The benefits of inclusion for disability measurement in the workplace

Abstract

Purpose

The formal reporting of disability to an employing organization is inconsistent and likely an underestimate of the true numbers of workers with disabilities and the presence of various types of disabilities. This issue interferes with an organization's count of such workers, as well as efforts to set priorities and develop practices to support workers with disabilities. The authors argue that creating inclusive work environments not only improves worker well-being (as suggested in past research) but also improves their reactions to the process of formal reporting of disability in the workplace.

Design/methodology/approach

A sample of 160 working adults in the United States who reported disabilities or health conditions that may qualify as disabilities under the Americans with Disabilities Act (1990, as amended in 2008) completed a survey that measured perceptions of the workplace environment and reactions to a frequently used disability disclosure form.

Findings

When controlling for age of respondents, anticipated disability stigma and inclusion in the workplace predicted different reactions to a disability disclosure request. Anticipated stigma was associated with more negative emotion, concerns about privacy and others' reactions to their responses on the disclosure form. Inclusion in the workplace was associated with higher ratings for appropriateness of the measure, positive emotion and less negative emotion.

Originality/value

Although research has identified associations between workplace inclusion and general worker experiences, such as job satisfaction and intentions to quit, this work uncovers a benefit of inclusion to required measurement processes in organizations. The unique contributions of inclusion and implications for workplace practices are discussed.

Citation

M. Santuzzi, A., Martinez, J.J. and Keating, R.T. (2022), "The benefits of inclusion for disability measurement in the workplace", Equality, Diversity and Inclusion, Vol. 41 No. 3, pp. 474-490. https://doi.org/10.1108/EDI-06-2020-0167