Annual review of a neurodivergent employee: pitfalls to avoid and the right questions
This key moment in management can become counterproductive — even discriminatory — if you do not adapt it. Here is the complete guide for managers, HR, and Disability Mission leaders.
The annual performance review is one of the most emotionally charged managerial rituals for a neurodivergent employee. ADHD, autism (ASD), DYS disorders, high potential, anxiety disorder: these profiles often approach this moment with disproportionate anxiety, a lack of perspective on their own work, and increased vulnerability to implicit wording or ambiguous feedback. For the untrained manager, this meeting becomes a source of misunderstandings, even of unintentional discrimination. This guide provides you with all the keys to transform the annual review into a lever for engagement and inclusive performance — by avoiding pitfalls, asking the right questions, and adapting the framework without complicating your practice.
1. Why the classic annual review is not suitable for neurodivergent profiles
1.1 A format designed for neurotypical brains
The standard annual review relies on a set of implicit assumptions that correspond to neurotypical cognitive functioning: the ability to synthesize an entire year of work from memory, ease in introspection and self-evaluation, stress management in formal evaluation situations, correct interpretation of indirect or ambiguous wording, and the ability to quickly switch from one topic to another in response to the manager's questions. For a neurodivergent employee, each of these implicit skills can be significantly weakened — and their failure will then be wrongly interpreted as a lack of motivation, professionalism, or involvement.
An employee with ADHD, for example, will have significant difficulties in providing a global and chronological view of the past year, not because they did not work, but because episodic memory is one of the most fragile executive functions in ADHD. They will remember in a fragmented way, often starting with the most recent or emotionally salient episodes. An employee with ASD may struggle with the implicit dimension of managerial feedback ("we could consider improving…", "there may be room for progress on…") — formulations they will interpret literally, without understanding the real implications. A DYS employee may be paralyzed by the self-evaluation grid to fill out by hand, or by the need to produce a structured oral presentation within a constrained time frame.
These mismatches are systemic and invisible: they are not related to the employee's unwillingness or the manager's incompetence. They result from a professional norm that has never been questioned, designed for a dominant but not universal cognitive functioning.
1.2 The figures that challenge current practices
According to INSERM, about 15 to 20% of the population presents a form of neurodiversity — ADHD, ASD, DYS disorders (dyslexia, dyspraxia, dyscalculia, dysorthography), high intellectual potential, structural anxiety disorder, or other. In a company of 200 employees, this represents between 30 and 40 people. The vast majority of these profiles are not declared in RQTH (Recognition of the Quality of Disabled Worker): either because the diagnosis occurred late in adulthood, or because the employee fears stigma, or simply because they have never been informed of their rights.
The McKinsey study "Diversity Wins" (2020) establishes a clear correlation between the cognitive diversity of teams and their performance: companies in the top quartile of diversity have a 36% higher likelihood of financial overperformance compared to their competitors. France Stratégie estimates that the employment of people with disabilities (a large portion of whom are neurodivergent) represents an untapped potential for GDP growth. The question is therefore not only ethical — it is strategic and economic.
15–20 % of employees
are neurodivergent — ADHD, autism, DYS disorders, HPI… Most without official diagnosis or declared RQTH.
+36 % performance
for companies with high cognitive diversity according to McKinsey Diversity Wins 2020.
Legal obligation
The law of February 11, 2005 requires reasonable accommodation of the workplace — which includes evaluation methods.
OETH: minimum 6 %
of employment of disabled workers in companies with more than 20 employees. Each activated RQTH counts.
1.3 The legal framework: what you need to know
The law of February 11, 2005 for equal rights and opportunities, participation, and citizenship of disabled people imposes on employers a principle of reasonable accommodation of working conditions — and this obligation extends to evaluation methods. Failing to adapt the annual review for an employee whose disability (visible or invisible, declared or not) impacts their communication, self-assessment, or stress management abilities may constitute indirect discrimination under the law.
The OETH (Obligation to Employ Disabled Workers) sets the minimum share of recognized disabled workers in companies with more than 20 employees at 6 %. Companies that do not meet this quota pay a contribution to the AGEFIPH (private sector) or the FIPHFP (public sector). These organizations also fund workplace accommodations, awareness training, and support tools — a resource that many companies do not utilize sufficiently.
The professional equality index and the CSR/ESG commitments of large groups increasingly incorporate the dimension of disability and neurodiversity into their indicators. An inappropriate annual review that leads to a mutual termination or sick leave of a neurodivergent employee thus has measurable direct and indirect costs — on the DOETH, on the index, on the employer brand.
⚠️ Legal warning: The wording of certain objectives or feedback in the annual review may be reclassified as indirect discrimination if it systematically penalizes characteristics related to an undeclared disability. A manager who penalizes "lack of organization" without prior accommodation for an employee with ADHD exposes themselves to real legal risk. Training for managers is the first line of defense.
2. The 8 classic traps of the annual review with a neurodiverse employee
2.1 The trap of implicit feedback
French managerial feedback is often built on the implicit, the litotes, and indirect wording. "There is room for improvement," "we could consider going further on," "I encourage you to work on your communication with the team" — all these formulations, for a neurotypical interlocutor, are clearly interpreted as criticisms or injunctions to change. For an employee with autism or certain ADHD profiles who process language very literally, these formulations will not be understood as such. The employee will leave the review convinced that everything is fine, while the manager believes they have clearly indicated several urgent areas for improvement.
The remedy is simple but requires stylistic discipline: formulate each feedback directly, positively, and actionably. Not "there is room for improvement in your time management," but "I invite you to use the visual timer we set up together every morning before 9 AM to list your three priorities." Precision replaces the implicit. The consequence is explicitly named. The expected action is clearly described.
2.2 The trap of unprepared self-assessment
Asking a neurodiverse employee to fill out their self-assessment grid within 48 hours before the review, without specific guidelines, often amounts to asking them to do the impossible. The episodic memory of ADHD profiles is highly fragmented — they will tend to evaluate themselves based on the last two or three months, overweighting recent failures and forgetting successes from the first half of the year. Anxious profiles (common in neurodiverse contexts) will tend to systematically undervalue themselves. Employees with autism will struggle with subjective scales ("satisfactory / very satisfactory / insufficient") that require self-judgment.
The solution: send the self-assessment grid two weeks in advance with a filled example, provide a list of achievements from the year (that you have recorded in your managerial log throughout the year), and offer the possibility to respond in writing before the oral review. This last point is particularly important: for many neurodiverse profiles, written expression is more accessible than oral expression in a pressure context.
2.3 The trap of the location and format
The glass meeting room, in an open space, where everyone can see that you are in a performance review — this is the worst possible context for an anxious neurodiverse employee. The sensory environment (noise, light, visibility) can mobilize most of the available cognitive resources, to the detriment of communication. The face-to-face format in an evaluation position can trigger an intense stress reaction that blocks thought and speech.
Prefer a closed and quiet office. For certain profiles (notably those with autism), suggest a walk — walking while talking reduces the intensity of the face-to-face and promotes fluid exchanges. For hypervigilant profiles, communicate the time and place several days in advance, and confirm the day before. The unexpected is a major source of stress for many neurodiverse profiles.
2.4 The trap of non-SMART objectives
Setting vague objectives for a neurodiverse employee guarantees their non-achievement. "Improve your communication with stakeholders" or "be more proactive on the files" are objectives that remain unfulfilled for someone who struggles with social inference and spontaneous planning. The precision of SMART objectives (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, Time-bound) is a universal good managerial practice — but it becomes an absolute necessity with neurodiverse profiles.
💡 SMART adapted golden rule: Each objective must answer these five questions — What exactly? How do I measure that it is achieved? With what resources? In how much time? What intermediate milestones? For an ADHD collaborator, always add a monthly follow-up point to the agenda right from the annual review.
2.5 The trap of comparison with others
Any implicit or explicit comparison with other team members is counterproductive with a neurodivergent profile. "Others manage this well," "your colleagues don't have this problem" — these phrases activate shame and anxiety far more than they motivate. They reinforce the feeling of being inadequate in a world designed for others — a feeling that many neurodivergent individuals have carried since childhood and which can trigger a spiral of devaluation.
Evaluation must always be individual, grounded in the objectives set for this specific collaborator, and in their own development from one year to the next. "This year, compared to last year, you have..." is an infinitely more effective and respectful formulation than any reference to others.
2.6 The trap of unannounced duration
For many neurodivergent profiles — and particularly ADHD — not knowing how long the meeting will last is a source of anxiety that can monopolize a significant part of the available cognitive resources. Anticipating the end takes more energy than the content of the exchange. Always indicate the expected duration, the structure of the meeting, and the main topics addressed right from the start.
2.7 The trap of misinterpreted silence
Some neurodivergent profiles — particularly autism — need longer processing times to respond to a question. A silence of 5 to 8 seconds after an open question is not a sign of disinterest or embarrassment: it is the normal processing time for a brain that analyzes thoroughly before responding. The manager who fills this silence with a new question or a rephrasing deprives their interlocutor of the time they need and generates a cognitive overload that blocks communication.
Learn to tolerate silence. Count mentally to ten before rephrasing. This simple adjustment can radically transform the quality of a meeting with an autism profile.
2.8 The trap of unshared reports
The annual review ends, the manager takes notes, the collaborator leaves without a written record of the exchanges. For an ADHD profile whose working memory is fragile, two weeks later they often will have no precise memory of the commitments made or the areas for improvement discussed. Worse: if the memories of the manager and the collaborator diverge (which is common), the trust relationship can be durably weakened.
Always share a clear and structured written report within 48 hours following the meeting. For ADHD profiles, a summary in bullet points with the three key points, the three objectives, and the three next actions is more useful than a long narrative text. Use the DYNSEO inclusive annual review template as a support — it is designed to structure these exchanges in an accessible way.
Summary table: traps vs. best practices
| Frequent trap | Impact on the neurodivergent collaborator | Recommended alternative |
|---|---|---|
| ✗ Trap Implicit/understated feedback | Misunderstanding of the real message (autism, ADHD) | ✓ Solution Direct, factual, actionable feedback |
| ✗ Trap Self-evaluation within 48 hours | Recency bias, anxious under-evaluation | Grid sent 2 weeks in advance + list of achievements |
| ✗ Trap Glass room/open space | Sensory overload, cognitive blockage | Quiet closed office, possible walking |
| ✗ Trap Vague objectives | Inability to plan and evaluate the result | SMART objectives with monthly milestones |
| ✗ Trap Comparison to the team | Shame, devaluation, anxious spiral | Individual evaluation on personal progress |
| ✗ Trap Unannounced duration | Anticipation anxiety, loss of cognitive resources | Structure and duration announced at the start |
| ✗ Trap Silence filled too quickly | Overload, truncated response (autism) | Tolerate 8-10 seconds of silence after each question |
| ✗ Trap No written report | Forgetfulness of commitments, memory divergence | Report in bullet points within 48 hours |
3. Preparing the annual review: the 5-step protocol
3.1 Step 1: Keep a managerial log throughout the year
The difficulty of the annual review begins well before the meeting itself: it lies in the preparation. A manager who has not taken regular notes on the achievements, difficulties, and behaviors of their collaborator throughout the year will be led to evaluate based on their memory — thus overemphasizing recent episodes and emotionally significant events. This memory bias can unjustly caricature the profile of a neurodivergent collaborator whose performance can sometimes be irregular.
The best practice is to keep, for each collaborator, a monthly managerial log of 5 to 10 lines: notable facts (positive and negative), achievements, requested adjustments, observed responses. This material will be the objective basis for the annual review — and will allow for a discussion grounded in facts rather than general impressions.
Monthly logbook
Note each month: 3 achievements, 1 difficulty observed, 1 adjustment made. 10 minutes per month is enough.
Advance transmission of materials
Send the self-assessment grid and the list of achievements 2 weeks before the interview.
Confirmation of location and duration
Confirm 48 hours in advance: room, time, expected duration (e.g. "1h30, in 3 parts"). No surprises.
Preparation of open questions
Prepare 5 to 8 concrete questions and send them in advance if the employee requests it.
Report within 48 hours
Write a structured report (assessment / objectives / action plan) and request validation from the employee.
3.2 Adapt the self-assessment grid
The standard self-assessment grid often contains ambiguous formulations, poorly defined subjective scales, and very broad open questions. For a neurodivergent employee, several simple adaptations can transform the experience: replace scales like "insufficient / progressing / satisfactory / very satisfactory" with more concrete and behavioral formulations ("I achieve this goal in more than 80% of cases / in 50 to 80% of cases / in less than 50% of cases"); break down general questions ("how do you assess your contribution to the team?") into specific questions ("name two projects you collaborated on with the team this year", "describe a situation where you helped a colleague"); and systematically offer the possibility to respond in writing, in advance, for employees who prefer it.
Manage a neurodivergent employee
This online training, 100% remote and at your own pace, gives you all the keys to adapt your posture, tools, and interviews to employees with ADHD, autism, DYS disorders, and HPI. It is aimed at managers, HR directors, team leaders, disability mission managers, and executives. Deployable in-house or inter-company, fundable via OPCO and skills development plan.
Discover the training →4. The right questions to ask during the interview
4.1 Questions to explore achievements
Open and abstract questions ("tell me about your year") are the least suitable for neurodivergent profiles. Prefer questions rooted in concrete situations, which allow your interlocutor to rely on specific facts rather than synthesizing a global impression. These "situational questions" are recognized as the most predictive in interviews — they validate actual behaviors rather than stated intentions.
📋 Effective questions about achievements
- ➜ "What is the achievement you are most proud of this year? Describe to me what you did concretely."
- ➜ "Is there a file or a situation this year where you really found the right solution — which one?"
- ➜ "What task or project gave you the most energy this year? Why?"
- ➜ "Is there a moment when you helped a colleague or contributed to a collective success? Tell me about it."
- ➜ "Regarding the goal X we set at the beginning of the year, what happened?"
4.2 Questions to explore difficulties without stigmatizing
Exploring areas for improvement with a neurodivergent profile requires particularly careful wording. The goal is to create a safe space where the employee can express their difficulties without fear of being judged or penalized. This psychological safety is the sine qua non condition for implementing relevant adjustments — without it, the employee will mask their difficulties instead of seeking solutions with you.
🔍 Effective questions about difficulties
- ➜ "Are there work situations that cost you a lot of energy? Which ones?"
- ➜ "If you could change one thing in your work environment, what would it be?"
- ➜ "Are there times during the day or week when you feel less effective? What happens at those times?"
- ➜ "Are there types of tasks for which you would like to have more resources or support?"
- ➜ "How do you experience communication with the team and with me? What works well, what could work better?"
4.3 Questions to co-construct the objectives for the following year
Co-constructing objectives is particularly important with neurodivergent profiles. An imposed objective without discussion will be much less followed than an objective on which the employee had a say — especially because only they know what is realistic given their cognitive resources and the compensatory strategies they have developed. This co-construction is also an opportunity to negotiate concrete adjustments that will facilitate the achievement of the objectives.
🎯 Questions for co-constructing goals
- ➜ "What goal would make you want to get up in the morning next year?"
- ➜ "To achieve goal X, what do you need that I haven't given you yet?"
- ➜ "What would help you better organize yourself on this type of file?"
- ➜ "It is said that goal X is achieved when… what indicator would you use?"
- ➜ "How often would you prefer to meet to take stock during the year?"
4.4 Questions to never ask
Some formulations, trivial in standard annual interviews, can have a detrimental impact on a neurodivergent employee. It is essential to be aware of them to systematically avoid them.
| Risky question | Why it's problematic | Recommended alternative |
|---|---|---|
| "How do you get along with your colleagues?" | Too vague, anxiety-inducing, can activate social shame (autism, ADHD) | "Tell me an example of successful collaboration this year." |
| "Aren't you overwhelmed?" | Calls for minimization, often biased response towards "no" | "What is your average workload? Out of 10?" |
| "Why didn't you manage to…" | Focused on failure, guilt-inducing, emotional blockage | "What happened with this file? What could have helped?" |
| "Others manage to handle this…" | Humiliating comparison, shame, devaluation | "Compared to last year, how do you position yourself on this point?" |
| "Do you think there's a motivation problem?" | Behavioral interpretation without factual basis | "Which projects energized you the most this year?" |
5. Annual interview and specific profiles: adapt according to diagnosis
5.1 ADHD employee: key adaptations
The ADHD employee generally presents specific difficulties in the context of the annual interview: fragmented episodic memory that makes the review exercise difficult, poor time management that can cause them to arrive late or struggle to manage the duration of the interview, emotional hyperreactivity that can turn critical feedback into confrontation, and a tendency towards distractibility that can make it difficult to maintain the thread of conversation for 1.5 hours.
Recommended adaptations: send the list of achievements from the year in advance (you kept your logbook!), structure the interview in short blocks of 20-25 minutes with a micro-pause in between, use a shared visual support (board, post-its on goals) to anchor the conversation, and provide a visible timer for each part. The JOE application from DYNSEO, which stimulates cognitive functions in adults, can also be recommended to your employee as a reinforcement tool outside of work.
5.2 Autism employee: key adaptations
The autistic employee often develops very effective masking strategies (hiding difficulties) that can make them appear perfectly neurotypical on the surface — until exhaustion. The annual interview can be a moment when this mask cracks, generating incomprehensible reactions for an uninformed manager. The main adaptations: announce the precise plan for the interview in advance in writing, avoid any changes to the agenda on the day, train yourself to interpret a "yes" that means "I understood your question" (and not "I approve") and to allow sufficient silence after each question.
Avoid metaphorical or abstract questions ("how do you see your long-term evolution?") without anchoring them in concrete examples. Prefer written communication over oral whenever possible for profiles that request it. And be wary of overly positive self-assessments: an autistic employee who says "everything is fine" does not always mean it — they often respond to what they perceive as the expected answer in this particular social context.
5.3 DYS employee: key adaptations
Dyslexic, dyspraxic, or dyscalculic employees may struggle with the formal aspects of the interview: self-assessment grid to read and fill out, report to review and validate, numerical objectives presented in a dense table. The adaptations are simple: readable font (Arial, Calibri 12pt minimum), generous spacing between lines, the possibility to dictate responses rather than write them, or to use a voice recorder to capture memories in preparation.
The DYS Disorders in the Workplace training from DYNSEO is a valuable resource for all managers who wish to deepen their understanding of these profiles and adapt their practice on a daily basis.
5.4 Employee with invisible disability (anxiety, depression, fibromyalgia…)
Invisible disability covers a very broad spectrum — generalized anxiety disorder, recurrent depression, fibromyalgia, lupus, epilepsy, silent chronic illnesses. These employees are often in great fragility around the annual interview because it reactivates mechanisms of fear of judgment and catastrophic anticipation. The key is to de-dramatize the format from the invitation: "This is not an exam, it's a discussion about your situation and your projects." And if necessary, provide the option to postpone by a week if the employee is going through a difficult time on the day.
The Invisible Disability: What Managers Need to Know training from DYNSEO specifically addresses these situations — including sensitive issues of confidentiality, disability recognition, and workplace accommodations.
6. DYNSEO tools for an inclusive annual interview
DYNSEO has developed a catalog of practical downloadable tools to facilitate the implementation of inclusive management on a daily basis. Here are the most useful resources for the annual interview:
📋 Inclusive annual interview template
Turnkey structure to prepare and conduct an interview suitable for neuroatypical profiles.
Download →💬 Neuroatypical communication sheet
Formulations to prioritize and avoid according to the profile (ADHD, autism, DYS disorders).
Download →📊 Neurodiversity management adaptation grid
Observation grid to identify the adaptation needs of each collaborator.
Download →💡 Neurodiversity feedback guide
Formulate useful and reassuring feedback for neuroatypical profiles.
Download →✅ Inclusive onboarding checklist
To prepare for the arrival and integration of a neuroatypical collaborator.
Download →🗂️ Complete tools catalog
More than 50 practical tools for inclusive management on a daily basis.
See all tools →🎓 Train your managers in neurodiversity
The training Managing a neuroatypical collaborator from DYNSEO is available online, Qualiopi certified, and deployable in multi-collaborator licenses for your entire HR and managerial team. OPCO funding and skills development plan accepted.
7. Integrate the annual review into a global inclusive HR strategy
7.1 The inclusive annual review as a lever for OETH and DOETH
Adapting the annual review is not just a matter of managerial goodwill — it is a strategic lever to improve your OETH declaration and reduce your AGEFIPH contribution. A better-adapted annual review reduces the risk of a conventional termination or sick leave for a neuroatypical employee who might feel misunderstood or unfairly evaluated. It also creates a dialogue space conducive to information about RQTH — many employees are unaware that they can benefit from this recognition and the adjustments it allows, simply because no one has ever informed them in a trusted environment.
The Disability Mission referent in your company (mandatory in companies with more than 250 employees since the law of September 5, 2018) must be involved upstream to assist managers in identifying employees who may benefit from adjustments and in implementing the necessary adaptations.
7.2 Training managers on a large scale: the DYNSEO model
DYNSEO has developed a B2B catalog of 5 neurodiversity and inclusion trainings, designed for deployment at the company level. These online trainings, certified by Qualiopi, can be deployed in multi-employee licenses and are integrated into your company's skills development plan (PDC). They can be funded through your OPCO (Opco Mobilités, ATLAS, AFDAS, CONSTRUCTYS depending on your sector).
The model is designed so that each manager in the company can follow the training at their own pace, without the constraint of simultaneous availability. The certifying assessments allow for validating the acquired knowledge and tracking it in your annual training report — an asset for your CSR report and your equality index.
7.3 Measurable ROI of neuroatypical inclusion
The return on investment of a well-conducted neuroatypical inclusion policy is documented by several benchmark studies. The McKinsey study "Diversity Wins" (2020) establishes a correlation between cognitive diversity and financial performance. An OECD study (2023) shows that companies investing in accessibility and workplace adjustments see their turnover rate decrease significantly — with the replacement cost of an employee estimated between 50% and 200% of their annual salary. France Stratégie estimates the economic cost of non-inclusion of disabled people in employment in France to be several billion euros.
At the team level, a better-adapted annual review that avoids a single "avoidable" conventional termination represents a direct saving of 15,000 to 30,000 euros (recruitment costs + training of the replacement). Add the gains in terms of engagement, creativity, and retention of neuroatypical talents — often endowed with exceptional skills in specific areas — and the ROI becomes evident.
8. DYNSEO applications to support your employees on a daily basis
Beyond the annual review, DYNSEO offers cognitive stimulation applications that can be recommended to your neuroatypical employees as tools for reinforcement and cognitive well-being on a daily basis.
🟦 CLINT — Adults
Cognitive stimulation application for adults — memory, attention, executive functions. Particularly useful for adults with ADHD and autism profiles.
Discover CLINT →🟨 SCARLETT — Seniors
Application dedicated to seniors to maintain cognitive abilities. Useful for senior employees with cognitive disabilities.
Discover SCARLETT →🟩 COCO — Children
Fun application for children aged 5-10. Can support employee parents of neurodiverse children in cognitive support at home.
Discover COCO →🟥 MY DICTIONARY — Communication
Alternative and augmented communication application — ideal for non-verbal autistic employees or those with atypical communication.
Discover MY DICTIONARY →9. Deepen with other trainings from the DYNSEO catalog
The inclusive annual review is part of a global HR approach to managing neurodiversity. To go further, the DYNSEO B2B catalog offers five complementary trainings:
DYS disorders in the workplace: identify, adapt, and value
Working in ESAT: understanding and adapting the environment
❓ FAQ — Annual review and neurodivergent employees
1. Am I required to disclose an employee's diagnosis when preparing for their annual review?
No. The manager does not need to know or mention the diagnosis. They should adapt their practices to the observed needs, not the diagnosis. If the employee has a declared RQTH, the Disability Mission referent can assist in defining accommodations. In any case, the occupational doctor is the only authorized contact to advise on accommodations related to a health condition.
2. How can I objectively assess the performance of an employee with ADHD whose results are very irregular?
Evaluate based on the annual trend, not on the peaks and troughs. Use your monthly logbook to have a complete view. Distinguish results from behaviors: an employee with ADHD can meet their numerical objectives while having problematic organizational behaviors — these two dimensions should be addressed separately in the review.
3. What should I do if the employee refuses to discuss their difficulties during the review?
Respect this refusal. You cannot force them to speak. However, you can create conditions for it to be possible by establishing a trusting relationship throughout the year through regular informal check-ins. Indicate that the door is open for a discussion outside the annual review if needed, and mention the available resources (occupational doctor, PSYCH'aidants, Disability Mission referent).
4. Is the training "Managing a neurodivergent employee" eligible for funding by OPCO?
Yes. The DYNSEO training is Qualiopi certified (No. 11757351875), making it eligible for OPCO funding as part of the skills development plan. Contact your OPCO to learn about the reimbursement conditions based on your industry. DYNSEO also offers multi-employee licenses for deployment across your HR or managerial team.
5. Can an employee request to be accompanied by a third party during their annual review?
Under French law, the annual evaluation interview is not a disciplinary interview — there is therefore no right to assistance from a staff representative. However, nothing prevents an employer from accepting it within the framework of negotiation freedom. For ASD profiles who benefit from support from a job coach or an ESAT, the presence of this support person can be considered if both parties agree.
6. How should I approach the issue of RQTH if the employee has not mentioned it?
Never force or suggest a diagnosis. However, you can mention, in a general and non-targeted way, that the company has a Disability Mission referent who can inform employees about existing provisions (RQTH, accommodations, AGEFIPH) in complete confidentiality. This general information gives the employee the opportunity to take action if they wish, without feeling singled out.
7. My neurodivergent employee has excellent results but a behavior that disrupts the team. How should I address this?
Separate the two dimensions in the review: explicitly praise the results before addressing the behaviors. For behaviors, remain factual ("during the meeting on March 15, you…") and avoid subjective qualifiers ("you are impulsive," "you are disorganized"). Co-construct concrete solutions with your employee — often, they are the first to suffer from their behaviors and seek strategies to manage them.
8. Are there cognitive tests to better understand my employee's profile?
DYNSEO offers an online platform for cognitive tests (non-diagnostic) that can help identify specific functioning profiles. These tests are orientation tools, not medical diagnoses. For an official diagnosis, the employee must consult a neuropsychologist, psychiatrist, or specialized doctor. Find all available tests at dynseo.com/nos-tests.
🚀 Take action: train your managers now
The training Managing a neurodivergent employee from DYNSEO provides your managers with the concrete tools to conduct inclusive annual reviews, set appropriate goals, and create a work environment where every profile can thrive. Qualiopi certified, fundable by OPCO, deployable in multi-employee licenses.
Did this content help you? Support DYNSEO 💙
We are a small team of 14 people based in Paris. For 13 years, we have been creating free content to help families, speech therapists, care homes and healthcare professionals.
Your feedback is the only way we know if our work is useful. A Google review helps us reach other families, caregivers and therapists who need it.
One action, 30 seconds: leave us a Google review ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐. It costs nothing, and it changes everything for us.
