Between September 2024 and July 2025, 1,510 candidates sat the Solicitors Qualifying Exam with a reasonable adjustment for a neurodivergent condition. According to the SRA’s analysis, their scores and pass rates were consistently slightly higher than the comparison group’s. So the profession’s qualifying exam can be made fair. The harder question is whether the firms those candidates join can do the same. Neuroinclusion in law firms, and across professional services more widely, runs up against billable hours, partnership track and recruitment funnels that were built around one way of working.
The profession is better at exams than at careers
The SRA’s latest data, collected in summer 2025, shows 8% of lawyers in law firms declared a disability. Compare that with the general working-age population and it looks low, which usually means people are not saying, rather than not there.
The reasons are well documented. The Legally Disabled? study from Cardiff University, published in 2020 with the Law Society’s Lawyers with Disabilities Division, found that around 40% of disabled solicitors and paralegals never or only sometimes tell their employer they are disabled. More than half (54%) believed their career and promotion prospects were worse than those of non-disabled colleagues. Many did not ask for adjustments they were entitled to because they worried how it would be received. That research covered disability broadly, but anyone who has worked with neurodivergent lawyers will recognise the pattern: get through the exams, then keep quiet.
Billable hours and the hidden cost of masking
The billable hour is the defining feature of private practice, and it interacts with neurodivergence in ways firms rarely consider. Time recording itself relies on executive function: remembering what you did, in six-minute units, across several matters. For many ADHD lawyers this admin is harder than the legal work. Dyslexic lawyers may spend longer reading bundles or proofreading drafts, then feel unable to record that time accurately in case it looks inefficient. Autistic lawyers may produce meticulous work but find the unbillable side of the job, such as networking, internal politics and reading what a partner really wants, consumes far more energy than anyone sees.
The result is a hidden cost. People mask, work late to compensate and write off their own time, and burnout follows. Firms then lose experienced associates they spent years training. Assistive technology, clear instructions on matters, realistic deadlines and supervisors who check understanding in writing all help, and none of them are expensive. Recognising that recorded hours are a poor proxy for value would help more.
Dyslexia deserves particular attention because it is so common in law and so often hidden. A profession built on precise text can assume dyslexia and legal ability are at odds. They are not. Many dyslexic lawyers are strong at seeing the overall shape of a deal or dispute, at oral advocacy and at explaining complex points simply. What they need is the right tools and a culture where using them is normal.
Assessment centres and the training contract funnel
Graduate recruitment in law, accounting and consulting tends to follow the same model: online application, timed reasoning tests, video interview, then an assessment centre with group exercises, case studies and partner interviews. Each stage rewards speed, confident verbal performance and social fluency under observation. Those are useful in some roles, but they are poor stand-ins for careful analysis, sound judgement and good written advice.
Most firms offer adjustments on request, which puts the burden on candidates to disclose at the point where they feel most exposed. A better approach is to build flexibility in for everyone: case materials sent in advance, a choice of written or spoken responses, clear explanations of what each exercise is assessing, and quiet space between sessions. If your trainee intake and your qualified lawyers look very different on disclosed neurodivergence, the funnel is telling you something.
Neuroinclusion in law firms and the partnership track
The partnership track is where the unwritten rules matter most. Business development, client entertaining, internal sponsorship and being seen in the right meetings carry real weight, and they rarely appear in written criteria. The Cardiff researchers noted that inflexible partnership criteria can make it “impossible for disabled people to reach partner status”, even in progressive firms.
Accounting and consulting face the same pressures under different labels: utilisation targets instead of billable hours, the “up or out” model instead of partnership track. Some firms have shown what targeted hiring can do. EY opened its first UK Neuro-Diverse Centre of Excellence in Manchester in January 2022, one of 13 worldwide, starting with a founding team of six technologists. Linklaters has worked with Auticon to bring autistic consultants into its technology team, with its global chief operating officer praising their accuracy and attention to detail. These are good steps, and both sit in technology functions. The test for the sector is whether neurodivergent people also become fee earners, managers and partners.
What HR and talent teams in professional services can do next
Start with time and utilisation. Look at whether time recording is supported with tools, templates and reminders, and whether supervisors are trained to discuss recorded hours without penalising people who take longer on certain tasks. Make assistive technology such as text-to-speech, dictation and reading tools available to everyone without an application process.
Then examine your early talent funnel stage by stage. Compare pass rates for candidates who requested adjustments with those who did not, and redesign any exercise that tests performance anxiety over the skills you need. Brief graduate recruiters and assessment centre assessors on neurodivergence, and tell candidates in plain English what each exercise is for.
Finally, make progression criteria explicit. Write down what it takes to make senior associate, manager, director or partner, including the business development expectations, and offer more than one way to meet them. Train supervising partners, because they decide whether disclosure feels safe. This applies to a 20-lawyer high street practice or regional accountancy firm as much as to the Magic Circle or the Big Four.
Want your graduate and lateral roles in front of people other firms are filtering out? Enna’s jobs board reaches more than 5,000 registered neurodivergent candidates, and a listing shows candidates you are serious about inclusion. Post your first role today, free.
