Australian leadership advisor Mike Meyer has sparked an international conversation with a provocative question: "What if we've spent 200 years making people fit the system, then called the people who couldn't fit it the problem?" The question, posed in a recent article, has resonated far beyond Meyer's usual audience, with 92% of its reach coming from outside his existing network, spanning Australia, the UK, and the US.
Meyer's question builds on his earlier hypothesis that 40 to 50% of the population could be neuro-complex, a claim that drew predictable attention to the numbers. But Meyer argues the real conversation is about something deeper: "What if neurodivergence isn't suddenly exploding? What if we're simply getting better at seeing people who were already here?"
Meyer points to the hereditary nature of neurodevelopmental differences and the historical lack of recognition for autism, ADHD, and other conditions. Generations of adults grew up without diagnoses, but they didn't suddenly become neurodivergent when their children or grandchildren were diagnosed. They were always present.
The industrial age, Meyer contends, shaped a world that demanded conformity: turn up at the same time, sit still, follow the process, work the same hours, communicate in expected ways. These systems were efficient, but they confused what worked for the system with what was natural for humans. "We built a world that needed people to behave predictably, then decided the people who didn't behave that way were the unusual ones," he said.
The relevance of this conversation is growing as the conditions that defined the industrial age change. Technology and new work models are creating more room for people to contribute differently. Meyer is not suggesting everyone is neurodivergent or disabled, but he is asking how much human capability has been overlooked because the definition of normal was too narrow. "For some people, neurodivergence is profoundly disabling. We shouldn't pretend otherwise. But for others, part of the problem may have been the collision between the person and a system built around somebody else's way of functioning," he explained.
Meyer's perspective is not new; he has long challenged conventional ideas about leadership and difference in his book Weird is the New Normal. But the current moment feels different. "The idea that weird might be normal isn't new to me. What's different now is that it feels more relevant, more visible, and perhaps more obvious than ever before," he said.
The conversation, which began with an article titled We're Not All Neurodivergent. So Why Does It Suddenly Look That Way?, has expanded into broader questions about diagnosis, environment, and inclusion. Meyer encourages people to challenge his 40 to 50% hypothesis but insists there's something underneath it that cannot be unseen: "Maybe the people weren't always the problem. Maybe sometimes it was the system we were asking them to fit."
