The Meeting Isn’t About the Meeting
One of the hardest lessons for many autistic employees in tech (or really, anywhere in the business world) is discovering that the meeting often isn’t about the meeting.
At first glance, this sounds absurd. If a meeting is called to discuss a project, surely the meeting is about the project. If a manager asks for feedback, surely they want feedback. If a team is brainstorming solutions to a problem, surely the goal is to find the best solution.
Yet so many of us eventually discover that something else is happening.
A manager asks for concerns about a proposal. An autistic team member raises a concern. The concern is relevant, well thought out, and directly connected to the topic under discussion. Yet the room becomes uncomfortable. The conversation moves on quickly. Afterwards, the employee is told they were “too direct” or that they could have “phrased it differently.”
The confusion is genuine. The autistic person thought they were participating in the meeting. Everyone else seemed to be participating in a different meeting entirely.
This is one of the reasons I find discussions about autistic communication so frustrating. We often talk about autistic people as though we simply don’t understand communication. But what if the issue isn’t that autistic people don’t understand communication? What if we’re operating according to a different understanding of what communication is for?
Many autistic people approach communication as a tool for exchanging information. If someone asks a question, they’re looking for an answer. If someone identifies a problem, the goal is to solve it. If someone asks for feedback, they’re seeking information that will help them make a better decision.
That sounds obvious, but it isn’t universal. Apparently.
Many workplace interactions aren’t primarily about exchanging information. They’re about building rapport, managing relationships, signalling status, maintaining group cohesion, or navigating power. None of these things are inherently bad. Humans are social creatures. Relationships matter. Trust matters. Team dynamics matter.
The problem arises when these purposes remain unspoken.
An autistic team member may enter a meeting believing the stated purpose is the actual purpose. Meanwhile, everyone else is navigating a complex set of unwritten expectations. The autistic employee thinks the discussion is about solving a problem. Others may be focused on maintaining harmony. The autistic employee thinks disagreement is a contribution. Others may experience it as disruption.
Neither side necessarily understands what the other is doing.
This is one reason why I find the “double empathy problem” far more useful than traditional deficit-based explanations of autistic communication. The problem isn’t that autistic people lack communication skills. The problem is that people with different communication styles are often trying to accomplish different things without realising it.
