When Reasonable Adjustments Reveal Unreasonable Management Gaps

In many organisations, a request for a reasonable adjustment sets off a familiar pattern: forms circulate, meetings multiply, and progress stalls. What should be a straightforward process — enabling someone to work at their best — becomes a drawn-out exercise in justification.

It’s tempting to see this as a procedural issue or a lack of resources. But more often, the real blockage lies elsewhere: reasonable adjustment requests expose where line managers lack basic management capability.

The visible problem: stalling, confusion, and discomfort

When an employee asks for something as simple as flexible hours, different communication formats, or adjustments to sensory environments, the request can trigger unease.

Some managers overcompensate — escalating unnecessarily or seeking multiple approvals. Others go silent, delay, or defer to HR. The result is a frustrating, sometimes humiliating experience for the employee — not because the adjustment is unreasonable, but because it surfaces the manager’s discomfort with difference.

These situations are rarely about malice. They’re about insecurity — a quiet fear of getting it wrong, of losing control, or of being exposed for not knowing what to do.

The hidden issue: competence, not compliance

Reasonable adjustments are, at their core, an exercise in good management. They rely on the same capabilities that underpin effective leadership: clear goal-setting, flexibility, empathy, and communication.

So when adjustment requests stall, they often highlight where these foundational skills are missing. For example:

• Setting SMART objectives: Some managers struggle to define outcomes clearly enough to flex working patterns or duties. They rely on presence over performance.

• Adapting to different personalities and preferences: A neurodivergent employee or someone with a health condition may need a different communication style, pace, or environment — exposing a manager’s limited range.

• Building trust and autonomy: Where management depends on visibility, not outcomes, adjustments like remote or flexible work feel threatening.

• Maintaining psychological safety: Fear of “saying the wrong thing” or “getting in trouble” can paralyse good intentions.

A request for adjustment, then, isn’t just a test of HR policy — it’s a mirror held up to leadership capability.

The cultural cost of avoidance

When line managers lack confidence in these areas, adjustment requests get stuck. HR teams become bottlenecks, employees feel scrutinised, and the organisation’s values start to ring hollow.

The cost isn’t only procedural. It’s cultural.

• Delays turn into disengagement. Employees stop asking for what they need.

• Psychological safety erodes. Colleagues notice how difference is handled.

• Talent is lost. Capable people leave because inclusion feels performative, not lived.

As one leader recently put it to me, “We say we’re inclusive, but our systems assume everyone works the same way.”

When line managers aren’t equipped to manage difference, the system itself becomes disabling.

From compliance to capability

The solution isn’t more bureaucracy. It’s more capable management.

Organisations serious about inclusion should stop treating adjustment conversations as specialist territory and start embedding them into everyday leadership practice. That means training and supporting managers to:

• Set adaptive objectives that focus on outcomes, not input.

• Co-create solutions rather than “approve” requests.

• Understand and flex to different working and communication styles.

• Create team norms that normalise difference rather than tolerate it.

This is leadership at its most practical. The same skills that enable good adjustments — clarity, curiosity, and flexibility — are the same ones that drive engagement and performance.

A closing thought

A culture that handles adjustments well is a culture that already manages people well. When reasonable adjustments flow smoothly, it’s a sign that managers understand their people, communicate clearly, and trust outcomes.

When they stall, it’s rarely because the request is unreasonable — it’s because the organisation hasn’t built the management capability to deal with difference confidently.