If you’ve ever managed, worked alongside, or been a neurodivergent professional who’s been labelled “difficult to communicate with,” there’s a good chance the real story involves what researchers now call the double empathy problem at work — and it’s far more nuanced than it first appears.
For decades, the dominant narrative around autism and communication has been one-sided: autistic people are assumed to lack social skills, and the burden of “fixing” communication breakdowns falls on them. But in 2012, autistic researcher Dr Damian Milton challenged this assumption with a concept that has since reshaped how psychologists, employers, and coaches think about neurodivergent communication: the double empathy problem.
What Is the Double Empathy Problem?
The double empathy problem proposes that communication difficulties between autistic and non-autistic people are not caused by a deficit in the autistic person alone. Instead, they arise from a mutual mismatch in understanding between two different communication styles and ways of processing the world.
In other words: it’s not that autistic people struggle to read neurotypical social cues. It’s that both autistic and neurotypical people often struggle to read each other — because they’re working from different, equally valid, frameworks for communication.
Research has supported this reframe. Studies have found that neurotypical people are often no better at interpreting autistic communication than autistic people are at interpreting neurotypical communication — and in some cases, autistic people understand each other more accurately than mixed groups understand one another. The breakdown isn’t a deficiency on one side; it’s friction between two different operating systems.
For HR and Managers: What the Double Empathy Problem Means for You
If you manage or support a neurodivergent employee who’s hit friction with colleagues, it’s worth pausing before assuming the fix sits entirely with them.
Reconsider “difficult” as a two-way read. When feedback repeatedly describes someone as “blunt,” “rigid,” or “hard to work with,” it’s worth asking: hard to work with for whom, and why? Often what’s labelled a personality problem is really a communication style mismatch that neither side has had the tools to bridge.
Look at the pattern, not just the incidents. Recurring friction with one particular colleague — rather than broad, universal conflict — often signals a specific clash in styles rather than a general deficit. That distinction matters for how you intervene.
Coaching one person isn’t the whole solution. Individual coaching can give a neurodivergent employee valuable tools — but if the surrounding team and management culture don’t also build understanding of neurodivergent communication, the same friction is likely to resurface with someone else. Awareness training for the wider team isn’t a nice-to-have; it’s often what makes coaching stick.
Disclosure and documentation matter. Understanding whether an employee has formally disclosed, what adjustments (if any) are in place, and what documented feedback exists — versus informal complaints — helps separate genuine performance issues from communication-style friction that can be addressed through better mutual understanding.
For Neurodivergent Professionals: What This Means for You
If you’ve been told you’re “too direct,” “too literal,” or “hard to read,” it’s worth knowing: that framing is incomplete.
The friction isn’t proof you’re doing something wrong. Many neurodivergent professionals internalise workplace conflict as personal failure — feeling they are fundamentally bad at the social side of work. The double empathy problem reframes this: communication breakdowns are mutual, not a one-sided deficit in you.
You can build translation tools without abandoning your strengths. Tools that help you navigate ambiguity, read context more explicitly, or decide when “being right” matters less than “being effective” are additions to your toolkit — not corrections of who you are. The goal isn’t to mask more; it’s to have more options available when they’re useful.
You’re allowed to ask for mutual adaptation. Advocating for clearer, more explicit communication from colleagues and managers — rather than only adjusting yourself — is a legitimate and often necessary part of making a workplace actually work for you.
The environment matters as much as your own approach. If the wider team or organisation isn’t neurodivergent-aware, even significant personal growth may not resolve recurring friction. That’s not a reflection of your effort — it’s a sign the environment also needs to change.
Bridging Both Perspectives
The double empathy problem doesn’t let anyone off the hook — but it does distribute responsibility more fairly. Workplace communication breakdowns involving neurodivergent employees are rarely a one-person problem, and treating them that way often leads to coaching that falls short, retention risk, and neurodivergent talent feeling perpetually “othered” rather than understood.
The most effective approach combines:
- Coaching for the neurodivergent employee — building tools to translate their thinking and communication style across different audiences, and to advocate for what they need.
- Awareness and training for managers and teams — building genuine understanding of neurodivergent communication styles, rather than expecting one person to carry the full weight of adapting.
The Takeaway
The more workplaces treat communication as a two-way skill — one that everyone needs to build, not just the neurodivergent person in the room — the more likely friction resolves, and stays resolved.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the double empathy problem in simple terms?
The double empathy problem is the idea that communication difficulties between autistic and non-autistic people are a two-way issue — not a deficit in the autistic person alone. Both sides often struggle to interpret each other’s communication styles, because they’re working from genuinely different but equally valid frameworks. It was first described by autistic researcher Dr Damian Milton in 2012.
Does the double empathy problem apply to all neurodivergent conditions, or just autism?
Dr Milton’s original research focused on autism, but the broader principle — that communication friction is often a mutual mismatch rather than a one-sided deficit — applies across many neurodivergent profiles, including ADHD, dyspraxia, and others. The specific dynamics differ, but the reframe of mutual responsibility is widely relevant.
What can HR and managers do about the double empathy problem?
The most impactful steps are: investing in neurodiversity awareness training for the wider team (not just coaching the neurodivergent individual), reviewing how “difficult” behaviour is labelled and investigated, ensuring reasonable adjustments and disclosure processes are clear, and creating an environment where communication differences are understood rather than penalised.
How does neurodiversity coaching help with the double empathy problem?
Coaching supports neurodivergent professionals in building tools to navigate different communication styles — not by masking or suppressing who they are, but by expanding their options. It can also help with self-advocacy, so they can ask for the clearer, more explicit communication they’re entitled to. For organisations, coaching works best alongside team awareness training rather than as a standalone fix.
How do I find out more about neurodiversity coaching for myself or my team?
I offer 1:1 neurodiversity coaching for individuals and bespoke neurodiversity awareness training for organisations and teams. You can book a free 30-minute discovery call to explore what would work best for you or your organisation — no pressure, just a conversation.
Ready to explore how coaching or training could help?
Book a free 30-minute discovery call with Merrigan at tidycal.com/thrivecoachinglondon23 — or get in touch at thrivecoachinglondon23@gmail.com.
