1 

Managing Diverse Employees 

with DisAbilities 

William J. Lawson, Ph.D. 

Technical Project Manager 

Advisory Board, ICDRI 

Chairman, INCITS/V2 ALF Sub-Committee 

AT&T Global Network Services 

WilliamJLawson@ieee.org

November 22, 2002 

Introduction

 This research paper will focus on the possible management issues and the 

potential resolutions that management executives may have to consider when 

setting about to manage diverse employees with disabilities. Accomplishing such 

a chore will require the exploration of theories, concepts, and practices 

(strategies) from the multi-dimensional perspective of numerous sources, both 

from printed and electronic mediums. Moreover, Hagner and DiLeo (1993) have 

implied that the term diversity is a synonymous reflection of the initiatives and 

objectives of affirmative action policies. The concept of diversity in the workplace 

actually refers to the differences embodied by the workforce members at large 

(Barnartt & Altman, 2001). The differences between all employees in the 

workforce can be equated to those employees of different or diverse ethnic 

origin, racial descent, gender, sexual orientation, chronological maturity, and 

ability; in effect minorities (Szymanski & Parker, 1996). 

 As our societies and workplaces have changed from that of industrial to 

informational, personal computers, telecommunication devices, and other highlevel technologies have become the dominant component of our national culture 

and economic system. This has also changed the employees from industrial 

workers (skilled laborer) to knowledge workers. The result of this change is that 

people with disabilities now have more career options (National Council on 

Disability [NCD], 2001). 

Problem Statement

 One of the greatest challenges facing American businesses and managers is 

the task of maintaining a qualified workforce. This is primarily because of the 

change from an industrial workforce to a knowledge workforce and because the 

baby boomers have only had about half as many children as their parents. As a 

result the number of 20 to 24 year olds entering the workforce continues to fall. 

This critical shortage has forced employers to rethink their recruitment strategies 
2 

and look towards targeting chronological mature people, and people with 

disabilities (varying abilities) (NCD, 2001). It is important to recognize that people 

with disabilities are the largest minority group, they cross all ethnic, racial, 

gender, chronological groups, and number at around 54 million Americans and 

growing (U.S. Department of Labor [USDOL], 2002). Out of the 29 million 

working age adults with disabilities in the U.S. about two thirds are unemployed 

and nearly 80 percent of that two thirds would like to work but have not had the 

opportunity to do so (USDOL, 2002). While people with disabilities may have the 

desire to work, they still may have to overcome the formidable attributes of the 

cultural barrier or innate characteristics of a disenabling mental, physical, or 

emotional barrier. 

 To overcome the disenabling effects of mental, physical, or emotional barriers 

employers have looked towards the advantages of assistive technologies for 

assistance. The reality of the matter is that while assistive can help to overcome 

many mental, physical, and emotional barriers it cannot and will not ever possess 

the ability to overcome the reigning number one barriers confronting employees 

with disabilities. The reigning number one barrier has been created by society 

and is referred to as the cultural barriers. Cultural barriers embody numerous 

complex, dynamic, and diverse challenges to be overcome. These challenges 

are related to but are not limited to organizational, management, and worker 

cultures (Hagner & DiLeo, 1993). 

Theories, Concepts, and/or Practices

 There are many theories, concepts, and practices associated to the effective 

management of such a diverse group, as employees with disabilities (Swanson & 

Fouad, 1999). Szymanski and Parker (1996) have theorized that to a certain 

degree that the application of diversity factors from current theories, concepts, 

and practices may be capable of providing a sturdy framework to the 

management of employees with disabilities. 

 In retrospect, the post World War I theory or concept of disability was 

perceived as a medical condition (mental, physical, or emotional) that lead to the 

inability of a person to conduct work, which is commonly referred to as the 

medical model (Heldrick, 1999). The medical model concept was perceived and 

widely accepted as the most accurate definition up until the 1990’s. In the 1990’s, 

the medical model concept (old paradigm) started to shift ever so slightly to what 

is nowadays known as the disability paradigm (new paradigm). This shift in 

paradigm has lead to the rethinking of many related theories, concepts, and 

practices from those that viewed disabilities under the medical model paradigm 

to what is now considered to be that of a social model (the disability paradigm) 

(Barnartt & Altman, 2001). Some of the most popular are the theory of work 

adjustment, organizational career theory, Super’s theory, and the role theory 

(Szymanski & Parker, 1996). 
3 

 The workplace concepts for people with disabilities include the concept of 

workplace accommodations, assistive technology concept, organizational 

concept of culture, and the concept of establishing solid management functions. 

Presently, business policies are not well defined and are for the most part 

dictated by federal and state laws or regulations (Barnartt & Altman, 2001; 

Hagner & DiLeo, 1993; Swanson & Fouad, 1999; Szymanski & Parker, 1996). 

 The theory of work adjustment was developed in the 1960s by the state of 

Minnesota and for all intensive purposes the theory of work adjustment is a 

person-environment theory model (Hagner & DiLeo, 1993). In accordance with 

the work of Szymanski and Parker (1996), the relationship between the 

employee and the workplace environment can be a source of unfathomed 

strength or profound confusion. Nonetheless, Szymanski and Parker (1996) have 

stated that the person-environment theory model is based on the following 

paraphrased assumptions (p. 83): 

• Individuals seek out and create environments that offer possibilities of 

leadership such that they are in charge. 

• Degree of fit between the person and environment is associated with 

significant outcomes that can substantially affect the performance, 

productivity, satisfaction, turnover, and stress. 

• The process of person and environment fit is reciprocal. 

 The major presumption in the theory of work adjustment is that employees 

seek to maintain a positive relationship with their workplace environment. 

Employees therefore bring their individual and/or team requirements to the 

workplace environment, and the workplace environment brings its requirements 

to the individual employees or the team (Barnartt & Altman, 2001). The 

implication is that for work adjustment to take place the employee and the 

workplace environment must achieve some degree of incontrovertible symmetry. 

In simplistic terms the employee and the workplace environment are in effect 

tethered to each other. The theory of work adjustment does not only apply to 

individuals with disabilities, it actually applies to all employees (Swanson & 

Fouad, 1999). 

 When the organizational career theory was first conceived it was perceived as 

an economic based theory and did not include employees with disabilities. This is 

because the medical model of disability was still widely accepted and a person 

with a disability was not thought of as needing or desiring a career, for he or she 

was unable to work (Swanson & Fouad, 1999). The organizational career theory 

is more of a theoretical method that can be used by employers in the 

development of career planning strategies or to meet company objectives and as 

a strategic career management tool for employees. The purpose of this theory is 

to match the skills and abilities of an employee to the best career fit within the 
4 

organization (Szymanski & Parker, 1996). The organizational career theory 

favors the established hierarchical bureaucracy of an enterprise as the idea and 

most efficient method of deployment. Hence, it is the responsibility of the 

employer to seek the best career fit to meet required organizational personnel 

objective, in doing so the employee will subsequently profit (Swanson & Fouad, 

1999). 

 Super’s Theory is a developmental theory that predicates the notion that there 

exist a fundamental correlation between the differences of people and 

occupations. These differences can be summed up in terms of abilities and 

personality traits. In theory, to achieve the most benevolent outcome it is feasibly 

possible for employers to translate such differences into occupational suitability 

factors for people with disabilities (Swanson & Fouad, 1999). As stated in the 

work of Szymanski and Parker (1996), the Super’s theory encompasses fourteen 

propositions, of which only three have practical application to the management of 

employees with disabilities (p. 87-89): 

• People differ in their abilities and personalities, needs, values, interests, 

traits, and self-concepts. 

• People are qualified, by virtue of these characteristics, each for a number of 

occupations. 

• Each occupation requires a characteristic pattern of ability and personality 

traits, with tolerances wide enough to allow both some variety of occupation. 

 Since Super’s theory is a developmental theory it is relevant to make note that 

employees progress through seven different stages of career priority. This 

progression is most often associated to an employee’s age. For example, at age 

18 an employee may be on a journey of self-discovery or exploration for the 

career. The progression of stages continues from the exploratory stage, to basic 

training, to early career, to mid-career, to late career, to disengagement of career 

focus, to the final stage of retirement (Hagner & DiLeo, 1993). However, for 

employees with disabilities this progression stages most often becomes stuck for 

an extended time somewhere in between the early to mid-career stages 

(Swanson & Fouad, 1999). As indicated by Barnartt and Altman (2001), it is 

important for a manager to recognize such a condition and take action in the 

advancement of an employee to the next career stage. 

 In reference to the role theory, employees fit into a particular career role and 

as such they are expected to assume the perceived characteristics of that role. 

The career role may be permanent or temporary and will dictate how each 

person or employee’ will be perceived by the employer and society. Under the 

medical model, a person with a disability is perceived by society as unable to 

work. Thus, it is very hard for some people (employers, managers, etc.) to 

understand why someone with a disability would desire to work (Barnartt & 

Altman, 2001). 
5 

 The role theory is a sociological theory composed of multiple role concepts. 

Barnartt and Altman (2001) have listed several of these role concepts. They are, 

“role salience, role set, role discontinuity, role strain, role conflict, role ambiguity 

and role synchrony” (p. 85). 

 As per the concept of workplace accommodations employers with 15 

employees or more must make reasonable workplace accommodations for 

employees with disabilities. Reasonable accommodations will include those 

structural and technological modifications that do not impose an undue hardship 

on the employer. The phases ‘reasonable accommodations’ and ‘undue 

hardship’ have not been distinctly defined. However, each can be gauged by the 

size, revenue, and nature of the company. For those employers or managers 

desiring more detail, they can refer the guidelines outlined by the Americans with 

Disabilities Act 1990 and current amendments via the Disability Rights Section 

website (United States Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, Disability 

Rights Section [USDOJ], 2002). 

 From the perspective of the manager some disabilities or impairment may be 

hidden or just not obvious. Furthermore, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 

1990, precludes the employer from inquiring about a disability or impairment. It is 

therefore the obligation of the employee to furnish the manager or employer with 

enough selective information to demonstrate that an employee has a disability or 

impairment that limits or restricts his or her ability to perform what is referred to 

as major life activities (USDOJ, 2002). Per the National Council on Disability 

(2001) a major life activity is the impairment in the performance of manual task, 

walking, learning, concentrating, thinking, speaking, breathing, sleeping, hearing, 

seeing, interacting with others, or caring for oneself. 

 The website of the United States Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, 

Disability Rights Section, Section 504 was amended in 2002 to the Americans 

with Act of 1990, as such a person with an disclosed disability or impairment may 

ask for accommodations to include, modification of facilities, assistive equipment 

or devices, part-time work schedule, modified work schedule, time away for 

treatment, unpaid leave of absence, job restructuring, additional education, 

modification of policy, or transfer to a vacant position for which the employee is 

qualified to fill. However, the United States Department of Labor, Office of 

Disability Employment Policy (2002) has legislated that the requesting employee 

must also be willing to participate in the process of researching, determining, 

developing, and implementing a reasonable accommodation. If the employee 

does not fully participate he or she may lose their right to such a reasonable 

accommodation. In the context of participation, the employee may voluntarily 

submit to a medical or psychological examination, as the resulting documentation 

may be needed to determine if the employee has a temporary or permanent 

disability. As per the United States Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, 
6 

Disability Rights Section website, a temporary disability may not warrant an 

accommodation via the aegis of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and if 

the disability is deemed as permanent the documentation may help to identify the 

perimeters for the most efficacious accommodation (USDOJ, 2002). 

 The concept of assistive technology refers to the belief that assistive 

technologies can dissolve the barriers most disability issues. In truth, assistive 

technologies are only effective when accompanied by the proper legislation, 

policies, and an equitable cultural paradigm in the workplace (Flippo, Inge, & 

Barcus, 1995). Assistive technologies can be an electronic device, a piece of 

software or a hardware component used to assist the employee (United States 

Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division [USDOJ], 1998). Assistive 

technology theories and concepts predicate the tenet philosophy that universal 

design is tethered directly to the universal access of all technologies, electronic 

or not (USDOJ, 2002). 

 As per Flippo, Inge, & Barcus (1995), the fundamental development of 

assistive technologies foundations have been dictated by legislation and federal 

policy. The aforementioned legislation and policies have also set the stage for 

standards associated to the application of communication technologies, sensory 

impairment technologies, mobility, and strategies for the workplace and schools. 

As implied by Heldrick (1999), the employment of assistive technologies within 

companies has also created a multitude of developmental staffing and creative 

financing issues. 

 The organizational concept of culture is the cultural paradigm that exists 

within the workplace of every company or enterprise. As coined on the 

Department of Labor’s website, the organizational concept is sometimes referred 

to as the “Social Theory of Disability” (USDOL, 2002). An example of this would 

be the dissimilar social ranking between management and employees. 

 The organizational culture is a set of learned attitudes, behaviors, and the 

other factoids that comprise a way of conducting business life with co-workers 

and management within an organization. While, it is unlikely that any one 

employee or manager will share his or her personal culture with all their coworkers. It is however very likely that he or she will choose to share their 

personal culture with at least one co-worker, both within the organization and 

outside of the organizational confines. With different organizational groups a 

varied level of comfort is achieved. The practice of establishing a desired level of 

comfort is known by most employees as networking and can be an effective 

reconnaissance tool for employees and managers alike (Szymanski & Parker, 

1996). 

 The concept of management functions is a broad plan of attack for managers 

on how to influence the organization and employees through effective planning, 
7 

organizing, directing, controlling, employee selection, employee support, 

employee training and development, and management style (Hagner & DiLeo, 

1993). There are many practices that management could feasible employ to 

determine what management functions are best suited to influence diverse 

employees with disabilities (Szymanski & Parker, 1996). The overpowering 

objective of the theories and concepts as related to the management functions of 

employees with disabilities is to promote or invoke a paradigm shift within the 

organization, management ranks, and the workers cultural from the current 

damning cultural to one that recognizes the potential abilities of a person (NCD, 

2001). 

Resolutions

 In order for employers to capitalize on the ability differences of employees 

with disabilities in the workforce they have sought out solutions from many 

sources. Some of the solutions are complex and other are simple, they may 

require a shift in the workplace paradigm, the use of assistive technologies, the 

development of management strategies, or a change in work location 

philosophies. The overwhelming justification is that it is the most beneficial, 

ethical and humane thing to do Hagner & DiLeo (1993). 

 The work of authors such as Szymanski and Parker (1996) have alluded to 

the fact that before people with disabilities could not be fully integrated into the 

workplace until the culture of the workplace becomes more welcoming. This is 

because the medical model did not perceive people with disabilities as potential 

workforce asset. Hence, not much emphasize had been placed on resolving the 

workplace barriers. The shift of paradigms from that of the medical model to the 

disability model has fostered a change in the perceptions of society and the 

workplace culture. Additionally, the National Council on Disability believes that 

the only way to shift the culture is to establish legislation (NCD, 2001). Still 

Hagner and DiLeo (1993) advocate a middle ground approach. 

 Workplace strategies can vary from company to company and can potentially 

consist of thousands of concepts or notions. The basic objective of workplace 

strategies as applied to differently abled employees is to promote productivity 

(Hagner & DiLeo, 1993). There are many strategies available to ponder from 

many sources (Hagner & DiLeo, 1993; Heldrick, 1999; Szymanski & Parker, 

1996; United States Department of Labor, Office of Disability Employment Policy 

[USDOL/ODEP], 2002; USDOL, 2002; NCD, 2001). Hagner and DiLeo (1993) 

have suggested a few strategies that managers can implement or modified to 

make the workplace culture more positive, nurturing, and accommodating to 

people with disabilities or new employees. Managers could reexamine or modify 

their leadership style to include, but not limited to their tone of interaction, vary 

gathering (meeting) places, celebrate special events, educate the staff on 

disability, form a disability support group, keep in touch with employees, create 
8 

pride by reinforcing the company image, and standardize required task 

(USDOL/ODEP, 2002). A required task could be as simple as standardizing the 

location of a stapler for the vision impaired or as complicated as the 

standardization of a password authentication system (Hagner & DiLeo, 1993). 

 Effective planning strategies for diverse employees with disabilities may 

consist of a detailed strategic business plan for the near and distant future. The 

plan must be accurate, timely, easy to find, identify information sources, 

communicate with other employees who do similar work, talk to the employee, 

examine job descriptions, or call the Job Accommodation Network at 800-JAN7234 (USDOJ, 2002). Plans are frequently threatened with obsolescence of 

technology changes and economic turbulence before the ink on the paper is 

even dries. The reality is that even the best-laid business plan may still go astray, 

especially as managers try to predict a company's technology requirements, 

staffing needs, and work processes (Szymanski & Parker, 1996). 

 Nonetheless, a good business plan can effectively communicate the 

company’s vision, provide direction, establish time management procedures and 

facilitate methods of control to all employees, whether disabled or not. 

 For additional examples, the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 refers to 

strategies, as principles of which there are seven (Heldrick, 1999). From the 

seven principles, there are only two that apply to diverse employees with 

disabilities (p. 6): 

• Services must be streamlined by coordinating multiple employments and 

training programs, must be accessible to people with disabilities. 

• The system should empower individuals with the information and resources 

they need to manage their own careers. 

 There are many types of assistive technologies available for many types of 

disabilities. Flippo, Inge, & Barcus (1995) have authored a book that details the 

many different types of assistive technologies available to employers and people 

with disabilities. They have proceeded to outline adaptation strategies for the 

workplace, such as career planning, education, redesign, mobility assistance, 

universal design of low-tech and high-tech devices, to name a few. The use or 

deployment of assistive technologies is not just a feasible resolution strategy. It 

may be also allow the employer to remain in compliance with rehabilitation and 

assistive technology legislation of the past century. For example the Vocational 

Rehabilitation Act of 1918, Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), to 

include the 2002 amendment of Section 508 to the ADA (USDOJ, 2002). The 

assistive technologies of today can help people with visual impairments or 

blindness, hearing impairments or deafness, mobility impairment or paralyze, or 

a combination of multiple impairments at varying levels of severity (Flippo, Inge, 

& Barcus, 1995). 
9 

 It has been recommended via the United States Department of Labor website 

that managers become familiar with the various type of assistive technologies 

that are available for people with disabilities. Here is a brief list of possible 

assistive technologies (USDOL, 2002): 

• Vision (sight) – screen readers, speech synthesizers, Braille systems, 

scanner systems, TeleBraille, and large format displays. 

• Hearing/speech – visual redundancy systems, telecommunication device for 

the deaf (TDD), speech amplification device, telephone signaling device, 

and caption systems. 

• Mobility – keyboard macros, sequential keystroke input, alternative 

keyboards, infrared pointing device, and a speech recognition system. 

 Telecommuting, which is sometimes referred to as teleworking, can be a 

highly effective and extremely flexible solution for employees of all ability levels. 

For those employees who cannot easily make it into the traditional workplace 

because of physical disabilities, as telecommuting eliminates the need to 

commute and may be the only viable alternative (Joice, n.d.). As stated in a 

report from the United States Department of Labor (2002, July 26), 

“telecommuting can be useful in solving business problems by decreasing certain 

overhead costs, satisfying fluctuating demands for additional office and parking 

space, and increasing employees’ loyalty, productivity, and retention by helping 

them balance work and family demands” (p. 43). 
10 

References

Barnartt, S. N., & Altman, B. M. (Eds.). (2001). Exploring theories and expanding

 methodologies: Where we are and where we need to go. London: Elsevier 

 Science Ltd. 

Flippo, K. F., Inge, K. J., & Barcus, M. (1995). Assistive technology: A resource 

 for school, work, and community. Baltimore: Paul H. Brooks Publishing Co. 

Hagner, D. C., & DiLeo, D. (1993). Working together: Workplace culture, 

 Supported employment, and persons with disabilities. Cambridge, MA: 

 Brookline Books. 

Heldrick, J. J. (1999). The Workforce Investment Act of 1998: A primer for people 

 with disabilities. Retrieved September 12, 2002, from University of Iowa Web 

 site: http://www.its.uiowa.edu/law/lhpdc/rrtc/workforce.html

Joice, W. (n.d.). Federal telework topics. United States General Services 

Administration. Retrieved September 14, 2002, from http://www.gsa.gov/ 

 attachments/GSA_PUBLICATIONS/extpub/DOL_Paper_Final.doc

National Council on Disability. (2001, June 21). The accessible future. Retrieved 

September 12, 2002, from http://www.ncd.gov/newsroom/publications/ 

 accessiblefuture.html

Swanson, J. L., & Fouad, N. A. (1999). Career theory and practice: Learning

 Through case studies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. 

Szymanski, E. M., & Parker, R. M. (Eds.). (1996). Work and disability: Issues and

 strategies in career development and job placement. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed, Inc. 

United States Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, Disability Rights 

 Section. http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/ada/adahom1.htm. 

United States Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division. (1998). Workforce

 Investment Act of 1998 (WIA). Retrieved September 24, 2002 from 

 http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/508/508law.html

United States Department of Labor. (2002, July 26). People with disabilities: 

 Strengthening the 21st Century workforce. Retrieved September 23, 2002, 

 from http://www.dol.gov/sec/programs/ptfead/2002rpt/ 2002_PTFEAD_ 

 Report.pdf

United States Department of Labor, Office of Disability Employment Policy. 

 (2002). New freedom initiative 2002: Independence through employment.
11 

 Retrieved September 24, 2002, from http://www.dol.gov/odep/pubs/nfi02/ 

 finalnfi_71802.pdf