Inclusive Team Building for Neurodivergent Team Members
Most team building advice assumes a neurotypical audience. It shouldn't. Between 15-20% of the global population is neurodivergent — including people with ADHD, autism, dyslexia, dyspraxia, and other neurological differences (Deloitte). That's roughly one in five of your team members.
And here's the uncomfortable truth: the activities most organisations default to — surprise icebreakers, rapid-fire brainstorms, all-day away days — often create exactly the conditions that make participation hardest for neurodivergent colleagues. Not because the intent is bad. Because nobody stopped to think about it.
This guide is for the people planning team activities who genuinely want to get it right. It's practical, specific, and built on what the research actually shows works.
Why Does Neurodivergent Team Building Matter?
Only 25% of neurodivergent professionals report feeling "truly included" at work, according to EY's 2025 neuroinclusion report. That's a staggering inclusion gap — and it has real consequences. Some 39% of neurodivergent employees plan to leave their role within 12 months, citing poor workplace relationships as a primary reason.
This isn't just a wellbeing issue. It's a retention and performance problem.
The Business Case Is Clear
Teams with neurodivergent professionals can be 30% more productive than those without, according to research cited by Deloitte and Harvard Business Review. JPMorgan's neurodiversity hiring programme found that neurodivergent employees were 90-140% more productive than neurotypical peers in certain roles. SAP's Autism at Work programme achieved 90% retention rates.
These aren't edge cases. They're evidence that neuroinclusion is a competitive advantage — when organisations actually design for it.
The Cost of Getting It Wrong
Half of neurodivergent employees have taken time off work specifically because of their neurodivergence (City & Guilds, 2024). Some 82% feel pressure to "mask" their neurodivergent traits at work, and 64% worry that disclosure would negatively impact their career (Understood.org, 2025).
When team building activities amplify these pressures — through surprise elements, forced social performance, or unclear expectations — they don't build connection. They erode it. The people who most need to feel included end up feeling most exposed.
What Makes Traditional Team Building Problematic?
Many standard team building formats contain elements that create genuine barriers for neurodivergent participants. Understanding what those barriers are is the first step toward removing them. This isn't about wrapping people in cotton wool — it's about recognising that "one-size-fits-all" never actually fit everyone.
Sensory Overload
Loud environments, sudden noises, bright or flickering lighting, and crowded spaces can be physically overwhelming for people with sensory processing differences. EY's 2025 research found that 73% of fully onsite neurodivergent employees experience regular sensory distractions — compared to roughly three times fewer in hybrid arrangements and twelve times fewer when working remotely.
All-day events with no quiet breaks, escape rooms with dramatic sound effects, or noisy pub quizzes aren't "a bit much." For some colleagues, they're genuinely distressing.
Ambiguity and Unwritten Rules
Activities with vague instructions, implicit social expectations, or "you'll figure it out as you go" approaches can be particularly challenging for autistic colleagues and others who process social information differently. When the rules aren't explicit, participation depends on reading unstated norms — a skill that's unevenly distributed and unfair to demand.
Time Pressure and Spontaneity
Speed rounds, on-the-spot creativity challenges, and rapid-fire brainstorms favour a specific cognitive style. People with ADHD may struggle with sustained attention under artificial pressure. Autistic participants may need more processing time. Dyslexic colleagues may find timed reading or writing tasks stressful.
Forced Social Performance
Mandatory public speaking, forced eye contact activities, physical trust exercises involving touch, and "everyone must share" rounds put enormous pressure on people who find these interactions draining or distressing. Camera-on mandates in virtual settings create similar pressure. So does the expectation that everyone will enjoy an alcohol-centred social event.
The common thread? These aren't niche concerns. They affect a fifth of your workforce. And honestly, fixing them tends to make activities better for everyone.
How Do You Apply Universal Design to Team Activities?
Universal Design for Learning (UDL), developed by CAST, provides a framework that works brilliantly for team building — even though it was originally designed for education. The core principle is simple: design for the edges and the middle takes care of itself.
UDL rests on three pillars, and each one translates directly to how you plan activities.
Multiple Means of Engagement
Give people choices. Not everyone is motivated by competition. Not everyone enjoys creative expression. Not everyone wants to be in the spotlight.
Practical application:
- Offer genuine opt-out without requiring justification — "sit this round out if you'd prefer" is enough
- Provide different roles within activities (observer, note-taker, facilitator, participant)
- Vary activity types across sessions so different strengths get their moment
- Let people choose their level of participation rather than mandating equal contribution
Multiple Means of Representation
Don't rely on a single format for delivering instructions or information. What's clear to one person may be confusing to another.
Practical application:
- Provide both written and verbal instructions — always
- Use visual aids, timers, and clear step-by-step breakdowns
- Share agendas and activity descriptions at least 48 hours in advance
- Explain all rules explicitly — never assume everyone "just knows" how something works
Multiple Means of Action and Expression
People contribute differently. Some think out loud. Others need time to process. Some write brilliantly but freeze when speaking. Some draw what they can't articulate in words.
Practical application:
- Allow participation through multiple channels — speaking, typing in chat, drawing, voting
- Use small groups of 3-4 instead of whole-team formats
- Build in reflection time before expecting contributions
- Offer camera-off options in virtual settings without making it a thing
The beauty of this framework is that it doesn't single anyone out. When you design activities with multiple pathways, everyone benefits — not just neurodivergent participants. Introverts get breathing room. Non-native speakers get written backup. New joiners get clarity. It's better design, full stop.
What Should You Actually Do Differently?
Theory is useful. But you're here for specifics. Here's a practical checklist for running team building activities that actually include everyone.
Before the Activity
Share a detailed agenda 48+ hours in advance. Include what the activity is, roughly how long it'll take, what participation looks like, and whether there's anything people need to prepare. Surprises feel fun to planners. They feel awful to people who need predictability to function well.
Explain the rules in writing. Even if you'll also explain them verbally on the day, put the written version in a shared document or message beforehand. Include examples where possible. This helps people who process information better through reading, and gives everyone a reference point.
Name the opt-out. In your invitation, explicitly state that participation is optional and that nobody needs to justify sitting out. This isn't just kindness — 68% of neurodivergent employees don't even know what accommodations they're entitled to (Understood.org, 2025). Removing the need to ask is the most inclusive move you can make.
During the Activity
Keep groups small. 3-4 people is the sweet spot. Large-group formats force people to compete for airtime, and that competition isn't equally distributed. Small groups create space for everyone to contribute naturally.
Use visual timers. Display countdowns on screen rather than relying on verbal time warnings. This helps people with time-perception differences (common with ADHD) manage their participation. Be generous with time limits. Speed rounds might create excitement for some, but they create anxiety for others.
Offer multiple ways to participate. In virtual settings, this means chat, voice, reactions, drawing tools — whatever the platform supports. In person, it means written sticky notes alongside verbal sharing. Gatherilla's games are designed around this principle — everyone plays from their phone, at their own pace, with no pressure to perform in front of the group.
Build in breaks. For any session longer than 30 minutes, schedule a genuine break — not a "quick two minutes." Sensory and social processing takes energy. A 5-10 minute quiet break every 30 minutes is a reasonable rhythm for longer events.
After the Activity
Don't demand public feedback. "How did everyone find that?" puts people on the spot. Instead, send a brief anonymous survey or simply let people share privately if they want to. What matters is that you're open to feedback, not that you extract it in public.
Iterate based on what you learn. Pay attention to who participates and who doesn't. If the same people consistently opt out, that's data — not a problem with those individuals. It's a signal that your format needs adjusting.
Which Activities Work Well for Neurodivergent Teams?
Some formats are inherently more inclusive than others. Here's what tends to work — and why.
Structured Games with Clear Rules
Games with explicit rules, defined turns, and predictable structure reduce ambiguity and let people focus on the actual activity rather than figuring out what's expected. Digital formats where everyone interacts through a device are particularly effective because they equalise participation — nobody is put on the spot, and everyone engages through the same interface.
Browser-based games work especially well here. Platforms like Gatherilla provide clear instructions, visual interfaces, and structured turn-taking by default. There's no need to speak over each other or compete for attention.
Asynchronous Activities
Not everything has to happen in real-time. Async team building gives people time to process, compose their thoughts, and participate when they're at their best. Photo challenges, shared playlists, written Q&As, and "get to know you" prompts in a team channel all create connection without the pressure of live performance.
Choice-Based Formats
Activities that offer genuine choice — pick your own question, choose which round to participate in, decide how you want to contribute — respect the fact that people have different capacities on different days. A format where someone can fully participate by typing in the chat is just as valid as one where they're talking on camera.
Low-Sensory Environments
Quieter settings, smaller groups, predictable structures, and generous pacing make activities accessible to people with sensory sensitivities. Virtual settings offer a natural advantage here because people control their own environment — volume, lighting, seating. That's one reason why remote team building can actually be more inclusive than in-person events, when done thoughtfully.
How Does the Manager's Role Affect Neuroinclusion?
Line manager behaviour accounts for 42% of an organisation's neuroinclusion score, according to EY's 2025 research. That's an enormous influence concentrated in a single role. If managers don't understand neuroinclusion, programmes and policies won't save you.
This has direct implications for team building. The manager sets the tone. If they treat opt-outs with suspicion, pressure people to participate "for the team," or dismiss concerns about activity formats, they undo whatever inclusive design you've built into the activity itself.
What Managers Should Do
Normalise accommodation. Don't make it something people have to request through a formal process. Build it into the default — "here's the agenda in advance, here's the opt-out, here are different ways to participate." When accommodation is the standard, nobody feels singled out.
Model the behaviour. Skip a round yourself sometimes. Use the chat instead of speaking. Take a break. When managers demonstrate that varied participation is acceptable, it gives permission to everyone else.
Ask, don't assume. Not every neurodivergent person needs the same things. A quick private check-in — "is there anything about this activity format that would make it harder for you to participate?" — goes further than any generic policy. But make sure the asking is genuinely open, not performative.
This connects directly to psychological safety. A team where people feel safe saying "I'd rather not do that" without consequence is a team where neurodivergent colleagues can actually be themselves. And that's the whole point.
How Do You Measure Whether Your Activities Are Inclusive?
Cognitively diverse teams show a 30% improvement in identifying risks compared to homogeneous teams (City & Guilds, 2025). But you won't capture that advantage if neurodivergent team members are opting out of the activities designed to build team cohesion.
Track these indicators:
Participation breadth. Are the same people always opting out? Are participation rates consistent across the team, or skewed toward a particular group? Look at patterns over time, not single events.
Anonymous feedback. Include specific questions about accessibility and comfort in your post-activity surveys. "Did the format allow you to participate in a way that worked for you?" is more useful than "Did you enjoy it?"
Retention correlation. Cross-reference team building participation with retention data. If people who consistently opt out are also more likely to leave, that's a signal worth investigating. Given that 39% of neurodivergent employees plan to leave within 12 months (EY, 2025), this isn't hypothetical.
Qualitative signals. Are people volunteering ideas in team settings more? Are quieter team members speaking up? Are new working relationships forming? These softer indicators often show up before hard metrics move. For a full measurement framework, see our guide on how to measure team building effectiveness.
Frequently Asked Questions
Do I need to ask who's neurodivergent before planning activities?
No — and you shouldn't. Many neurodivergent people haven't disclosed and may not want to. The point of inclusive design is that it works without anyone needing to identify themselves. Design every activity as if neurodivergent people are present, because statistically, they are. Given that 64% worry disclosure would negatively impact them (Understood.org, 2025), the safest approach is universal design by default.
Won't making activities "accessible" make them boring?
The opposite, actually. Structured games with clear rules, multiple participation methods, and genuine choice tend to be more engaging for everyone. Most of the things that make activities hard for neurodivergent people — ambiguity, forced performance, sensory overload — aren't fun for neurotypical people either. Better design is better design.
What if someone refuses to participate despite accommodations?
Respect it. Genuine inclusion means genuine choice. If someone consistently opts out, it might be worth a private, low-pressure conversation to understand whether there's something specific you could change. But "no" is a complete answer. Forced participation defeats the entire purpose.
How do I handle team building for mixed remote and in-person teams?
Phone-based platforms like Gatherilla equalise the experience — everyone participates through the same device whether they're in the room or at home. This is especially important for neurodivergent team members, since remote workers experience far fewer sensory distractions (EY, 2025). See our full guide on hybrid meeting engagement for more.
Where should I start if our current activities aren't inclusive?
Start with three changes this week: share your next activity agenda 48 hours early, add a written version of all instructions, and explicitly name the opt-out option. These cost nothing and signal that you're thinking about inclusion. Then work through the rest of this guide over subsequent sessions. Progress matters more than perfection.
---
Inclusive team building isn't a separate category of activity. It's a design approach. The same games and formats you already run can work for neurodivergent colleagues — they just need clearer instructions, more flexibility, and fewer assumptions about how everyone processes the world.
The research is unambiguous: neuroinclusive teams perform better, retain more people, and identify risks others miss. The organisations leading the way — SAP, Microsoft, JPMorgan, GCHQ — aren't doing this out of charity. They're doing it because it works.
Start with your next team session. Share the agenda early. Offer choices. Build in breaks. Make opt-out genuinely safe. These aren't radical changes. They're the baseline of good facilitation — and your whole team will be better for it.
---
*Sources: Deloitte Neuroinclusive Workplace, EY Neuroinclusion Report 2025, Understood.org Neurodiversity at Work Survey 2025, HBR: Neurodiversity as a Competitive Advantage, CAST Universal Design for Learning, City & Guilds Neurodiversity Index 2024, City & Guilds Neurodiversity Index 2025, CIPD Neuroinclusion at Work 2024*