From Masking to Belonging: Tackling Shame in Neurodivergent FE Culture

In the daily rhythm of Further and higher education, perfectionism is often misinterpreted. It’s praised for its professionalism, commitment, or high standards. However, for many neurodivergent staff members, it’s something else entirely, a shield against shame. And unless leadership teams begin to unpick what perfectionism is really signalling, we risk missing the deeper cultural issues affecting wellbeing, retention and authenticity at work.

The Hidden Cost of Being ‘Impressive’

Across FE, you’ll find colleagues who triple-check emails, work late to ‘catch up’ after back-to-back meetings, or quietly opt out of fast-paced team spaces. It can appear to be care and diligence. But for autistic, ADHD or otherwise neurodivergent professionals, it can be an exhausting act of self-protection, a form of masking.

Research from Curran and Hill (2019) and clinical insights from Brené Brown’s Atlas of the Heart highlight the strong correlation between perfectionism and shame. Brown notes that perfectionism isn’t healthy striving; it’s a strategy to avoid judgment. And for neurodivergent staff, that judgment often feels inevitable in environments that were not built with them in mind.

This shows up in small but corrosive ways: the staff member who won’t ask a clarifying question for fear of looking slow. The leader who hides their need for written instructions because they “should” be able to cope. The colleague who is always “on”, constantly scanning to fit in. These are not individual quirks. They’re symptoms of a workplace culture that, while unintentional, still centres speed, surface-level confidence and sameness.

Why This Matters Now

The FE sector is already under pressure. Funding squeezes, accountability demands, and chronic staff churn are creating cultures of overdrive. But within that noise, there’s an opportunity for leadership teams to build something more sustainable. If we continue to treat perfectionism purely as a productivity issue (“they overthink”, “they just need to speed up”), we risk deepening the distress. Instead, we need to ask: what shame are people carrying, and how is the workplace reinforcing it?

A 2023 EY Belonging Barometer found that 75% of workers had felt excluded at work (Interestingly, despite 41% stating their workplace was where they felt the most incredible sense of belonging after home), with over half hiding parts of themselves to avoid judgment. In FE, where time is often tight and informal norms are often unchallenged, this can hit neurodivergent professionals the hardest.

Beyond Adjustments: Culture Is the Cure

Workplace Needs Assessments remain a powerful tool for identifying barriers, such as sensory overload, cognitive fatigue, and support gaps. The BUILD Framework, which we’ve previously written about, ensures that these assessments become dynamic and embedded, rather than one-off fixes.

But inclusion can’t stop at adjustments.

CARE Model

We must also examine what perfectionism and shame reveal about our team culture. Using the CARE model – Clarity, Access, Recognition, Empathy leaders can begin to create the conditions for psychological safety, where masking is reduced and honest conversations become possible.

• Clarity reduces the anxiety caused by ambiguity. Clear expectations and feedback lessen the need to “read between the lines”.
• Access allows multiple modes of contribution, from written responses to asynchronous input, which supports varied processing styles.
• Recognition shifts the narrative from deficit to strength. It highlights what’s working, not just what’s missing.
• Empathy is the foundation. It means noticing when someone is withdrawing or overcompensating and being curious rather than corrective.

These aren’t soft add-ons. They are the groundwork for resilience and innovation. And when integrated, they reshape the workplace for everyone, not just neurodivergent colleagues.

Sector Variations: What Inclusion Looks Like in Practice

Let’s compare a few recent shifts across different education settings:

• In a large FE college, a curriculum team began using written prompts and pre-meeting questions. This reduced the pressure to perform on the spot and unexpectedly increased participation from staff who’d previously stayed silent.
• In an apprenticeship provider, line managers were trained to spot when “professionalism” masked anxiety or overcompensation. Weekly well-being check-ins were introduced, framed as mutual rather than remedial. Staff reported reduced burnout and higher engagement.
• In a university support department, a manager began modelling imperfection: admitting when they didn’t know something and showing their own working process. It didn’t lower standards; it raised trust.

Each example reflects not just a single accommodation but a shift in cultural expectations. And each directly challenged the performance-shame link that perfectionism often hides.

Recommendations for Leaders: Shifting from Fixing to Listening

If you’re in a position of leadership in FE or HE, consider these practical steps:

• Audit informal norms. What unspoken expectations might be fuelling shame or masking?
• Use the phrase “What’s working for you?” in check-ins. This opens up dialogue without pathologising differences.
• Reframe feedback to include positives before areas for development. Neurodivergent staff often miss strengths that seem obvious to others.
• Model mistake-making. Share what you’ve learned from getting things wrong. It normalises imperfection.
• Introduce a team charter that allows staff to co-design how they work together, including norms around pace, communication and feedback.

These aren’t time-heavy solutions. But they require intention, reflection and a willingness to ask: what are we unconsciously rewarding? If the answer is perfection, then the cost may be inclusion.

A Cultural Shift, Not a Quick Fix

Perfectionism in neurodivergent staff isn’t just a personal challenge. It’s a relational one shaped by signals from managers, peers and the wider institution. And shame, when unspoken, becomes a barrier to belonging, creativity and growth.

The good news?

Cultures can be redesigned. By surfacing the invisible, including the quiet toll of masking, the hidden effort of “fitting in” and the silent scripts around failure, we can build workplaces where diverse ways of thinking and being are not just tolerated but trusted.

Let’s move beyond policies and into practice.

Let’s create teams where “your 80 per cent is better than most people’s 100” isn’t just a compliment, it’s a clue to what’s possible when shame is replaced with safety.

If you’re wondering what safety really looks like, I highly recommend Timothy Clark’s The 4 Stages of Psychological Safety. It offers a clear, practical framework for building the kind of space where people feel safe to speak up, share ideas and challenge what’s going on appropriately and constructively.

By Nathan Whitbread, The Neurodivergent Coach