is not distorted by the recruitment format. Adjustments should enable performance — not test endurance.
The Fear Around Disclosure
Many candidates hesitate to request adjustments because disclosure feels risky. They fear being viewed as “difficult,” having opportunities withdrawn, or being told they are “not the right fit” before they’ve even had a chance to perform.
If requesting an adjustment feels unsafe, inclusion is not yet embedded. Organisations that are serious about fairness make adjustments visible, normal, and proactively offered. A simple line in an invitation email can change everything:
“If there’s anything we can adjust to support you in showing your best work, please let us know.”
That sentence communicates safety. And safety changes outcomes.
The Difference Between Reactive and Proactive Inclusion
At Diversity Lock, we advocate for the shift from Reactive to Proactive inclusion:
The Reactive Approach: Waits for a problem, treats adjustments as exceptions, and places the burden on the individual to disclose.
The Proactive Approach: Designs processes assuming diversity, builds accessibility into systems by default, and uses tools like the Inclusion Lock Audit to verify structural readiness.
The second approach reduces the need for individual disclosure. It creates a process that works for more people without anyone having to explain themselves. That is inclusive design.
“Reasonable” Doesn’t Mean Minimal
The word "reasonable" is often misinterpreted as “minimal effort.” In reality, it means proportionate, practical, and effective at removing disadvantage. For most organisations, providing interview questions in advance or sharing clear written expectations is entirely reasonable.
The greater risk lies not in making adjustments — but in failing to do so and missing out on exceptional, specialized talent as a result.
Inclusion Is About System Design
When reasonable adjustments are embedded across recruitment and employment:
Candidates perform more authentically.
Anxiety decreases and retention rates rise.
Talent is assessed more accurately.
Organisational culture improves for everyone.
If a candidate struggles in your recruitment process, the first question should not be: “Can they handle this job?” It should be: “Is our process enabling them to show what they can do?”
Reasonable adjustments are not about giving an advantage; they are about restoring balance. When we design recruitment and workplaces with flexibility in mind, we create fairness.
And fairness is where real inclusion begins.Start writing here...