There’s a pattern we are seeing more and more in mediation work.
An otherwise capable, conscientious employee begins to struggle. Not because they lack skill or motivation, but because something in the environment no longer fits for them. Communication begins to break down. Pressure builds. Assumptions are made. Then, instead of having a conversation to explore what is happening, the organisation or the individual reaches for process.
By the time mediation is considered, the person is often already burnt out, absent, or deeply disengaged.
This pattern shows up particularly starkly where neurodivergence is involved.
Neurodivergence isn’t the problem : poor adaptation is
It’s worth pausing briefly on what we mean by neurodiversity.
Every human brain is different, but the term “neurodivergent” is commonly used to describe people whose brains process information differently from what is commonly regarded as neurotypical. This often shows up as a “spiky skills profile” with pronounced strengths alongside areas of challenge.
Some people will have a formal diagnosis such as ADHD, autism, dyslexia or dyspraxia. Others may never have been assessed, or only discover this later in life. Neurodiversity is far more common than many organisations realise, with around one in seven people in the UK being neurodivergent, often unknowingly.
Neurodivergent individuals will often bring exceptional value to organisations. The very fact that they perceive things differently can bring huge benefits to productivity and innovation. But they are often more sensitive to ambiguity, power imbalance, abrupt change or poorly delineated processes.
What looks like resistance can be overwhelm.
What gets labelled demanding is often a request for clarity or support.
What’s dismissed as overreaction is frequently cumulative stress left unresolved.
These dynamics are well documented. Yet too often, the human explanation is bypassed in favour of a procedural response.
The moment that matters most is the one organisations miss
In many cases, there is a clear early moment where things could have gone differently:
- a raised voice in a meeting
- a breakdown in trust between colleagues
- a request for support reframed as inconvenience
- a misunderstanding that becomes personal because it’s never unpacked
These should not be disciplinary moments. They should be seen as mediation moments.
When these issues arise and are handled well, trust and psychological safety can be restored and understanding gained. Handled poorly, they can become the starting point for burnout, grievance, and long-term absence leading to a procedural response.
When process steps in without sequencing
Process isn’t the enemy. But when it’s deployed without thought for timing , or context, it can do real harm to workplace relationships
Unexpected assessments. Decisions taken “for someone’s own good”. Timelines that prioritise organisational comfort over human readiness.
For neurodivergent individuals, lack of preparation and opaque decision-making are not neutral. They’re destabilising , especially when trust has already been damaged.
This is how people who want to work end up unable to do so.
Long-term absence is rarely about capacity alone
Prolonged absence is often framed as a health issue. In reality, it’s frequently a relationship issue or a psychological safety issue that was never addressed early enough.
By the time someone has been off work for months, the real question isn’t “when can they return?”, it’s “if they return” and “to what would they be returning?”
The skills managers need
Managing neurodiversity well doesn’t necessarily require clinical expertise. It requires relational skill and emotional intelligence:
- noticing early signs of overload
- having difficult conversations without defensiveness
- separating performance from environment
- understanding that psychological safety is a productivity issue
- recognising when power dynamics make internal resolution unsafe
These are skills that managers need, but few organisations provide any or any adequate training in these areas. They are soft skills, mediation skills. Not legal ones.
They should be seen as an essential part of every manager’s toolkit.
The role of HR
There’s a quiet irony here. HR and people professionals are experiencing record levels of burnout themselves. This is widely acknowledged across the industry and is readily observable on LinkedIn and elsewhere.
Yet within HR teams, the same dynamics can play out: pressure, overload, reliance on process, and too little space for reflection or repair.
Being people-centred externally doesn’t automatically mean people-centred internally.
Where mediation changes the trajectory
Early, independent mediation creates space that process alone cannot:
- power dynamics are acknowledged
- intent and impact are separated
- assumptions are challenged safely
- solutions are co-designed rather than imposed
When power imbalances exist, external mediation isn’t a “nice to have”. It’s often essential. The perception of the independence of external mediators can be the key to unravelling the problem and finding a workable solution that suits all parties.
A quieter question for leaders
Before reaching for another process, ask:
- Have we created space for a real conversation?
- Are we addressing the relationship, not just the risk?
- Have we considered psychological safety, not just policy compliance?
- Are we solving the right problem, or are we just following a process that we are comfortable with because it is familiar?
If the answer isn’t clear, that’s often the moment mediation can make the greatest difference.
At Mediation Rescue, we like to work with organisations at these exact pressure points. Being involved early, sensitively, and pragmatically, helping retain talented people, reduce absence, rebuild trust and promote better understanding, before options narrow.
We support leaders to navigate situations where protected characteristics, wellbeing and psychological safety intersect with performance and process, ensuring that legal duties around reasonable adjustments and duty of care are met in a way that is human, proportionate and sustainable. The outcomes are hugely beneficial to the organisation as well as the individuals involved.
When process replaces good communication, everyone loses.
When people are properly heard, understood and validated, organisations become stronger, not weaker.