Autistic people are often honest to the point it hurts. Thus, I will begin this post with a disclaimer. I am not a psychologist or an expert on neurodiversity in any way, apart from being autistic myself. Which probably makes me more of an expert than those trained experts.

I am a certified CliftonStrengths coach, though. So, no problem on that side.

This combination results in a lack of motivation to change people and “help” them reintegrate into society, following social norms, while not challenging neurotypical individuals. I leave this urge to the experts and professionals mentioned above.

Describing Neurodivergence 

Neurodiversity is the rather unspectacular insight that all our brains are different. We know today that no two brains are equal.

Neurodivergence is a subset of neurodiversity. Neurodivergent brains are those that substantially differ from the norm, where the norm refers to the majority of brains.

The term “neurodivergence” is not rooted in science. It was created by activists in the neurodiversity movement in the late 1980s. They aimed to challenge the idea that differences in brain structures are disorders.

We know too little about the brain, and our imaging methods lack the necessary resolution, so we typically base our classification on behavioral observations.

We define neurodivergence as a set of disorders that display two categories of symptoms. A neurodivergent person 

• is no longer classified or perceived as being in the “normal range” and thus is disruptive to society. 
• experiences inner suffering and pressure, both in varying degrees.

Sadly, we have come to use even the term “neurodivergent” and not only the conditions it encompasses in diagnostic terms. We call people neurodivergent when 

• Their behavior presents a challenge to their environment.
• They need exceptional support.
• They suffer as a result of their differences. 

The goal of a diagnosis is to provide the necessary support, typically through the healthcare system.

Many neurodivergent individuals are overlooked due to this. Consider someone who has the energy to hide their condition most of the time. They don’t meet the diagnostic criteria. However, when they struggle, they may no longer be able to maintain their mask. As a result, they can’t get a diagnosis because the criteria require symptoms and behaviors to be visible from a young age, when they masked their differences.

Neurodivergence encompasses variations in sensory processing, motor skills, social comfort, cognition, and focus, recognizing them as natural differences in brain function.

Let me add some examples—in alphabetical order—but remember that these traits show up in different forms and combinations to the degree that when you have met one neurodivergent person, you have met … one neurodivergent person.

(The above is an excerpt from my upcoming book, Neurodivergent Genius: What if your difference is exactly what the future needs? If you are interested in knowing more, let me know. I can then provide you with a link to the Kickstarter campaign where you can express your interest in concrete action. Or we can just talk back and forth in the comments.)

Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD)

Autism is less a single condition and more a different way the brain interacts with the world. It influences how we communicate, connect, and develop patterns in daily life, often through unique sensory experiences and intense, focused interests. Since autism exists on a spectrum, no two people experience it exactly the same; support needs can range from subtle adjustments to extensive assistance with communication and self-care. Understanding autism involves recognizing both the challenges it can present in a world designed for neurotypical norms and the special strengths it often offers: noticing details others miss, maintaining deep focus, and providing creative, outside-the-box approaches to thinking.

My CliftonStrengths Profile 

My dominant strengths are Ideation, Learner, Deliberative, Intellection, Futuristic, Connectedness, Strategic, Analytical. Input, and Self-Assurance.

If you know the model, this list contains seven of the eight Strategic Thinking themes. In an older system of classification, all my strengths but one were lumped into the seeing category:

Striving: Motivational strengths that generate and focus energy to accomplish a lot. Achiever, Activator, Adaptability, Belief, Discipline, Focus, Restorative, Self-Assurance, Significance

Impacting: Interpersonal strengths that enable a person to impact or influence others in a powerful way. Command, Competition, Developer, Maximizer, Positivity, Woo

Relating: Interpersonal bonding, forming deeply meaningful, close and strong personal relationships. Communication, Empathy, Harmony, Includer, Individualization, Relator, Responsibility

Seeing: Strengths of perception, organization, and information processing that produce lifelong learning. Analytical, Arranger, Connectedness, Consistency, Context, Deliberative, Futuristic, Ideation, Intellection, Input, Learner, Strategic

Only self-assurance was in Striving, and that made sense to me. More on that soon.

I call my strengths my seedbed for and expression of autism. Autism is about seeing, often with difficulties relating, impacting, and striving. My strengths are closely tied to my unique brain structure. If you think of it, strengths are expressions of brain structures as well.

I define the brain as the gateway through which the mind enters and interacts with this world. The brain permits the mind, and different brain structures allow for different expressions of the mind.

The observing role of the strategic thinking themes, aided by the tainted expressions of deliberative (focusing on the “thinking of all the possible risks”) and connectedness (building the Net of Indra, a complete Weltanschauung from what the other strengths provide, seeing the connections between concepts more than people), find their perfect gateway in an autistic brain.

What is the special role of Self-Assurance in my case? Being autistic and neurodivergent in other aspects, my Self-Assurance did not develop and mature because I had the firm conviction of being a misfit. I valued external expectations and externally motivated ideals more than my own needs and capabilities. 

It took a personal crisis (cancer and near-death by lung embolism) and the loss of all my relationships but three friends to revisit my self-definition. I invested in Self-Assurance by focusing my other strengths on myself. I even studied topics I would never have allowed myself to come near in my previous environment, such as personal development and developmental psychology.

Your strengths are a reason for your challenges, but they are also a solution. We might need help to see that. This help can come in the form of a crisis, but we do not have to wait for that. There are people who can help you. Maybe not the crowd I described at the outset of this post, as you do not need to fit the mold because you are unique.

All the best and much courage on your path. And if I can help, you know where to find me.

In this exercise, we create a sentence together that describes us based on our top five strengths. To accomplish this, we’ll take the personalized Top 5 section or the full 34 Strengths report.

Our primary goal is a sentence with this structure: Adjective Noun and Adjective Adjective Noun.

This sounds complicated at first, but it’s simple. Here is an example:

Imaginative thinker and soberly observant visionary.

This sentence is mine and includes the strengths of ideation, learner, deliberative, intellection, and futuristic.

How did I proceed?

I read through my personal strength descriptions and first looked for two nouns. Then, I add the adjectives. Basically, I want one word from each strength.

You might not find the right words in your strength description. If you don’t, ask yourself: What words would I use to describe this strength in me? What comes to mind when I read this text?

After you find the five words, compose your sentence from them. Et voilà, your unique selling proposition is ready. If you’re not satisfied, tweak the sentence until you like it.

Alternatively, you can build other sentence constructs if you like:

As a visionary, I think imaginatively and observe soberly.

I think and observe constantly, and develop sober ideas and visions.

You might extend this to your dominant strengths. An example using intellection, connectedness, learner, ideation, and futuristic:

Networked thinker and lifelong learner, imaginative futurist.

I think through the big picture, learn as I go, develop new ideas for the future.

Now it’s up to you.

First, a few reasons why I advise against it.

Hopefully, by the time I take the CliftonStrengths Assessment a second time, I’m already a bit biased and believe that investing in my strengths is better than trying to solve my weaknesses.

Or better yet, I no longer necessarily understand my weaknesses as the things I can’t do, but as what prevents me from being efficient, productive, and helpful.

After all, it can be my strengths hindering me if they demand too much space and attention.

This knowledge alone makes me respond differently to certain of the 177 questions in the assessment.

Moreover, a few terms mean something different for us now. Empathy in colloquial terms is different from Gallup’s definition of empathy. But if I have Gallup’s term in mind, I will also respond differently to certain questions.

Third, it is almost impossible for us to answer 177 questions exactly the same way over and over again. This leads to shifts in the results, which I then focus on. This leads to me trusting the assessment less and therefore benefiting less.

Smaller shifts are normal, even certain jumps can be well explained, but the energy is now invested in the wrong thing.

Various studies conducted by Gallup showed an average stability of about 70% of Top 5 and 95% of Top 10.

That is, on average, one strength slips out of the top 10 and is replaced by another. The results of the studies can be read on the Gallup website in the Technical Report.

But back to me. I have so many strengths in Strategic Thinking that I, of course, had to do my own “research”. But again, I didn’t.

I took the assessment in February 2017, and retook it as part of my certification in October 2017. I did this before the course because I was sent a code for the course and didn’t know any better yet.

I repeated the assessment in 2018 when Gallup changed platforms to the current Access. I wanted to know what the new process looked like for my clients.

In 2019, I took the assessment again. I had just gotten over cancer (or rather, I thought I had). Gallup recommends retaking the assessment after a major trauma, if necessary.

And a few days ago, I was asked by Gallup to test the new version for coaches, the Personal Subscription, for them. I did the assessment again in that frame to check the features.

I am amazed at how robust the results are for me.

My top 10 each differ in one talent theme: Maximizer, Self-Assurance, and Relator alternate.

For me, Maximizer is a typical example of the effect described above: I’m now on a path of steady growth and know there’s always more to come.

Relator, on the other hand, has always danced around the top 10. Maybe an indication that I have eleven dominant strengths? Or possibly, there are only 9, namely the ones that consistently show up in the top 10? Or perhaps Relator just jumped the gun because a small group of people became more important to me in my fight against cancer, pulmonary embolism, and more.

As I said, I think Maximizer snuck in. I am most comfortable with the original result, and I am currently wavering between 9, 10, and 11 dominant strengths.

Finally, the reasons for doing the assessment a second time:

• Trauma in the interim.
• The first time you were under 25, and that was 5 years ago or more.
• You took the assessment once, but you were thinking about pleasing someone else (e.g. your boss).

If you are surprised by the result, get a coach to help you track down the result. I’m happy to do that, of course.