Neurodiversity, Dignity, & Intersectional Belonging

In this episode of Think Differently with Dr. Theresa Haskins, we sit down with Dr. Ludmila Praslova, an esteemed professor and advocate for neurodiversity, to explore how addressing challenges in supporting neurodiversity may signify larger organizational issues. We will briefly discuss her book, The Canary Code, which draws parallels between canaries in coal mines and neurodivergent individuals in the workplace, highlighting their shared ability to detect issues before they escalate. Discover how embracing neurodiversity fosters inclusivity, dignity, and belonging in professional environments.

Transcript

[00:00] Dr. Haskins: 

You know, it's fascinating how canaries were once used in coal mines to detect dangerous gases before they became toxic to the workers. And in some ways, neurodivergent individuals serve a similar role in the workplace, with an ability to detect toxicity and other issues long before others do. In this episode, I had the privilege to chat with the esteemed Dr. Ludmila Praslova where we will discuss how issues and supporting neurodivergent individuals in the workplace may be a telltale sign of larger issues, and how neurodiversity informs more inclusivity, dignity, and belonging in the workplace.

[00:44] Dr. Haskins: 

Hi, I'm Dr. Theresa Haskins. And welcome to "Think Differently," the podcast that challenges the status quo and explores the power of neurodiversity to create a more inclusive and accessible world. Together, we will talk about everything from the value of different perspectives to the limitless potential of human beings. We'll explore how embracing differences can lead to endless possibilities, and how you can maximize strengths to make a positive impact on the world. So sit back, relax, and join me as we get ready to think differently. 

Welcome, everyone. Today, we are going to take a new focus and chat from a neurodivergent perspective. And I'm really excited because we're gonna look at both the lived experience and the intentional research that's informing meaningful change towards realizing neural inclusion in education and the workplace. Joining us today is Dr. Ludmilla Kosova. She's a professor of Organizational Psychology at Vanguard University of Southern California. She's a neurodivergent advocate, and maybe most exciting, the author of the upcoming book, "The Canary Code: A Guide to Neurodiversity, Dignity, and Intersectional Belonging at Work." Dr. Priscilla is known for her contributions to supporting global talent, diversity, and making meaningful change to support and promote neurodiversity. Thank you for joining us today, Ludmila. I'm so excited to have you here.

[00:2:20] Dr. Praslova: 

I'm thrilled to be here and grateful for the opportunity to chat with you. And

[00:2:26 ] Dr. Haskins: 

I've just been so excited to, like, get you on the show, because you're so busy. And I've been reading your work for just years. And what I'd really like to start our conversation with today is really for you to share a bit about what initially drew you into the field of diversity, inclusion, and how your personal experiences are really influencing your work.

[00:2:50 ] Dr. Praslova: 

I don't remember never being interested in diversity. It started with the national level of differences, global cultures. And that's where I've been working since college. So I've been in this field of diversity for a very long time. But then I started noticing, not just, you know, cultural differences or gender, but many intersectional injustices. So organizations will pay attention to one dimension of diversity, but not to the other. So they will have attention on culture, but not on gender, gender, but no disability, and on and on. So I started noticing those intersectional injustices before the word intersectionality was there. And I started thinking, how can we create organizations that are inclusive of all the different aspects of humans, not just one or the other or a few, because that still leaves many people behind? So many years and after I started my career and global diversity, and then I got a PhD in industrial-organizational psychology, trying to figure out how to make organizations more inclusive. And I did all kinds of other things, you know, teaching and working with organizations. And then I realized that like many adults who didn't have very much access to early diagnostics, because they were born kind of before people really figured out that, you know, autistic people ADHD are so not always, you know, little boy type-presenting people. And then we kind of discover as adults so that some of our little differences that have been there, our entire lives are really manifestations of neurodivergence. So I discovered my own autistic characteristics. And then I did get officially diagnosed because I felt like if I want to be that engaged as I am, I really kind of just felt that this was important part. But my self-diagnosis was valid for quite a while before I got to the important news. I think many people just do just fine with their self-understanding for their purposes. So I don't insist on additional official diagnosis. That's what I felt I needed. But that just gave me this final piece of intersectionality that really, in my mind, connects all the dots on inclusion. Because when we start thinking about diversity on the level of nervous system wiring, emotion, emotional intensity, cognitive differences, that are really good is a key to more inclusion, if you think about inclusion as a safety net. If you think about it, national cultures, gender, those are very large differences with a lot of open air between them. And then you add other things. So I'd say you could add ethnic differences, and you can add something else, or the net becomes a little bit tighter. But when you start thinking on an individual level differences, psychological level differences, like emotion and cognition and communication needs, then you start realizing that onboarding and professional development and hiring need to be aware, not just of those large differences, but the differences that are within individuals. And there really can't be a one-size-fits-all. On the psychological level, we end up with a much tighter net of the overall inclusion and a much lower likelihood that anyone is going to fall through the cracks and not be welcomed in the workplace. So that really became a big part of my passion and the key to what I do.

[00:7:41] Dr. Haskins: 

I love that, and I love how I feel that neurodiversity, I've been saying and I think you agree, I know you agree. But that I think it's the key that's gonna unlock a lot of the areas that have been blockers in terms of achieving diversity in other areas. Because in other areas, it was often like overcoming prejudice and stigmas. But when we think about neurodivergence, how we communicate the needs that we need to like, have entry into the workplace, it's actually different. It's not like a perceived difference because of a gender or racial difference, but that we process information differently, the communications and structures we need might be different. And when you actually start building these cultures, right, that focus on that individual differentiation construct, I think, then it starts expanding opportunities. And I think, and I have found that people who understand disability inclusion and neurodivergence and are good at that tend to be more diversity-minded overall. Have you seen that? Yes.

[00:8:53] Dr. Praslova: 

When I work with leaders, very often when leaders start to understand psychological level of diversity, that is when they really start acting in ways that are inclusive of all the different categories because they start paying attention to the person and not to whatever mental model or stereotype and we know that within those large differences there are. There's huge diversity within any one of those groups. And if you just look at someone as Okay, the person of that gender, or a person from that culture, it's such a lack of a really paying attention to how you function and then you almost build even more stereotypes in what you do sometimes, if you expect everyone to, you know, behave as typical Asian or typical, any other kind of idea of what you expect the person to be. But when you start looking at people On the level that's not necessarily visible, but the level that really matters to people in how we think and how we process and how we react, react to things it makes for a much more inclusive environment. And so that's, that's really the whole Canary code idea that when you start paying attention to barriers that are experienced by people based on those differences, they're super real, but not always errant, then you clean up a lot of barriers that otherwise just able to read over them. And they just kind of remain a notice and people just get blamed for tripping over them. Now we can actually pay attention to those barriers, because no, it's your organizational communication. Is your hiring system. It's your promotion system. No, you don't need to say, yeah, those barriers, those people, they're just like, something's wrong with them. Because there are those invisible barriers, and we need to remove them.

[00:11:20] Dr. Haskins:  

And so you touched on your upcoming book and the projects launching just I think it's going to, I know you can preorder, but it's going to be live very soon. When you look at the canary code, first of all, I'd love to know what drove the title. But obviously, we have a code to break. But can you tell us like in your book, what are we exploring? What is what what are the principles that you're really trying to push for your readers to understand?

[00:11:45] Dr. Praslova 
 Well, the general principle is that very often, our organizations are toxic for everybody. We have huge stress levels, and people are getting physically sick. And we keep saying we need to improve workplaces. And then we end up again with kind of partial measures that we're just saying, "Okay, well, let's take half a day off or go to a spa or something like that," that doesn't fully address that issue. We need to really try to figure out what is going on. Why is there so much that people are now using the word toxic, toxic, toxic? There is usually a reason we will talk about this. And if you think about toxic environments, the canaries in the coal mine were actually real canaries that were taken to coal mines to determine whether the air was good enough for miners, so it's not some kind of imaginary. It's the actual true history. And then you can find mines through the 1980s. And canaries have a more intense air metabolism. So they are affected by toxins earlier than humans would be just because of their higher intensity of breathing. By the way, they're given oxygen and revived. But if you think about people in the workplace, some people are more sensitive to those toxic work environments, be it overwork or mistreatment that can lead to bullying. In some workplaces, some people are more sensitive to that. And neurodivergent people tend to be more sensitive. So if we create good air for those organizational canaries, organizations are going to be less toxic for everyone, and hopefully, it will have good air for everyone.

[00:14:03] Dr. Haskins 
 I love that imagery that our neurodivergent and autistic population predominantly are the canaries because they are often the first affected in an environment that isn't healthy.

[00:14:17] Dr. Praslova 
 And our brain literally processes 40% more information than the average brain. It's so it's very similar to how birds process air more intensely.

[00:14:32] Dr. Haskins 
 I love that and I love how you made the connection. And most people are familiar with that concept of the canaries in the coal mine as a sign for danger. And I think what I like about it as instead of, you know, some people think about autism inclusion, their inability to integrate is like a problem that like they would need to be fixed right and you know this and I know you and I are not for this where people are always trying to coach and change For the autistic population to better integrate, but I love how you're taking this view of their distress is actually an indicator of a bad environment that's actually impacting all the other birds and people with an organization that canaries.

[00:15:15] Dr. Praslova 
 Canaries are not broken, canaries are functioning exactly how they're meant to function, then research does show that when you just focus on changing autistic people, and don't change organizations, skills improve, but inclusion doesn't as employment outcomes don't because as long as organizations remain toxic, all the talk about inclusion and trying to go to deceive people to be something we're not. It's a misguided approach we need to clean up organizations.

[00:15:52] Dr. Haskins 
 It really is. And one of the things I get frustrated about with really well-intentioned programs out there is a lot of times, they are designed to try to help coach the autistic person to appear less autistic to better integrate. And it's a little forward to say it, but I have said to people, you wouldn't ask a blind person to be less blind. To Ask an Autistic person to modify their behavior to better fit in essence is not really recognizing the markers of the condition, like how they communicate and how they process the world is different. It's them.

[00:16:34] Dr. Praslova
 It hurts autistic people. Because when you try to change someone, they you force someone to be someone who are not. It's extremely painful, it's torturous. It doesn't work because it's on the level of your biological wiring. So it takes all your energy to maintain this facade. But it's also not healthy for organizations in the long run, because it perpetuates exclusionary environments. So you keep trying to force people into exclusionary environments, and they really should not be like that, because those exclusionary environments are also hurting everyone. Right?

[00:17:19] Dr. Haskins 
 Right. And we see that that when people get it right, or get it better, or closer to right, everybody reports like better engagement, you know, higher productivity. And I always tried to tell folks, it's not just because the autistic person is there. When people are happy and motivated and accepted, they are more productive. Like that's an A team effect. And it, I think it's a benefit that I think, you know, businesses are about money in production, right. And while we don't want to sell things, happy employees tend to be healthier employees tend to be more productive employees. Like,

[00:17:58] Dr. Praslova 
 that's a good thing. It absolutely is a good thing. And I do have a lot of opinions on business case, too. But definitely when you are trying to create environments that are productive environments, where people are miserable, to not make sense, and some people do have this misguided idea that if you create a lot of anxiety, productivity is going to go up a it can only work for a very short time for physical productivity. But then again, you burn people out and for mental productivity doesn't work period, because it interferes with our high low-level cognitive functioning. So those high-stress organizations that rely on cognitive productivity, they just literally doing the opposite of what actually does help productivity if they are thinking that a fear-driven organization can be a productive organization, right. Like you said,

[00:19:05] Dr. Haskins 
 Fear can incite movement for a while, but it's not sustainable. It would be like running on adrenaline constantly.

[00:19:12)] Dr. Praslova 
 It's not a good fuel for any kind of productivity performance. Nothing other than running away from a bear. If that's kind of an organization you want to create where people are constantly riding away from beers and can focus on anything else. That makes sense. But I think mostly this is not kind of organizations that people envision. So fear is not a fuel for human productivity, but enjoyment, desire to be creative desire to contribute, because you are in a group where people value each other. That really is the fuel that can help creativity and innovation that eventually those outcomes,

[00:20:02] Dr. Haskins 
 right? And like Who wouldn't want to work there? Exactly. We touched on it. And we we don't have to go there, but not big fans of the business case for neurodiversity, and I agree with that. But we are trying to get organizations to buy in. And so when, what I think about it, I think more of the barriers are aligned to like misconceptions that in the challenges that are perceived. So can you share some of the misconceptions and challenges you've encountered with organizations? And how you help them address those concerns so that they're willing to go to that next step? Yes.

[00:20:42] Dr. Praslova 
 And I've written about some of them. So my kind of biggest pet peeves is occupational typecasting, the people keep asking which occupations and Jobs are suitable for neurodivergent people or specifically for autistic people for dyslexic people? What kind of jobs can they do? That greatly limits all kinds of opportunities? Because you don't ask the question what jobs women do, or at least you shouldn't have been for, you know, quite a while since people figured out that this is not a not an appropriate question. Because really, people have all kinds of abilities in all kinds of areas. And when we try to pigeonhole people and say, "Okay, so we'll have this little autistic hiring program that is specifically for TAP, or we'll have this some other entrepreneurship development program. And we'll only bring in people who have ADHD, because we've heard that helps, or dyslexia or something else, whatever they think that feeds that particular, the idea they've got that people can be assigned to jobs based on those labels, that is just so terribly limiting and terribly unfair to people who have really all kinds of interests, all kinds of abilities. And this occupational typecasting very much limits opportunities for people whose abilities do not align with a stereotype for that particular label. And that leads me to the second day, the special programs, the special hiring programs, they are not going to solve those ugly unemployment numbers for neurodivergent people, there might help some people, but it's always going to be a relatively low number. And it's, I think, a couple of years ago, it was maybe 1500s in the US and outs maybe like 2000 in the entire US. It's nothing compared to home, any people are still struggling with unemployment and underemployment, despite their high levels of tone, which is why I was talking about autism and Allergy Asthma, employment paradox, talented people and huge unemployment levels. And this narrow program, so it's usually very narrow sets of jobs, again, usually tack a few other things, but for the most part, it stack, and it's Bill hire me, I don't know, 1015 30 people is a big program. So it's, it's a drop in the bucket. And you know, another problem with those. Another problem with those programs is often that they ignore intersectionality and intersectional needs in differences. So for example, sometimes hiring process for those special programs is two or three year, two or three weeks of unpaid work. And sometimes you have to travel somewhere to do that. Okay. Think of people who can afford it. People who are who already come from the more affluent families are the only people who would be able to afford something like that. So obviously, people who are in the most desperate need will be completely left out of those programs. And then there's just all kinds of other interesting intersectional issues that come up with those special programs. So they are they're helping some people and it's wonderful and I'm grateful for those people who are helped, but to create a more just society and to create more Just employment system really need to create more inclusion across organizations across various types of jobs and industries. And we just need to create organizations that are not toxic coal mines.

[00:25:22] Dr. Haskins 
 I agree. And it's interesting because you talked about those programs, I, like you said they serve a purpose, and they are a pathway for some people. But when I think of those programs, they they're upsetting to me, because I think about in the US where we are equal employment laws, and in essence, they almost perpetuate stigma, because an autistic person going through that program has to go through a week or two or three weeks of unpaid training, to prove that they may be worthy to be employed. But I was talking to somebody the other day, we need to be very careful with that. Because today, there's people that are just so grateful that, you know, either they or a loved one is getting a chance to these programs. But if there's an underlying ableist bias, it's not good. Because it's implying that if you're typical, you could get that same job and about an hour and a half. Three Su's. And so I have said, and I'm saying out loud, again, dad is a problem waiting to happen, because that's not an equal employment opportunity. And they're not, it's not. And then the other thing that bothers me, is when I think about it, that also implies that we are making the assumption that this autistic person who is trying to it's usually big companies that have these programs, we're making assumption you're already unemployed. That's not nice, either. So, you know, the big thing that I have talked to some of these programs, and you have is oftentimes the like, well, we give them training, and we try to teach them soft skills. And with Mila, I've said things before, and I, I said, I don't know how you think in one week, you were gonna be able to modify the behavior and the way somebody interacts, who's probably had been coaching and other therapies for the first 2030 years of their life, like you will not make somebody less autistic. And that's my concern that these programs aren't just testing, are you capable, but they often are like trying to see like, is your level of autism going to be palatable for how we work around here? That's a lot of these programs. So I, I think that like they're well-intended, but there's some problems with it. But then we think of people, Google, NASA, where they've went to skills based models, right? So they do hire more autistic and Dyslexic individuals. But everybody getting hired for X job goes through like a skills based assessment, they rely less on the interpersonal component. Now I understand those tend to be science and tech jobs. But at least they're creating like a more neural inclusive path to employment. It's more equitable. Exactly.

[00:28:21] Dr. Praslova 
 And that's really skills based hiring is what I emphasize as well, because so much hiring is simply not valid. I am Why would you test bragging skills for someone who is going to do accounting or food prep? It doesn't make any sense. But that's what that's the only thing interview tests how well you can brag about yourself. It's irrelevant. When you would do skills, assessments, and they don't have to be long, you can do a very valid skill sampling, specifically tailored and relevant for the job in 30 minutes. You don't have to give people this huge, you know, three weeks of unpaid work. You can test relevant skills, if you carefully determine the job in which school skills go with it. You can give assessment in a very reasonable amount of time, and you will end up with better hiring system period. There is no need to invent something separate and unequal for some groups, because you really are going to have something that just works for good selection for this particular position. And if autistic people have those work related skills, and wonderful if dyslexia If people if any other neurodivergent people have skills for that particular job, why do we have any kind of special program, and especially trying to modify who people are. And

[00:29:46] Dr. Haskins 
 I think what you said about skills based hiring really makes sense, especially when you consider how many people with neurodiverse conditions often have unique skills and perspectives that could be very valuable in the workplace. By focusing on skills rather than trying to fit people into predetermined categories, we open up opportunities for everyone while also benefiting from a more diverse workforce.

[00:30:34] Dr. Praslova: So I know that you have tons of examples. I know that there's organizations that want to get it right. A lot of them lean on awareness and training. But how do you really approach helping organizations the like, we want to get this rate, we want to be more neuron inclusive? What seems to be the best first step for organizations to take? Like, where do you start with them?

[00:31:04] Dr. Praslova: I start with assessment and understanding particular unique needs of this organization, I do not believe in a one size fits all, when it comes to individuals. And I don't believe in a one size fits all when it comes to organization. I am first and foremost a cultural psychologist, that's my origin, I know that the same intervention is not going to work within different cultures. So we need to understand particular culture of their organization, particular issues that they struggle with, and just do audit of their needs. And each organization very often has specific pain points. And I like systemic inclusion, have you read anything, all right, I'm all about systemic inclusion, and addressing in youth, everything from hiring to leadership pipelines. But when you come into organization, there is very often a pain point. It could be other training that just burns people out, and is not meant for anyone's brain, not just for neurodivergent brain, very often, it's their promotion program, that leaves many people bitter and angry, because there is so much perceived unfairness and favoritism and who knows what reasons why people get promoted or not promoted. So once you address the pain point, for everyone, you get so much more support across all the different people in organization, not necessarily will just look at the special diversity group, or divergent or any other group, but you get a big support coalition, because people see it that when we addressed that pain point, that particular, you know, a source of toxicity, that's where those nasty gases are coming from, that people see that, okay? What is happening really is for everybody, it's helping everybody and you get so much more support of that you can start fixing the entire system and people are going to be not everyone is going to be always enthusiastic about everything, but you're going to have a much larger support coalition than you would have otherwise, some organizations are more here, and top down than others. And there are sometimes organizations who decide, okay, we're just going to publish the executive decision and rammed things through the problem, of course, is that everything kind of hinges on that particular leader do you think happens to them, they change their mind they leave whatever. The entire system can crumble very often. So, really, creating organizations where there is a multi-level understanding and kind of universal understanding that we're creating an inclusive culture rather than a set of pronouncements. To me, it makes more sense. I'm, I tend to be very noisy here and egalitarian in my thinking. And organizations typically do have smoother transitions. When there is a slow Building of coalition, something that's done top down can be kind of effective for a while, or it can appear a factor. But there are not many examples of lasting change, when it's just top down. If you create a change, where a lot more people see the point, and understand that the change addresses all of their pain points, you tend to create much deeper and more lasting change. Even if in the beginning, it takes a tiny bit longer, isn't it also trying to cram a whole other book I want arrived into, like two minutes. 

Dr. Haskins But it's an interesting thing, because you and I know a lot of people will reach out and say, educate our people on this, we need more awareness. And I do agree awareness, like you have to know of a problem before you're going to solve a problem. So I think there is value there. But I think that some organizations think Well, we, you know, I told you it was a problem, and I gave you some resources, and they're not doing it. Do you see that? Like, so one of the things you called out is that the source has to be specific. And I do think a lot of organizations are like, Oh, well, Microsoft did this. So we're going to duplicate it. And so I think that's where a we might be seeing problems and then be, they're like, well, we gave them information, they should be aware that what they should be doing, and then things continually fall flat. I think that neurodiversity is harder than some of the other disability-inclusive, inclusive initiatives that came out through accommodations. Because for me, and I think you were saying this, too, I don't want questions ahead of time or just like an accommodation in the process. Neuro inclusion really requires a shift in culture and a people mindset, are you seeing more organizations understanding that it really has to just get me to get into how we're interacting with each other, and that it's not just an accommodation we can throw at it? Yes.

[00:37:09] Dr. Praslova And I have some very interesting examples now where people are starting to think more broadly. First of all, when I when I teach in the workplace, I do those awareness sessions. And there are different ways to do to do them. So one thing I always stress with regard to disability in general, and in a specific type of neuro divergence, whatever the organization is interested in, is that accommodations do not equal inclusion. People can have accommodations, and they can still be bullied and mistreated and seen as not promotable. So accommodations can be a necessary prerequisite for some people, but it's nowhere near sufficient, or inclusion. And that I think helps people see, okay, so we can just say that here's a manual for accommodations, and we're done. And there are more people now who are thinking more flexibly. So depending, when this podcast comes out, I did some interesting writing also on long COVID. Because if you think about long COVID In a way, there's brain fog, there's all kinds of neurological differences that occur in that condition, that very much fall under the broader umbrella of neuro divergence, not like neuro minority in the way that you were born right by the board or you're a divergence applies. And now organizations are kind of a little bit more amenable to conversation. Okay, so how do we even broaden it to all the different things that could happen to meet friends? And that kind of helps to get them to see okay, so we can just say, Okay, here's a list of accommodation for autistic people. Here's a list of accommodations for long COVID or whatever, and leave me alone. They really start thinking that systemic change and making organizations more flexible to support different kinds of people actually makes organizations more resilient because, you know, with disability, things happen. Someone can have an accident, someone can have a bug from from sitting on the plane. At next to someone, and if your organization is not prepared for things that happen all the time in light, and they just pretend that those things don't exist, and they just always going to have this perfect employee that's in their mind, that's going to do XYZ and never ask questions and never needing a thing. It's not a resilient organization, because very few humans feed that idea that people have in their mind. So organizations need to flex and adapt to different levels of strength to maximize whatever it is that we can do. And whatever it is that we can do well, and then someone else can do things that they can do well, and that is what is creating a stronger organization, not sticking to the idea of a non existing individual that is going to answer phones, crunch numbers, and sing karaoke at your parties.

[00:41:14] Dr. Haskins: And what I love is how our conversation has literally transformed for those that are following where we started talking about neurodiversity as the difference in the neuro divergence, and we've landed on organizations, you say you need talent, you want to survive, you want to stay competitive, you want to stay flexible. And Dr. Praslova has really just brought us on the gamut that if you start really thinking about truly integrating a healthy organization, we achieve inclusion, but they achieve stability, they get the talent are seeking, they are resilient during times of change. And with an aging population, right? We're going to see more disabilities, anyway.

[00:41:57] Dr. Praslova: Exactly. Exactly. And why not? Just learn how to function in that reality. In actual human reality that yes, we change shoe age. But that's okay, we still have a ton of experience that could be used. Unless your idea is that anyone who is you know, over 25 is a crime, which unfortunately, kind of happens in some organizations. And

[00:42:27] Dr. Haskins: that would be another topic. Definitely for another day. So our time has flown together. And I think we could just talk for hours and hours. Before we conclude our time together today. Are there any parting words you have for those listening, that are like, I really want to do this? And she just said, I have to really be mindful on my own needs. What do you want to say to our guests? Where should they start? How can they contact you?

[00:42:58] Dr. Praslova: I'm very easy to find on LinkedIn, if you just Google my name, my LinkedIn is probably going to come up. If you search for me on LinkedIn, it's going to come up. And that's the main version of social media I use. There's a lot of my writings are, there's, it's, it's kind of the easiest place to find me. But you know, you can find with our my university website, and my local website is almost done. So hopefully a little bit up very soon, and they're ours, so many different things we can do. Depending on who we are. It might be different. It could be supporting your co workers and daily interactions, and reminding everyone, did we make this meeting accessible? Did everyone have a time for their input? What some people want to send their thoughts after the meeting, if you didn't speak up, just basic, everyday things that could support change. And then other people might have leverage where they could change organizational policies, really any kind of change, making matters. I talk about it in the last chapter of my book, any form of change making can lead to significant difference in what if you think like, you know, I'm just this, the Borsa with a modest title, and then even how we go about our daily life, including our self care, including our mindful disclosure of who we are, and all we show our authenticity to the world, literally anything that aligns with who you are in life. Don't, I never tell people just force you to do something that you're completely uncomfortable with. If you don't want to disclose everything about yourself, you may not be ready. But if you do want to disclose, you might be able to communicate to others that okay, there are examples of people in very successful careers that actually have struggled or are struggling with the same thing that I'm dealing with. So responsible disclosure, I'm very disclosed, obviously, about my autistic identity, because it's a huge part of what I do. But it's a very individual decision, we all need to figure out what works for us kind of like organizations, figure out what works for your organization, the same thing for us. People don't have to turn into you, people don't have to turn into me, they can find their own way to make a difference. And again, everything counts and everything matters. You. Someone wants to be YouTuber, someone like stick talk, someone just likes helping people in their workplace. And I think really, every type of action is valuable, because the need is still great. The levels of unemployment are still great. So any positive message we can send in the world in the world pounds, because

[00:46:36] Dr. Haskins: every single step matters. So it's a no, I can't thank you enough for spending time with me today. I hope that those listening are so inspired, just speaking up for themselves or co-worker, that also brings big change because it's going to take an army of us to realize the change that we're all seeking. I want to thank you all for your time today and, most importantly, Dr. Slava for being with me. And I encourage you all to continue to think differently. And we'll talk to you next time.

[00:47:11] Dr. Praslova: this has been fantastic. Thank you so much for hosting me today.

[00:47:15] Dr. Haskins: Thank you for being here. Thank you for listening to this episode of Think Differently. I hope you found our discussion today insightful and thought-provoking. I want to thank Audio Works Studios for their exceptional production and recording support. Without their expertise and dedication, this podcast would not be possible. If you enjoyed this episode, we encourage you to share it with others. Your support helps us to reach new audiences and promote neurodiversity in our world. Also, be sure to subscribe to this podcast on I Heart Radio, Spotify, Apple podcasts, or your favorite platforms so that you can stay up to date on the latest episodes. We look forward to seeing you again soon and think differently.