Empowering neurodivergent careers: building a sustainable and strengths-based career ecosystem Open Access

The sustainable career ecosystem emphasizes the dynamic interplay between individuals, organizations, and their broader context in fostering careers that are experienced as satisfying, healthy, meaningful, and productive over time (Donald, 2023; Van der Heijden and De Vos, 2015). This perspective is particularly relevant for neurodivergent workers whose neurological functioning differs from dominant societal norms (Doyle, 2020) and whose unique strengths and challenges often require tailored career development approaches that enable them to thrive (Lennox, 2025).

The term neurodivergence refers to individuals with, amongst others, Autism Spectrum Condition (ASC), Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), and Dyslexia, who collectively represent an estimated 15 to 20% of the population (Doyle, 2020). Despite this prevalence, neurodivergent individuals frequently face stigma upon entering the labor market (Bölte et al., 2025). The persistent unemployment and underemployment among neurodivergent individuals have drawn attention to the importance of workplace inclusion (Wen et al., 2024), highlighting that neurominorities are still not fully able to realize their career potential (Doyle, 2020).

Whereas Donald (2025) sheds light on the exclusionary experiences shaping the career sustainability of disabled scholars, explicit attention to neurodivergence within this research field remains limited. Hence, there is an increasing need for insights into how a neuro-inclusive and sustainable career ecosystem can be fostered, which not only removes barriers but also positively embraces neurodiversity. Previous studies have highlighted the potential that Positive Psychology's strengths-based approach to neurodiversity has for shaping workplace environments where neurominorities thrive (e.g. Kersten et al., 2025). This approach frames neurodivergence in a more positive light and challenges the deficit-oriented paradigm, which is dominant in diagnostic models and assumes that neurominorities have deficits that need to be fixed (McLennan et al., 2025). The strengths-based approach involves the identification of workplace factors that promote neurominorities' thriving at work (Blondel et al., 2025). Still, additional efforts are needed to explore a sustainable and strengths-based approach to empower neurodivergent individuals' careers. Particularly, more knowledge is needed regarding the roles that various actors play within the sustainable career ecosystem (Donald, 2023) in identifying, using, and developing strengths (Ghielen et al., 2018).

Building on these omissions, the objective of this paper was to explore how the strengths of neurominorities can be identified, used, and developed within a sustainable career ecosystem (Donald, 2023; Donald et al., 2024a, b). By integrating a strengths-based perspective (Peterson and Seligman, 2004) with career ecosystem research (Baruch, 2015), this study advances career theory by framing neurodiversity not solely as a challenge but as a source of unique strengths and value. Building on recent applications to disability inclusion (Donald, 2025), this paper positions neurodivergence within a positive, growth-oriented paradigm that highlights potential and capability. Furthermore, this study further explores the interconnectedness of actors across micro, meso, and macro levels with the career ecosystem (Baruch, 2015; Baruch and Rousseau, 2019) in understanding neuro-inclusive careers, while highlighting practical implications for individuals, organizations, and career practitioners.

The conceptualization of a “sustainable career” has been shaped by various research fields, including vocational behavior, career development, and human resource management (Donald et al., 2024a, b). Whereas earlier career theories emphasized individual responsibility in shaping one's career, sustainable career theory recognizes that career development is not solely influenced by individual differences (i.e. the person dimension), but also contextual differences (i.e. the context dimension), and dynamic processes over time (i.e. the time dimension). Together, these dimensions shape career-related outcomes such as happiness, health, and productivity (Van der Heijden and De Vos, 2015, p. 7). Complementing this perspective on career sustainability, career ecosystem theory (Baruch, 2015; Baruch and Rousseau, 2019) highlights that careers evolve within a system of individuals and institutions. The founders of this theoretical perspective draw on the metaphor of an ecosystem to demonstrate the interdependence and interconnectedness between the various actors within the ecosystem at the micro, meso, and macro levels.

Donald (2023) integrated insights from sustainable career theory and career ecosystem theory to conceptualize the sustainable career ecosystem (Donald et al., 2024a, b, Figure 1). This framework illustrates the multilayered context in which careers unfold, consisting of local, national, and global levels. At each of these levels, the framework distinguishes relevant actors that play a role in the career ecosystem (Baruch, 2015). At the local level, encompassing the micro and meso levels, the framework portrays (1) employees, (2) organizations, and (3) career practitioners as key actors within the ecosystem. The involvement of these actors underlines that “while the career is the ‘property’ of individuals, organizations must strategically plan and manage it” (Donald et al., 2024a, p. 5), hence demonstrating the influence that actors within the organization have on career sustainability. Exceeding the local level, the framework furthermore illustrates the role of the national and global context (i.e. macro level) in shaping career sustainability (e.g. institutional pressures). By adopting this theoretical framework, the present study acknowledges the influence of multiple actors and contextual levels on the sustainability of the careers of neurodivergent individuals.

Understanding career outcomes as the result of dynamic interactions between multiple actors and contextual levels provides a valuable lens for examining the labor market experiences of neurominorities. Research indicates that ableist, neurotypical norms (Scholz, 2020) often hinder neurominorities from achieving alignment with their occupational environment (Doyle, 2020). Yet, as the sustainable career literature highlights, such alignment is crucial for fostering an individual's career sustainability (Talluri et al., 2025).

Societal expectations around neurotypical norms and expected behavior strongly influence neurominorities' experiences at work throughout their careers (Hennekam and Follmer, 2024). Numerous studies report experiences with stigma, misunderstanding, and communication barriers that attest to the harsh reality that neurominorities face in the labor market (e.g. Wen et al., 2024). This situation may partly stem from organizations' implicit tendency to address workplace challenges by focusing on “fixing” employees' perceived deficits in skills, abilities, and behaviors (Luthans, 2002). This organizational approach of targeting individual deficits rather than embracing neurological differences stems from the underlying medical and deficit-oriented view of neurodivergence (Ratten, 2025). The strengths-based approach provides a more positive framework by recognizing and leveraging neurodiversity.

While remediating deficiencies can be useful in organizations (e.g. offering training to build skills), progress may be slow and effortful, thereby reducing motivation, confidence, and engagement, especially if individuals are constantly encouraged to improve in areas that do not align with their natural strengths (van Woerkom and Meyers, 2015). In contrast, the opposing view, rooted in positive psychology (Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi, 2000), holds that people can only perform at their best when they are empowered to use their unique and diverse strengths (van Woerkom and Meyers, 2015).

Peterson and Seligman (2004) define strengths as trait-like characteristics that are valued for their intrinsic worth. These strengths (e.g. creativity or perseverance) are considered the building blocks of six broader, more abstract virtues (i.e. wisdom, courage, humanity, justice, temperance, and transcendence). Typically, individuals possess between three and seven “signature strengths”, which are personality traits that a person “owns, celebrates, and frequently exercises” (Peterson and Seligman, 2004, p. 18). Embracing the strengths of neurodivergent employees not only improves their experiences (Kersten et al., 2025) but may also enhance an organization's social legitimacy (Ratten, 2025).

Like all workers, neurominorities have signature strengths as well as strengths that are less developed. The key difference, however, is that their strengths profile tends to be “spiky” (Doyle, 2020), exhibiting more pronounced peaks and valleys in comparison to neurotypical workers. This may result in suboptimal strengths use, which can have negative effects when there is little support from a strengths-based culture (Niemiec, 2019). To build a supportive strength-based culture, individuals must be supported by an environment where they can (1) (self-)identify strengths, (2) use strengths, and (3) develop strengths.

First, although signature strengths are inherent qualities that energize individuals and enable them to perform at their highest potential (Wood et al., 2011), strengths can become so ingrained in a person's personality that they may be used unconsciously, blurring the line between exceptional qualities and what feels “normal” (van Woerkom, 2024). As a result, many individuals find it challenging to accurately identify and appreciate their strengths without guidance (Owens et al., 2018). Research shows that neurominorities may struggle to recognize their strengths due to internalization of deficit-based norms (Kersten et al., 2025), translating to fear of failure or low self-kindness (Beaton et al., 2022; Blondel et al., 2025).

At the local level of the sustainable career ecosystem, several actors can play a role in enhancing strength (self-)identification of neurodivergent workers. Organizations can support workers in identifying their strengths by providing tools such as the Values In Action (VIA) questionnaire (Peterson and Seligman, 2004) or reflected best-self practices (Roberts et al., 2005). These tools enable individuals to recognize their own strengths and those of their colleagues. Additionally, line managers are well-positioned to assist their employees in identifying their strengths by recognizing tendencies to apply certain strengths (Linley et al., 2007). Since strengths use is linked to enthusiasm and psychological arousal (Linley, 2008), various physical cues (e.g. increased smiling) and vocal indicators (e.g. faster speech) can help identify when signature strengths are being expressed. Within the team, co-workers can initiate conversations or offer feedback to better understand others' strengths (Biswas-Diener et al., 2011).

Employees may (un)consciously apply their strengths in the workplace. For example, an engineer might leverage their passion for learning by getting to the core of complex topics, thereby quickly gaining a thorough technical understanding of a new system. Miglianico et al. (2020) found that using one's strengths is linked to happiness, health, and productivity; the three indicators of career sustainability (Van der Heijden and De Vos, 2015). Hence, being able to use one's strengths may be crucial for pursuing a fulfilling career (Aulthouse et al., 2017). Although individuals generally yearn to use their strengths, they may refrain from doing so if they perceive it as inappropriate, considering the organizational culture, norms, or task demands (Lee et al., 2016). Particularly for neurominorities, the expectation to “fit” to their context may lead them to leave (part of) their authentic selves behind (Krzeminska et al., 2019).

Organizations can promote the strengths use of neurominorities by fostering a strengths-based culture with strengths-based norms (Kersten et al., 2025). They can integrate these strengths-based norms into Human Resources (HR) policy frameworks (e.g. in rewards, job design, and promotion policies; Wang et al., 2023). Finally, teams can enhance collective strengths use by coordinating tasks and assigning roles based on strengths (van Woerkom et al., 2022). This process involves jointly deciding how to distribute tasks and adjusting roles to leverage strengths in pursuit of a shared goal (Leana et al., 2009).

Lastly, it is important to acknowledge that strengths can be developed by enhancing them with knowledge and skills (van Woerkom, 2024). Developing strengths involves learning when to apply them, considering their impact on others, and balancing them to avoid over- or underuse (Biswas-Diener et al., 2011). Generally, underusing strengths is more detrimental to well-being than overusing them (Littman-Ovadia and Freidlin, 2020), although excessive use of strengths in inappropriate situations can turn them into perceived weaknesses (Niemiec, 2019). Given their spiky profile, neurodivergent workers tend to overuse their strengths (Kersten et al., 2025), resulting in suboptimal functioning.

Again, actors at the local level of the ecosystem can play a role in developing the strengths of neurominorities. Line managers may provide support for strengths development by signaling strengths under- or overuse. In the case of strengths overuse, for instance, they may suggest using one strength (e.g. kindness) to temper another strength (e.g. honesty). Alternatively, in cases of strengths underuse, they may suggest boosting an underused strength (e.g. self-regulation) with a more dominant one (e.g. love of learning; Niemiec, 2019).

Line managers may struggle to adopt these responsibilities in the context of neurodivergence (Richards et al., 2019). Hence, organizations can support them by offering training on recognizing common challenges faced by neurodivergent workers and equipping them with effective solutions.

In this study, we build on previous research that identified barriers to implementing a strengths-based approach in the hiring of neurominorities (Hennekam and Follmer, 2024) by dedicating explicit attention to shaping meaningful and sustainable career paths for and with neurodivergent workers. In our approach, we do not only focus on lived experiences to explore how neurominorities may self-manage careers but also acknowledge the roles of actors and the context of the sustainable career ecosystem (Baruch and Rousseau, 2019). With this, we respond directly to the call of Donald et al. (2024a) to not overemphasize agentic factors influencing career (self)management, but to consider the influence of contextual drivers in studying sustainable careers. This study explores the following research questions: What strengths of neurominorities are valued within organizations? And how can the strengths of neurominorities be identified, used, and developed within a sustainable career ecosystem?

The study was approved by the ethical review board of Tilburg University. Qualitative data were collected among neurodivergent workers, line managers, and HR professionals. With this approach, we aimed to involve various actors within the career ecosystem (Baruch, 2015). To prioritize a (neuro-)inclusive research design and progress the validity of our findings (e.g. Le Cunff et al., 2023), feedback loops with neurodivergent individuals were incorporated in the research design and data collection (e.g. Scholz, 2020).

Participants were recruited via a Neurodiversity Network, consisting of organizations of various sizes in the STEM (i.e. science, technology, engineering, and mathematics), financial, and professional services sectors in the Netherlands (i.e. macro context) that employ neurodivergent workers. After the distribution of an information leaflet, we relied on voluntary, self-selected participation of (neurodivergent) employees, line managers, and HR professionals within this network. During the process of participant recruitment, we communicated directly with each participant to ensure that participation was anonymous and that other participants from the same organization were not aware of each other's involvement. In our sample, we did not have any dyads of employees and line managers. We relied on specific selection criteria for each subgroup: (1) employees had to self-identify as neurodivergent, (2) line managers had to supervise at least one neurodivergent employee, and (3) HR professionals had to be actively involved in neuro-inclusion.

Each participant's informed consent was collected before the first interview and was re-established throughout the two rounds of data collection. In the first round, 31 participants engaged in a semi-structured interview (N_employee = 12; N_manager = 4; N_HR = 15). Our interview questions aimed to capture strengths-identification, -use and -development, and career development opportunities (Ghielen et al., 2018, Appendix 1). We encouraged respondents to provide feedback on the understandability and accessibility of our research design (e.g. using member checks), while allowing new themes to be constructed by the research team. Data collection was concluded when the research team agreed that the dataset was sufficiently rich and no substantially new insights relevant to the research question were being generated (Braun and Clarke, 2021). In the second round of data collection, half a year later, participants were invited for focus groups. Twelve participants participated in two focus groups (i.e. N_employee = 2; N_manager = 2; N_HR = 8; 38.7% follow-up participation rate). Six participants (all employees) opted to participate in a qualitative survey (Appendix 1). The dropout for this round of data collection was due to time constraints or job changes. Table I presents sample characteristics.

Being mindful of the risks of adopting pre-defined templates in career research (Richardson et al., 2022), we adopted a thematic analysis to analyze the data on (practices promoting) a sustainable, strengths-based career ecosystem for neurominorities (Braun and Clarke, 2006). In doing so, a hybrid deductive–inductive approach to thematic analysis was taken, combining theoretically informed coding with openness to themes identified in the data. The sustainable career ecosystem (Donald et al., 2024a, b) and the VIA Strengths (Peterson and Seligman, 2004) were used as frameworks to guide the analysis, while allowing for a posteriori codes to be identified from the data (Swain, 2018). Following this approach, the interviews and focus groups were recorded and transcribed. The research team familiarized itself with the data by (re-)reading all transcripts. The coding was conducted by four research team members, who first coded individually and then engaged in collective coding based on the a priori and a posteriori codes identified in the data.

The first major theme that was identified in the data was the valued strengths of neurominorities, in which subthemes consisted of the (self-)identified strengths, which were mapped against the VIA Strengths framework (Peterson and Seligman, 2004, Appendix 2). The second major theme aligned with the strengths-based career ecosystem, in which the different actors represented relevant themes (i.e. the organization, the team, the line management, the employee) with their roles coded as subthemes. While some actors and their roles corresponded to the sustainable career ecosystem by Donald et al. (2024a, b), the hybrid analysis allowed newly identified themes to be added. The findings are presented in Figure 2.

To answer the first research question, we elaborate on the identified strengths of neurodivergent workers. In line with the second research question, the remaining findings of this study are presented according to the different levels of the ecosystem. Firstly, the local level is elaborated upon by shedding light on practices adopted by the employee, team, line management, and organization. Secondly, we elaborate at the societal level.

We invited stakeholders to (self-)identify the strengths of neurodivergent workers in their organization. Neurodivergent workers often found self-reflection a challenge, due to the deficit-oriented norms they encountered throughout their careers. Despite this challenge, neurodivergent participants had a clear understanding of what was important to them in their careers and what gave them energy. Although strengths were (self-)identified across all six core virtues (Appendix 2), many neurodivergent workers shared with us that they thrive when adopting strengths that allow them to acquire and use knowledge (i.e. wisdom virtue).

Additionally, neurodivergent workers were recognized for their strength in accomplishing goals in the face of opposition (i.e. courage virtue), for instance, by demonstrating bravery and a critical perspective.

Various employees illustrated how energizing the opportunity to make use of their strengths was – and how detrimental the lack thereof could be for their well-being.

At the same time, line managers and HR professionals indicated that the strengths aligning with the wisdom and courage virtues were seen as highly valuable within the organization, as they helped build organizational excellence, particularly in the STEM sector.

In addition to productivity-related outcomes of strengths use on the individual and organizational level, the way neurodivergent workers shaped their future work self (Taber and Blankemeyer, 2015) around their strengths highlighted how strengths use may help to shape meaningful career paths over time. This future-looking perspective, however, requires opportunities for strengths identification, use, and development.

While all individuals possess unique strengths, certain strengths were more commonly observed among neurodivergent individuals (e.g. within the virtues of wisdom and courage). In addition, their expression was seen as more pronounced compared to neurotypical populations (i.e. a spiky strength profile with pronounced highs and lows; Doyle, 2020). To illustrate, various participants reported that neurodivergent employees often display strengths (e.g. perseverance) at particularly high levels.

No VIA strength is exclusively “unique” to neurodivergent individuals; rather, differences lie in how these strengths are experienced and expressed compared to neurotypical counterparts. To illustrate, both neurotypical and neurodivergent employees may display perseverance, but when a neurodivergent employee exhibits this strength with particular intensity, it may become more noticeable in terms of its benefits and potential challenges by others in the organization. This highlights the relevance of studying strengths-based career experiences of neurodivergent individuals specifically.

Next, we explored strengths-based practices in the sustainable career ecosystem, shedding light on the interconnected actors and strengths-based practices at the local and societal level (Figure 2). While we acknowledge that every neurodivergent worker has a different conceptualization of their ideal career and related outcomes, we found various strengths-based practices for shaping sustainable careers. We first elaborate on the actors at the local level and the practices they adopt, after which we reflect on the societal level of the ecosystem.

We identified that (1) the (neurodivergent) employees, (2) the line manager, (3) the team, and (4) the organizational representatives (HR), as interrelated and interdependent actors at the local level of the ecosystem, play a vital role in implementing (in)formal practices that shape a strengths-based career ecosystem.

Firstly, our findings emphasize the role of the individual in exerting agency in their career, for instance, by actively engaging in opportunities for strengths identification, use, and development. Participants illustrated that self-directed engagement in strengths use, for instance, in client-facing tasks, would contribute positively to their well-being.

The opportunity to exert this agency relied heavily, however, on both contextual support and individual proactivity in identifying and utilizing strengths. Participants stressed the key role of the line manager and the team in fostering strengths-based careers. For instance, effective and collective strengths use relied largely on openness and acceptance of neurodivergence within the team, highlighting the interrelatedness and interdependence between the individual and collective.

Next to fostering an open culture for strengths use, line managers engaged in the coordination of group-level strengths use, with support of the organizational (HR) level. Respondents highlighted how the strengths profiles of different workers could be strategically combined, ensuring every team member could experience sustainable career progression.

An important condition for career progression was openness to neurodivergent strength profiles, by breaking down jobs into strengths-based profiles based on individual strengths. This approach does not assume that individuals can be molded into a pre-existing job profile based on neurotypical expectations, but rather actively aims to identify “task profiles” and allows individuals to craft their career based on their strengths. In this way, line managers could tailor profiles to align with the strengths of neurodivergent workers.

Considering the role of the organization as an actor, participants highlighted that the practice of implementing strengths-based career tracks helped create sustainable career pathways in various sectors, with opportunities at the board level.

Advocating this strengths-based approach also required organizations to give neurodivergent workers representation within the organization. Various organizations launched employee networks as a means of collectively empowering neurominorities at the local level. In various cases, such networks could even exceed the local level and result in inter-organizational collaboration on neuro-inclusion.

Complementing the individual, team, line manager, and organization, we identified career practitioners (e.g. coaches) as central figures in promoting strengths-based careers of neurodivergent workers. These career practitioners played a key role in building bridges between actors at the local level, for instance, by engaging in team-level coaching.

By providing (internal or external) career coaching to not only neurominorities but also actors within their context (e.g. line managers, HR professionals, and teams), career coaching helped to shape a positive path towards career sustainability.

Pressures from the institutional context (i.e. macro level) influenced organizations in their openness towards neurodivergence. In our sample, market dynamics, such as labor shortages, and institutional dynamics around collective responsibility in supporting (education-)employment transitions for neurodivergent individuals, strengthened this development. The example below illustrates how institutional logics translate to organizations' engagement in neuro-inclusive career management:

Research has demonstrated that neurodivergent workers face challenges in achieving their career potential (Doyle, 2020). Therefore, there is an urgent need to study how sustainable career ecosystems can be created for and with neurodivergent workers (Wen et al., 2024). Following this call, various studies explored how the strengths-based approach may improve the workplace experiences of neurominorities (e.g. Cherewick and Matergia, 2024; Iqbal et al., 2025). Building on this growing line of research, the objective of this paper was to explore how the strengths of neurominorities can be identified, used, and developed within a sustainable career ecosystem. The strengths-based approach provides a lens, not to reinforce a one-sided portrayal of neurodivergence as a “superpower”, but rather to present a nuanced and inclusive perspective that reflects the diverse experiences of neurodivergent individuals in shaping sustainable career paths that align with their strengths.

The sustainable career ecosystem (Donald, 2023; Donald et al., 2024a, b) offers a framework for understanding the careers of neurodivergent workers (Donald, 2025), as it emphasizes that careers are not solely shaped by individual attributes and choices, but also by dynamic, interdependent systems in which individuals are embedded. This perspective is particularly relevant for neurodivergent individuals, whose career paths may be constrained by ableist organizational norms that do not accommodate neurological differences. In line with Donald et al. (2024a), we argue that neurominorities are central agents within the sustainable career ecosystem of interconnected actors (Baruch, 2015). Hence, we have provided insights into the lived experiences of neurodivergent workers, showcasing their firsthand experience with strengths-based career practices, while complementing these insights with the experiences of line managers and HR professionals who lay the foundation for strengths-based career systems that support neurominorities both directly and indirectly, by empowering their agency.

Based on this qualitative two-wave study, including semi-structured interviews, focus groups, and a qualitative survey, we identified four relevant actors at the local level of the sustainable career ecosystem: (1) the (neurodivergent) employee, (2) the team, (3) the line management, and (4) the organization. At the individual level, the findings highlighted the value of individual (and collective) voice for empowering neurodivergent workers to be(come) self-directed change agents in shaping strengths-based career pathways. Theoretically, this aligns with the notion of sustainable career theory that individuals are key agents in the sustainable career ecosystem and sheds some light on how neurodivergent individuals, who face barriers within the current ecosystem (e.g. Wen et al., 2024), may be empowered to exert agency in their careers from a strengths-based lens. Building on the sustainable career ecosystem, our findings offer insights into how employers can positively support diverse career paths within a (neuro-)inclusive organization. This can be achieved by providing individualized and context-sensitive measures that foster strengths-based careers, while also enabling employees to actively explore and shape their own career paths.

At the team level, this study highlighted the relevance of not only maximizing individual strengths but also coordinating individual strengths across the team level (Meyers et al., 2023). This approach challenges the idea that all employees should be able to perform the same tasks or follow similar (neurotypical) career trajectories (e.g. seen in traditional career literature), instead highlighting how each person's unique strengths can complement those of their team members to foster collective strengths use. In addition, our paper underscored the importance of coworker support and team-level acceptance of neurodiversity for sustainable careers (Patton, 2019). Whereas HR (on the organizational level) played a key role in promoting openness to neurodiversity and providing strengths-based and expertise-oriented opportunities for career progression, line management must translate these practices into strengths-based task allocation on the work floor, focused on guarding a balance between happiness, health, and productivity as indicators of sustainable careers. Because of the alignment between positive psychology research and sustainable career research in focusing on these outcomes of happiness, health, and productivity, adopting a strengths-based perspective in line management's career support may help promote neuro-inclusive careers.

By integrating the strengths-based approach with sustainable career ecosystem theory, our findings offer a theoretical contribution by (1) highlighting line managers are essential actors in creating (neuro)inclusive workplaces and career trajectories (Richards et al., 2019), and (2) demonstrating the importance of placing individual strengths at the core of job- and career-matching efforts for and with neurodivergent workers (Bölte et al., 2025). Although the organization, as an actor, has been acknowledged in the sustainable career ecosystem, we provide additional insights into the role of the team, line management, and HR in fostering sustainable careers.

Each of these actors at the local level could be supported by strengths-based career (coaching) infrastructures, underscoring the importance of internal or external career practitioners (Donald et al., 2024a) based on strengths. The most prevalent example of this was the use of job coaching (e.g. Bölte et al., 2025), for individuals (e.g. when an individual wants to understand their strengths), teams (e.g. when a team wants to explore how they can better align neurotypical and neurodivergent workers' strengths) and line managers (e.g. when a line manager wants to learn how they can facilitate strengths identification, use, and development among their neurodivergent workers). Theoretically, we position the career practitioners as providing a “bridging role” between the various actors at the local level, highlighting the fundamental role that their expertise may play in addressing knowledge (and experience) caveats at the local level of the ecosystem.

Lastly, our findings shed preliminary light on the dynamics between the local and the societal career ecosystem, which impact the career sustainability of neurominorities. We found that contextual drivers (e.g. societal norms, institutional context, or market dynamics; Donald et al., 2024a) influenced organizations' efforts towards the inclusion of neurominorities. These findings provide a stepping stone for future research endeavors to further unravel the complex and bidirectional interplay between organizations and their institutional context (e.g. Lewis et al., 2019), which may influence (neuro)inclusive career ecosystems.

Considering the study's current theoretical contributions as well as limitations, we propose several future research avenues. Firstly, our study involved organizations of various sizes in the STEM, financial, and professional services sectors, all connected through a neurodiversity network that was already actively engaged in efforts to enhance neuro-inclusion. While previous research (Krzeminska and Hawse, 2020) has emphasized the need to study neurodiversity, particularly in STEM sectors, we call on future research to further extend this investigation to other sectors and work contexts. Furthermore, we encourage future researchers to further investigate the role of all actors, but particularly the role of line management in fostering neuro-inclusive career ecosystems (e.g. Richards et al., 2019), as line managers were the least represented group in our tripartite design. While our study sheds some light on the institutional drivers of neuro-inclusion in organizations, it does not offer extensive insights into the complexity of the national and global level of the sustainable career ecosystem (Donald et al., 2024a). We therefore also call for future research to investigate the contextual and institutional drivers (e.g. government policies) that influence career sustainability for neurominorities.

Our findings (Figure 2) highlight the various strengths-based practices embedded in a sustainable career ecosystem for neurodivergent workers. The implementation of these practices depends heavily on character strengths-awareness of the individual themselves, which may be challenging for neurodivergent workers (Kersten et al., 2025). Professionals may use the Values in Action Survey by Peterson and Seligman (2004) as a practical tool for starting the conversation about strengths at the workplace, for instance, by integrating this tool into onboarding or performance management practices. However, as previous research indicates (Meyers et al., 2023), organizations should pay attention to and foster a culture of collective strengths use by adopting strengths-based HR practices. As such, it is relevant that HR practices do not solely focus on individual strengths but rather focus on embedding strengths into organizational infrastructures. This aligns with the notion that career sustainability is progressed not only by individual resources (e.g. strengths [awareness]), but also by providing the right contextual support (Donald et al., 2024a, b).

Particularly considering neurodivergence and the spiky strengths profiles related to neurodiversity (Doyle, 2020), it is relevant that line managers are equipped to foster awareness, use, and appreciation of a variety of strengths profiles. While many individuals adopt a straightforward “identify and use” approach to strengths, line managers and career coaches may benefit from a more nuanced and neuro-inclusive understanding of optimal strengths use. This includes recognizing that strengths do not always need to be maximized; rather, individuals often benefit most from understanding the fit of their strengths with their context and learning to regulate and apply them contextually (Biswas-Diener et al., 2011). This once more aligns with the notion that contextual fit is highly relevant for career sustainability (Talluri et al., 2025).

This study applied a qualitative design to map strengths-based practices for a sustainable career ecosystem for neurodivergent workers. The findings stress the key role of (1) the (neurodivergent) individual, (2) the team, (3) the line manager, and (4) the organization as actors at the local level of the ecosystem, supported and bridged by strengths-based career (coaching) infrastructures, and influenced by the institutional context. With our findings, we encourage both researchers and practitioners to further explore the strengths-based, sustainable career ecosystem for and with neurodivergent workers.

The authors would like to thank Arnout Nederpelt and Merel Bakermans for their contribution to this study.

The supplementary material for this article can be found online.