Case Study: How One Manager Changed a Routine One-on-One Into Real Insight
Most leaders believe they have a good handle on how their teams are performing. The 1:1s are in the diary, deliverables are tracked, and nothing looks obviously wrong.
And yet issues still surface later than expected. Overwhelm that was never voiced. Expectations two people understood differently. Friction that compounded quietly for months. By the time it's visible, it's usually urgent.
For neurodivergent employees, that lag tends to be longer. Masking, past experiences of disclosure going badly, and uncertainty about what's reasonable to ask for all mean the useful information often stays unspoken - not because the relationship is poor, but because nothing in the usual rhythm of work invites it.
This case study looks at what changed when one manager used a different kind of conversation inside a meeting she was already having.
What the Optimum Job Design Tool is
What it is: A structured pre-work guide completed separately by the manager and employee, and a joint meeting to improve how work is designed, experienced and delivered
What it covers: Task fit, environment, communication, energy and recovery, strengths and support needs
How long it takes: 30 minutes prep time + 45-minute conversation
Where it's used: Inside an existing 1:1, not as an additional meeting
Who it's for: Any employee, though it's built on what we've learned works for neurodivergent employees
What one leader did differently
A senior manager leading a small team in a highly technical environment faced a situation that will feel familiar to many leaders. A capable employee was delivering in a demanding role, managing a constant flow of information and competing priorities. From the outside, everything appeared to be working.
Like most leaders, the manager was already committed to regular 1:1s, but those conversations were shaped by operational pressure and whatever was most pressing that week.
“Normally it’s quite narrow and specific…you’re focused on whatever needs to be talked about urgently that week."
Rather than introducing a new process or adding another meeting, the manager made one change. She used the Optimum Job Design (OJD) Tool within an existing 1:1.
That's what makes this practical. It doesn't ask for more of a leader's time. It asks for better use of the time they're already spending.
One conversation changed what was visible
The shift was immediate. Instead of tracking tasks and outputs, the discussion opened up to how the role was actually being experienced week to week.
"It gave that sort of meta view of the job, rather than always being in the details."
This is the place most leaders work within. They can see what's being delivered. They have far less visibility into whether the way it's being delivered is sustainable.
"It sits in the really important, but not the really urgent quadrant...and that's the one you don't always get to."
What surfaced and why it matters
Even in an established, positive working relationship, things came up that had never been said out loud.
"You still find there are assumptions...and I did find that it was very insightful."
None of it was a breakdown. It was the quieter things that sit underneath performance: uncertainty about how to prioritise, hesitation about when to ask for clarity, expectations neither person had ever stated.
Left alone, these don't trigger concern. They just slowly erode efficiency, confidence and alignment - and they're disproportionately costly for employees who are already spending energy managing an environment isn't always designed with them in mind.
Surfacing them early meant the manager could deal with them while they were still manageable.
From adjustment request to role design
The most significant change was in how the discussion was framed.
In a lot of workplaces, conversations about support or adjustments carry an unspoken transactional edge - one person asking, the other deciding.
"It often feels like the person is asking for something that's going to inconvenience you."
That framing puts the employee in a position of justifying a need, which is exactly why so many neurodivergent employees never start the conversation at all. The OJD Tool changes the starting point.
"It started in a place of strength...saying what works best rather than where there's a gap. That felt like a more psychologically safe way of approaching it."
The focus moves from what someone needs in order to cope, to how the role can be built so they do their best work. For organisations, that distinction matters - it's the difference between managing an exception and designing a job properly.
Shared ownership, not added burden
The tool also changed who was carrying the thinking. Rather than the leader having to diagnose and solve, both people prepared, reflected and contributed.
"It's not just the leader's job, and it's not just the individual's job."
For leaders, that lowers cognitive load and improves the quality of what they learn. For employees, it increases ownership. The result is a role that's co-designed rather than assigned.
Use it early, not as a job repair
The manager was clear about where this tool belongs.
"l would not use it in a performance management conversation...people would feel there's a right or wrong answer."
Conversations about role effectiveness often happen too late, once concerns have already formed. By then, the openness that makes the tool work is reduced.
"What you're trying to do is set people up for success."
The outcome
From one structured discussion, a clearer understanding of how the role was being experienced, fewer assumptions driving decisions, and stronger alignment between manager and employee emerged.
The tone shifted, and practical changes could be made without anyone getting defensive.
No extra resources were required. There was no escalation, and no formal process. Just a better use of forty-five minutes that was already in the diary.
Four things leaders can take from this
Use the meeting you already have. The barrier to better conversations is rarely time - it's the absence of a structure that makes room for anything beyond this week's priorities.
Start from what works, not what's missing. Opening with strengths makes it safe for people to tell you the rest.
Share the preparation. When both people come with reflections, the insight is better and the load is lighter.
Have the conversation before you need it. Used proactively, this surfaces friction early. Used inside a performance process, it stops working.
The business case
Most organisations have capable people and committed leaders. What they're short of is timely insight. Without it, attention stays on what's urgent while the things actually shaping performance go unexamined - and the fixes get more expensive the longer they wait.
A structured job design conversation changes what a leader can see, before anything has gone wrong.
So it's worth asking: are your 1:1s giving you the visibility you actually need? The leaders getting ahead of this aren't finding more time. They're asking different questions inside the meetings they're already having.
Want to try this with your team?
Download the Optimum Job Design Tool and Guide here.
Little Neuroinclusion Agency partners with organisations to embed neuroinclusive communication and leadership practices in a way that's practical, sustainable, and grounded in real workplace contexts.
Learn more about our services and tools:
Comments