The Cult of the Average: Why Your Hiring Process is a Safety Hazard

The Digestive Biscuit Theory of Recruitment

We have spent the better part of fifty years trying to build teams that resemble a packet of Digestive biscuits: uniform, predictable, and, if we are being honest, a bit dull. In the corporate world, we call this "culture fit." It is a charming phrase that masks a dangerous obsession with conformity. We tell ourselves that by hiring people who think, act, and solve problems in the exact same way, we are reducing risk. In reality, we are doing the opposite. We are building a system with a single point of failure.

When did being different stop being the prize? In any other high-stakes environment, variance is the goal. You don’t want a poker hand full of the same card, and you certainly don't want a hedge fund where every analyst uses the same model. Yet, when it comes to the human capital that drives our businesses, we have been conditioned to see "different" as a compliance cost rather than a competitive edge.

---

The High-Performance Glitch

Consider the logic of the stress test. If you want to know if a piece of software is truly resilient, you don't run it under perfect conditions. You throw "glitches" at it. You look for the edge cases. People who navigate the world with a disability or a neurodivergent brain are, by definition, the world’s most experienced edge-case solvers. We spend our lives debugging environments that weren't built for us. We are the ultimate beta testers for reality.

"Hiring for conformity isn't a safety strategy: it is a recipe for groupthink. True resilience is found at the margins, where the perspective is different because it has to be."

If I told you there was a talent pool that possessed a natural immunity to groupthink, an inherent drive for efficiency, and a lived experience in complex problem-solving, you would call it a gold mine. But the moment we label that pool "disabled" or "neurodivergent," the conversation shifts to "reasonable adjustments" and "support needs." We have been looking at the wrong side of the ledger. We focus on the cost of the bridge rather than the value of the territory it opens up.

---

De-Risking the High Reward

The common pushback is that hiring "different" is high risk. It is an understandable but flawed assumption. The perceived risk usually stems from a lack of infrastructure, not a lack of capability. If you could remove the friction from the process, hiring a neurodivergent specialist or a disabled leader becomes the ultimate hedge against stagnation. It is the only way to ensure your business doesn't fall victim to its own blind spots.

To move from "inclusion" as a chore to "variance" as a weapon, we need to change the diagnostic criteria of a good hire:

• Value Friction over Flow: A team that agrees too quickly is a team that isn't thinking. You need the person who asks the awkward question because their brain is wired to see the structural flaw you’ve ignored.
• Assess for Problem-Solving Density: Stop looking for years of experience in a specific silo. Look for the "hack." Those who have had to adapt their physical or cognitive environment have a higher density of original thought.
• Design for the Margins: If you build a recruitment process that works for the most "constrained" candidate, you create a frictionless experience for everyone.

---

The New Asset Class

We need to stop viewing disability and neurodivergence through the lens of social responsibility. It is a strategic asset class. In a world of rapidly accelerating AI and automation, the "average" worker is the most easily replaced. The value, therefore, lies in the outliers. It lies in the people who don’t fit the template because the template was too small to begin with.

It is time to stop hiring for "fit" and start hiring for "misfit." If you want to remove the high risk from the high reward, stop looking for the safest bet and start looking for the person who has already solved the problems you don't even know you have yet. That is where the prize is hidden.