Evaluating the Effectiveness of an Autism-Specific Workplace Tool

Background: Employment is a highly desirable social achievement for most individuals, including those on the autism spectrum. Work facilitates economic independence, engendering a sense of a purpose and accomplishment. However, for many adults on the autism spectrum the process of finding and securing a job remains challenging. A variety of environmental factors may influence the employment process, particularly employers, who play a central role in hindering or facilitating work participation for individuals on the autism spectrum. Yet, few studies exist exploring employers’ capacity in hiring and supporting employees on the autism spectrum, and even fewer have considered interventions and strategies targeting employers’ skills, abilities and knowledge in enhancing employment opportunities.

Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness of an autism-specific workplace tool, the Integrated Employment Success Tool (IEST^TM), in improving employers’ self-efficacy and knowledge in modifying the work environment to meet the specific needs of their employees on the autism spectrum.

Methods: A two-armed randomised controlled trial (RCT) was employed to evaluate the effectiveness of the IEST^TM intervention, by comparing employers (N=84) who used the IEST^TM with employers receiving employment support services as usual. Measurements were obtained at baseline and 12-weeks later at post-test. Measurements included self-efficacy in relation to implementing autism-specific workplace modifications using the Employment Self-Efficacy Scale and attitudes towards disability in the workplace using the Scale of Attitudes Toward Workers with Disabilities.

Results: Intention-to-treat analysis revealed a significant improvement in self-efficacy within the IEST^TM group between baseline and post-test (p=0.016), indicating participants increased their confidence in supporting employees on the autism spectrum by modifying the work environment. At post-test, there were no significant differences between groups in relation to self-efficacy in implementing autism-specific workplace modifications and employer attitudes towards disability in the workplace. Subgroup analyses were conducted to further explore whether then intervention dosage of the IEST^TM effected self-efficacy and attitudinal outcomes. Results were found to be similar to the intention-treat-analysis, with no significant differences between groups at baseline and post-test respectively.

Conclusions: The RCT found evidence that an autism-specific workplace tool for employers led to significant improvements in their confidence in modifying the work environment to meet the specific needs of their employees on the autism spectrum. These findings are consistent with the concept that implementing an intervention that increases knowledge, increases self-efficacy. While no significant attitudinal improvements were found, participants generally held favourable attitudes towards autism in the workplace, most likely influenced by previous experience, larger organisations and external support. Lastly, the IEST^TM was considered a useful tool for both new and existing employers in assisting them in modifying and managing the workplace, particularly during the interim of their regular assigned visits from disability employment service providers. The findings of the current study could be enhanced by further conducting a process evaluation to better interpret the outcomes of the interventions.