Coaching or Compromise? Why Cutting Corners on ADHD Support Risks More Than Just Performance

Across the UK’s Further Education (FE) sector, institutions are ramping up their efforts to promote inclusion. As awareness of neurodiversity grows, so does the demand for specialist coaching to support both staff and learners. ADHD coaching, in particular, has become increasingly visible, driven by rising rates of late diagnosis and the growing confidence of neurodivergent professionals to request workplace support.

But this demand has outpaced regulation. As Katherine Sanders’ white paper, ADHD Coaching Standards: Protecting Clients Through Industry Reform, reveals, the ADHD coaching industry is becoming a case study in what happens when well-meaning inclusion meets unregulated commercialisation.

And while this paper focuses on ADHD, these same risks are emerging across the coaching space for autism, dyslexia, dyspraxia and other neurodivergent experiences. The issue is not just the lack of standards. It’s a deeper misunderstanding of what good support really looks like.

The danger lies in how easily credentials can be purchased. Some “certified” ADHD coaches offer services after completing just 10 or 20 hours of self-paced online content. Others build brands around personal experience and market themselves to vulnerable clients without formal supervision or coaching qualifications. In some cases, this leads to unethical or even harmful practices, including unverified claims around “brain rewiring,” identity transformation and unsupported therapeutic techniques.

These services are being offered, and sometimes funded, across education and employment. But when a neurodivergent member of staff receives coaching that’s ineffective, directive or confusing, it isn’t just a missed opportunity. It’s a breach of trust. And it tells that person once again that the system doesn’t know how to help them.

Let’s be clear. Coaching, when done effectively, is successful. There is a growing body of evidence indicating that ADHD coaching, in particular, can enhance executive function, promote long-term job retention, and assist individuals in developing sustainable strategies for thriving at work. But only when the coach is appropriately trained and operates within a clear ethical framework.

SCARF model

The SCARF model, developed by David Rock, offers a useful lens here. It reminds us that all humans respond strongly to five social factors: status, certainty, autonomy, relatedness and fairness. Poor coaching practices undermine every one of these.

When coaching is unclear, overly prescriptive or based on personal branding rather than structured methodology, the client’s autonomy is eroded. When coaches fail to explain their qualifications or limitations, certainty and fairness disappear. And when services are sold through a lens of identity rather than competence, relatedness becomes a marketing tool rather than a human connection.

These patterns aren’t confined to ADHD support. They are becoming increasingly common in coaching targeted at autistic professionals, those with dyslexia or dyspraxia, or individuals managing anxiety, trauma or sensory differences. And if we allow coaching to become a loosely defined bolt-on to inclusion strategies, we risk diluting its value and undermining its impact.

That’s why I believe, fundamentally, it is more important to be a great coach than it is to be a neurodiversity expert.

Because while understanding traits, patterns and profiles is helpful, no diagnosis can fully explain what any individual experiences day to day. There are too many variables. Two people with the same diagnosis can have radically different strengths, needs and strategies. Effective coaching is about partnering with that individual to find out what works for them, not applying a generic toolkit.

And that brings us to the broader point. This isn’t just about coaches. It’s about managers too.

You don’t need to be a neurodiversity expert to be a great manager. You need to be a great manager.

A great manager listens, adapts and creates space for people to do their best work. A great manager doesn’t wait for a diagnosis or an HR prompt to ask, “How are you finding things?” or “What do you need to thrive in your role?” A great manager knows that inclusion isn’t something you do once. It’s something you negotiate continuously.

Boundaries

Sometimes that will mean implementing clear boundaries. Sometimes it will mean co-creating a work pattern that suits someone’s energy rhythms. Sometimes it means saying no to a particular request, but doing so in a way that invites further conversation rather than shuts it down.

Ultimately, the job of a manager is not to protect the status quo. It’s to build capability. In the best-case scenario, we should be supporting people well enough that they could take our jobs, so we can go and do the next big thing. That’s the hallmark of inclusive leadership. That’s how institutions grow.

BUILD Framework

These ideas are already being put into practice through workplace needs assessments across the FE sector. Approaches like the BUILD Framework focus on supporting individuals not by imposing new systems, but by identifying and amplifying what already works. It’s not about offering every possible adjustment. It’s about being specific, relational and sustainable.

That’s the kind of thinking we need to bring to coaching and management. Less about diagnosis, more about dialogue. Less about expertise, more about engagement.

Takeaways for Managers and Leaders

• You don’t need to be an expert in neurodiversity. You need to be skilled at building trust, listening well and adapting with your team.
• Focus on partnership. Ask people what they need to do their best work and work collaboratively to find solutions that fit the role and the environment.
• Don’t wait for formal processes or assessments. Everyday conversations are often the most powerful tools for inclusion.
• Quality matters. Whether you’re hiring a coach or managing directly, make sure support is credible, evidence-informed and person-centred.
• Build with the future in mind. Great managers grow their teams to thrive without them, not by stepping back but by stepping up into leadership that empowers.

So before commissioning a coaching service or launching an inclusion programme, ask yourself:

Are we investing in quality or convenience?

Are we buying credentials or competence?

Are we empowering our people or managing around them?

Because inclusion without quality is not inclusion at all. And in education, where we model culture every day, that distinction matters more than ever.

Let’s stop treating inclusion as a service. Let’s lead it as a skill.

By Nathan Whitbread, The Neurodivergent Coach