• Replies 5 replies
  • Subscribers 32 subscribers
  • Views 227 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related
Hints and tips
  • To quote someone's message, first select/highlight the relevant text, and then use the Quote button that appears
  • To "mention" someone, type @ followed by the start of the forum name, and choose from the list; that person will get a notification of being mentioned

Processing ≠ Agreement: A Neurodivergent Perspective on Meetings

Packet
Has anyone else noticed how in neurotypical meetings, silence is often interpreted as agreement?
As someone who processes information deeply and sometimes needs time to reflect before responding, I find this assumption problematic. When I take the time I need and later share my thoughts—often via email or another asynchronous method—my input can be met with resistance or even seen as disruptive.
It feels like there's a mismatch in communication styles: neurotypical norms often prioritize immediacy, while neurodivergent minds may prioritize accuracy and depth. The result? A rebuttal that’s seen as obstinate rather than constructive.
Curious to hear if others have experienced this. How do you navigate these dynamics? Have you found ways to advocate for your processing style in group settings?
Parents

  • If the agenda was not sent in advance or did not have enough detail to allow preparation, then you register dissent but ask for some time to reply in detail after the meeting.

    If you are too scared to speak up, I have been there when younger, it is hard to overcome that. You can approach people individually afterwards.

    It is also possible to go round the table and find ways to be more inclusive. Depends on how good the meeting convener or chair is and how formal the setting.

    For documents related to quality, your normally needs explicit agreement.

    When dealing with foreign companies, e.g. in Asia where English is not the first language, often people will say yes to indicate they heard the question and understood it, you then have to give them time to think and answer. I learnt this a long time ago. Communicating with lots of people helps you see what works and what doesn't.

    Thinking people have agreed when they haven't doesn't eally help.

Reply

  • If the agenda was not sent in advance or did not have enough detail to allow preparation, then you register dissent but ask for some time to reply in detail after the meeting.

    If you are too scared to speak up, I have been there when younger, it is hard to overcome that. You can approach people individually afterwards.

    It is also possible to go round the table and find ways to be more inclusive. Depends on how good the meeting convener or chair is and how formal the setting.

    For documents related to quality, your normally needs explicit agreement.

    When dealing with foreign companies, e.g. in Asia where English is not the first language, often people will say yes to indicate they heard the question and understood it, you then have to give them time to think and answer. I learnt this a long time ago. Communicating with lots of people helps you see what works and what doesn't.

    Thinking people have agreed when they haven't doesn't eally help.

Children
No Data