Reasonable Adjustments in Legal Recruitment

Creating Fair Opportunities for Neurodiverse and Disabled Candidates

A fair recruitment process is not one where every candidate experiences exactly the same process. A fair recruitment process is one where every candidate has an equal opportunity to demonstrate their skills, knowledge, and potential.

Traditional recruitment methods often assume that the best candidate will be the person who performs most effectively under pressure, responds most quickly, communicates in a particular way, or fits a specific idea of professionalism.

However, these measures do not always reflect a candidate’s ability to succeed in the role.

Neurodiverse candidates and candidates with disabilities may experience barriers within recruitment processes that are unrelated to their skills, intelligence, or professional potential.

Reasonable adjustments remove unnecessary barriers and allow candidates to demonstrate their abilities more accurately.

Adjustments are not about lowering standards or giving someone an unfair advantage. They are about ensuring candidates are assessed on the skills required for the role rather than on barriers created by the recruitment process.

The most effective approach is direct communication. Every individual is different, and candidates are usually best placed to explain what support would allow them to perform at their best.

Common Reasonable Adjustments Recruiters May Already Consider

These adjustments are often recognised by employers and may already form part of accessibility policies.

Extra Time in Assessments

Why this may help

Timed assessments can measure processing speed, reading speed, working memory, or the ability to perform under pressure rather than the specific skills required for a legal role.

Additional time may allow candidates to demonstrate their reasoning and knowledge more accurately.

Examples

  • Additional time for written assessments.
  • Additional time for online tests.
  • Additional time for case studies.
  • Additional time for situational judgement tests.
  • Additional time for video assessments.

Breaks During Longer Assessments

Why this may help

Long assessments can create difficulties for candidates who experience fatigue, concentration differences, sensory overload, anxiety, or conditions that affect energy levels.

Examples

  • Allowing short breaks during assessment centres.
  • Allowing candidates to pause online assessments.
  • Providing rest periods between recruitment stages.

Quiet Assessment Spaces

Why this may help

Busy environments can create barriers for candidates who experience sensory sensitivities, attention differences, or difficulty processing information in noisy environments.

Examples

  • Providing a quiet interview room.
  • Reducing background noise.
  • Allowing candidates to complete assessments remotely where appropriate.

Assistive Technology

Why this may help

Some candidates may use technology to support reading, writing, communication, or organisation.

Examples

  • Screen readers.
  • Speech-to-text software.
  • Text-to-speech software.
  • Digital note-taking tools.
  • Reading support software.

Adjustments Recruiters May Not Have Considered

Many of the most effective adjustments are not complicated. They involve changing assumptions about how candidates should communicate, prepare, and demonstrate ability.

Providing Interview Questions in Advance

Why this may help

Traditional interviews often reward immediate responses rather than thoughtful answers.

Some candidates may need additional time to process questions, organise their thoughts, or retrieve information under pressure.

Providing questions in advance allows candidates to demonstrate their knowledge and experience more accurately.

Possible adjustments

  • Providing full interview questions before the interview.
  • Providing key themes or competency areas in advance.
  • Allowing candidates time to prepare examples.
  • Explaining the interview structure beforehand.

This does not remove the need for preparation. It allows candidates to demonstrate their preparation more effectively.

Providing Written Questions Alongside Spoken Questions

Why this may help

Some candidates process written information more effectively than spoken information.

This may support individuals with:

  • Auditory processing differences.
  • Language processing differences.
  • Working memory difficulties.
  • Anxiety during interviews.

Possible adjustments

  • Providing written copies of interview questions.
  • Allowing candidates to read questions while listening.
  • Allowing candidates to refer back to questions while answering.
  • Providing written clarification where needed.

Allowing Additional Processing Time

Why this may help

A pause before responding does not indicate a lack of confidence, preparation, or knowledge.

Some candidates require additional time to process information and formulate their response.

Possible adjustments

  • Allowing longer pauses before expecting an answer.
  • Avoiding interrupting candidates.
  • Allowing candidates time to structure their thoughts.
  • Including additional thinking time in video assessments.

Alternative Formats for Video Interviews and Assessments

Why this may help

Video assessments can create barriers because candidates often have to:

  • Process questions quickly.
  • Respond without interaction.
  • Manage recording themselves.
  • Perform under artificial conditions.

Possible adjustments

  • Providing extra processing time before recording begins.
  • Allowing practice questions.
  • Allowing candidates to re-record answers.
  • Providing written versions of questions.
  • Offering a live interview alternative.

Providing Assessment Materials in Advance

Why this may help

Many candidates perform best when they have time to understand information before being assessed.

This may particularly support candidates with differences affecting:

  • Processing speed.
  • Reading.
  • Memory.
  • Anxiety.
  • Attention.

Possible adjustments

Recruiters can consider providing:

  • Case studies before assessment days.
  • Group exercise instructions in advance.
  • Presentation topics beforehand.
  • Information about assessment formats.
  • Examples of previous tasks.

Group Assessment Adjustments

Assessment centres are often one of the least accessible recruitment methods because they rely heavily on spontaneous communication.

They can unintentionally reward:

  • Speaking quickly.
  • Interrupting.
  • Taking up space in discussions.
  • Performing confidently in unfamiliar groups.

These behaviours do not always reflect leadership, teamwork, or legal ability.

Allowing Private Follow-Up Contributions

Why this may help

Some candidates may have valuable ideas but find it difficult to contribute during fast-moving group discussions.

Possible adjustments

  • Allowing candidates to submit written reflections after group exercises.
  • Allowing candidates to discuss their ideas privately afterwards.
  • Allowing additional one-to-one explanation of their contribution.

This ensures candidates are assessed on the quality of their ideas rather than their speed of verbal participation.

Not Penalising Eye Contact or Body Language Differences

Why this may help

Many recruitment processes unintentionally judge candidates based on communication styles.

Examples include:

  • Eye contact.
  • Facial expressions.
  • Hand movements.
  • Speaking style.
  • Sitting position.

These behaviours can vary significantly between individuals.

Possible adjustments

  • Do not require eye contact as evidence of confidence or honesty.
  • Do not interpret reduced facial expression as disengagement.
  • Focus assessment on answers, reasoning, and contribution.
  • Recognise different professional communication styles.

A candidate can be engaged, confident, and capable while communicating differently.

Psychometric Testing Adjustments

Why this may help

Psychometric tests are commonly used within legal recruitment, but they do not always measure the skills recruiters intend to assess.

Some tests may be influenced by:

  • Processing speed.
  • Reading differences.
  • Anxiety.
  • Working memory.
  • Understanding of ambiguous wording.
  • Test familiarity.

Possible adjustments

Recruiters can consider:

  • Allowing candidates to opt out of psychometric testing.
  • Providing alternative assessment methods.
  • Using multiple ways to assess suitability.
  • Reviewing whether testing genuinely reflects the skills required.

For some candidates, exemption from psychometric testing may provide a more accurate assessment of their potential.

Adjustments for Written Assessments

Why this may help

Written exercises are common in legal recruitment, but accessibility barriers may affect a candidate’s ability to demonstrate their reasoning.

Possible adjustments

  • Providing assessment papers earlier.
  • Allowing additional reading time before starting.
  • Providing accessible formatting.
  • Allowing assistive technology.
  • Extending deadlines.
  • Allowing breaks during longer written tasks.

Providing materials in advance can allow candidates to focus on analysis rather than processing information under unnecessary time pressure.

Communication Adjustments

Why this may help

Communication differences do not indicate reduced ability.

Candidates may communicate most effectively through different methods.

Possible adjustments

  • Allowing written communication instead of telephone calls where appropriate.
  • Providing written confirmation of verbal information.
  • Allowing candidates to request clarification.
  • Avoiding unnecessary pressure to respond immediately.
  • Providing a named contact person throughout recruitment.

Predictability and Structure Adjustments

Why this may help

Many candidates perform better when expectations are clear.

Possible adjustments

  • Providing a recruitment timeline.
  • Explaining each assessment stage.
  • Explaining scoring criteria.
  • Explaining what assessors are looking for.
  • Providing reminders before assessment days.
  • Informing candidates about any changes as early as possible.

Adjustments Recruiters May Not Realise Are Barriers

Sometimes the barrier is not the task itself, but the assumption behind it.

Recruiters should consider whether they are unintentionally assessing:

  • Confidence rather than competence.

  • Speed rather than accuracy.

  • Eye contact rather than engagement.

  • Fluency rather than communication ability.

  • Social performance rather than teamwork.

  • Stress response rather than resilience.

A candidate who needs an adjustment may still be highly capable of performing the role.

Having the Conversation

There is no universal list of adjustments that works for everyone.

Two candidates with the same diagnosis may need completely different support.

The most effective question a recruiter can ask is:

“What adjustments would help you demonstrate your abilities effectively during this process?”

Recruiters should focus on removing barriers rather than expecting candidates to adapt themselves to a single way of communicating, learning, or working.

Building an Inclusive Legal Profession

Inclusive recruitment benefits both candidates and employers.

When barriers are removed, recruiters gain a clearer understanding of a candidate’s:

  • Legal reasoning.
  • Analytical ability.
  • Problem-solving skills.
  • Communication strengths.
  • Professional potential.
  • Ability to contribute to a team.

Reasonable adjustments are not about making recruitment easier.

They are about making recruitment fairer.

A truly inclusive legal profession recognises that talent does not come in one format, one communication style, or one way of thinking.

By creating accessible recruitment processes, legal employers can ensure every candidate has the opportunity to demonstrate what they can bring to the profession.