Three Reasons Why Disability Adjustments And Productivity Are The Same Thing

By Dr Nancy Doyle, for Forbes.com

Provision of disability related adjustments is sometimes seen as a competition for scarce resources, or “unfair special treatment”, where a handful of employees gain favours over others. This view has led to what Susan Scott Parker, founder of Business Disability International, calls the “compliance paradox.” Scott-Parker points out that this is a high risk strategy for businesses, where bare minimum disability support is offered and employees have to jump through hoops to participate. Requiring people to prove they have a disability before making it easier for them to do their job inevitably causes ill-will and generates legal risk.

Scott-Parker has teamed up with end-to-end disability adjustments provider Microlink, and the non-profit Purple Space, the global professional development hub for disability employee networks , to create a new report: “Everyone Wins a Balloon.” In the report, they have gathered statistics and stories to illustrate the cost effectiveness of being proactive with disability adjustments, synthesizing data from a range of industry reports, news reporting, plus data analysis from Microlink and Purple Space. They are arguing for a more strategic look at the business value of adjustment management in line with workforce planning. Here’s three stand out stories from the report.

Scott-Parker recalls a quote from a diversity manager, “if we did offer adjustments more widely, we risk opening the floodgates.” Surely this fear in fact belies an indication that a significant number of employees would be more productive were the needed tools and flexibility provided! Indeed, 25% of any large workforce will have a disability and/or health condition that affects their work performance. However, only 3-5% will request adjustments in any given year, even when the support is well advertised. This is hardly a flood. 80% of disabilities are not immediately apparent so require some thought, which is best conducted strategically, as part of workforce planning, rather than in the hands of individual managers. The report points out that with an uncoordinated, medicalised, compliance-orientated “let managers improvise” approach, no one is actually monitoring costs and impacts. Employees might approach facilities management, technology, occupational health, health and safety, procurement, legal and and/or human resources in addition to their line manager.

Many adjustments are free, easy to implement and / or a tiny part of an existing budget like facilities or technology. Yet one woman found that it took her employer 18 months to fit a different light bulb above her desk – one which didn’t cause migraines – and a lot of good will was lost along with productivity.

Microlink’s data indicated that typical costs for a complete end-to-end process comes to as low as few hundred dollars per person, which breaks down to 20% on Assistive Technology, 20% on ergonomic products and 30% is on coaching and training. All of these would benefit from being procured at the group level for both economies of scale and also due diligence in terms of service level agreements and impact evaluation. When adjustments are part of a comprehensive system, management information comes as standard.

Scott-Parker points out, “Your average COO simply doesn’t realise that “unmanaged” responses by definition, simply cannot provide the data which would have persuaded them to introduce a managed process. However, we shouldn’t need to prove that refusing to change that lightbulb making someone sick with migraines, will inevitably cause needless absenteeism – and ill will –and lost productivity –and resignations- and/or litigation.” Further, when we take the medicalised approach, we are sending the clear signal that we distrust our people. “You don’t require your left -handed CFO to see a doctor before giving her the left-handed mouse that lets her work more comfortably. Why would you force her to see an occupational health medic if she had lost her right hand in an accident? Why wouldn’t you just give her a left handed mouse?

An adjustments system which is fit for purpose requires logistics management and disability expertise. This happens at the organizational level, not based on individual diagnoses. It is focused on enhancing job performance, which requires business relevant solutions. In a managed system, the business value comes from enhancing productivity, employee engagement and wellness as you would any other business priority. This means holding a senior leader accountable for the performance of the end to end service line – from advertising the service, to the request, to procurement and delivery. This executive then routinely monitors KPIs such as how long it takes to deliver, how many requests are denied and why, impact on sickness absence, manager and employee satisfaction with the service, reduction in employee relations issues. Case studies in large organisations show it is reasonable to expect most adjustments to be delivered within 20 working days.

Deloitte found that for every £1 spent on mental health at work, a company saw returns of £4.70 on productivity. Employee Assistance Programs (EAP) have been widely implemented in multiple sectors and reduce unnecessary occupational health testing and assessment, as well as reducing sickness absence and presenteeism. A Microlink case study focused on 114 employees who were absent over 12 months with mental health related conditions. The introduction of adjustment management cut absenteeism by circa 83% with basic costs savings of £1 million in just one year.

Scott-Parker point out that nearly 50 % of employees requesting adjustments had only recently acquired their disability and/or health condition. Logically, adjustment management would be funded on a per head subscription basis, so as to provide the insurance cover that enables the business to retain and enhance the productivity of workers who do not yet have disabilities. Other services such as Health Insurance and EAP’s operate on a subscription basis which spreads costs predictably.

That employee engagement leads to improved productivity is not news. What IS news, however, is that the employee engagement gap between non-disabled and disabled employees improved 10 percentage points after introducing an adjustment management system, with a catalogue of preapproved items and a process which didn’t rely on individual manager’s budgets, time and energy, and specialist expertise.

/Scott-Parker explained what drove the research and report: “My frustration at the level of stuckness we see every day, and which disability employee networks describe in every conversation. I can’t believe how many senior leaders are so out of touch with their people – with their human capital – with what it means to be human. They still think this disability adjustment rights thing is an HR problem. No, this is a productivity challenge which requires IT, Property, Facilities Management, Procurement, Employee Relations and HR to line up their game and manage delivery of adjustment packages that can include specialist software, designated parking bays, doors that are easy to open and revised shift schedules. And yes – treating people fairly is good for business.”

The prevalence of disability rises from less than 20% to nearly 40% between our twenties and our sixties Our fifties are a tipping point. In world where the workforce is aging and we need to manage careers beyond historical retirement points , the time has come for the C-suit to take responsibility to provide every employee with the tools and flexibility they need if they are to do their best work. And to make it someone’s job to do so.

And why the ‘Balloons’ you ask? Because when we move beyond ‘ well lots of things don’t work around here’ … to a managed, trust-based service line designed to cost effectively enhance productivity, employee engagement and career development—everyone wins.

Download the Everyone Wins a Balloon Report.Follow me on Twitter or LinkedIn. Check out my website.