A provocative question about neurodivergence and societal norms has ignited a global conversation, with 92% of its online reach coming from outside the author's existing network, spanning Australia, the UK, and the US. The question, posed by Australian leadership advisor and author Mike Meyer, asks: "What if we've spent 200 years making people fit the system, then called the people who couldn't fit it the problem?"
Meyer's question follows his earlier hypothesis that 40 to 50% of the population could potentially be neuro-complex. While the figure itself drew attention, Meyer emphasizes that the conversation it opened is far more significant. "People understandably got caught on the 40 to 50% figure. But the conversation it opened is far more interesting," he said. The discussion has resonated across countries and industries, suggesting a broader readiness to examine long-held assumptions about what is considered normal.
Meyer argues that neurodevelopmental differences are highly hereditary, yet many adults grew up in an era when autism, ADHD, and other differences were poorly recognized or rarely diagnosed. These individuals didn't suddenly become neurodivergent when their children or grandchildren were diagnosed; they were always there. The systems they grew up in, however, were designed for the industrial age—requiring people to arrive at the same time, sit still, follow processes, and communicate in expected ways. These systems worked, but Meyer contends that society confused what worked for the system with what is natural for humans. "We built a world that needed people to behave predictably, then decided the people who didn't behave that way were the unusual ones," he said.
As the world evolves, Meyer sees a catalyst moment to question these definitions. "The world those systems were built for is changing. This is the catalyst moment to question what we have been calling normal," he stated. For Meyer, who wrote Weird is the New Normal: The Unlikely Path of Leadership, this is not a new direction but one that feels more relevant and visible now. "The idea that weird might be normal isn't new to me. What's different now is that it feels more relevant, more visible and, perhaps, more obvious than ever before."
Meyer is not suggesting that everyone is neurodivergent or that 40 to 50% of people are disabled. Instead, he asks a more uncomfortable question: how much human capability have we overlooked because our definition of normal was too narrow? He acknowledges that for some, neurodivergence is profoundly disabling, and we shouldn't pretend otherwise. However, for others, the problem may lie in the collision between the person and a system built around someone else's way of functioning. "Change the environment, and you don't change the person's neurology. You change the collision," he explained.
The popularity of this conversation suggests people are ready to tackle bigger questions about neurodivergence beyond diagnosis numbers. Meyer encourages challenging his hypothesis, but insists there's an underlying truth that cannot be ignored: "Maybe the people weren't always the problem. Maybe sometimes it was the system we were asking them to fit."
Meyer's work through his advisory firm, M31, challenges industrial-era thinking and explores leadership in a world shaped by complexity, artificial intelligence, and constant change. His insights offer a fresh perspective for business leaders, suggesting that redefining "normal" could unlock untapped potential in the workforce.
For more on this conversation, read the original article: We're Not All Neurodivergent. So Why Does It Suddenly Look That Way? And for the original hypothesis: Beyond Diagnosis: What If We've Been Counting the Wrong People?
