Apt - Making it Work final report

Workstream Activities

This section described the activities that took place in each of the 4 workstreams. Specifically, the work that was carried out with a group of employers who were assigned to each workstream after completing the Employer Self-Assessment and Report & Recommendations process. These activities allowed us to draw some conclusions on the appropriate tools that would successfully enable employers to develop their skills and knowledge in the subject area and that would be included in the employer guides as examples of interventions that could be successfully used by a wider audience.

Workstream 1: Equitable Induction & In-Work Support

Rationale for the Workstream

If we are to reduce the likelihood of people becoming economically inactive, a key element of the support we provide must be to set them up for success when they enter paid work. Experience has taught us that people who have been economically inactive, particularly disabled recruits are most likely to fall out of employment very soon after taking up a job. If we can support the new employee to sustain employment for 3 months, they are more likely to retain their job longer-term and their support needs will steadily diminish over time as workplace supports are put in place. To achieve this induction and onboarding processes need to equitable and able to flex to meet the needs of diverse groups and individuals. Employers also need to have a strong understanding of reasonable adjustments and how to address challenges when the arise to ensure that people do not lose their jobs when this could have been avoided if the correct support and problem solving had been in place.

SUSE promotes the 5 Stage Supported Employment model and works closely with providers across Scotland who use this model to move disabled people into sustained work, including 20 Local Authorities. We believe that Supported Employment is cost effective and that it compares favourably with other models, including the standard No One Left Behind services. In our view this is because of the unique elements of Supported Employment including the approach taken to inducting and onboarding new employees and the in-work support that is provided.

This workstream offered the opportunity to learn about employers’ current practices and to support them to improve the materials, processes and interventions they are using. We intended that this may include some Supported Employment elements, and this turned out to be the case, but the assessment process with employers and the inputs from our Workstream partners also resulted in us testing some new approaches.

Aims

The Workstream sought to understand what employers are currently doing when new employees start, beyond the bureaucratic processes such as HR forms and payroll. We wanted to review the materials that employers issue and how these are used – are employees expected to navigate these by themselves or are they supported to understand them. To make this worthwhile it was necessary to identify a variety of types of employers in terms of size and sectors. As would be expected the amount of formal processes used was closely linked to the resources the employers had at their disposal and whether they had a dedicated HR team.

SUSE’s delivery partners and people with lived experience played a significant role in project delivery, specifically working 1-to-1 with employers. We wanted to geta clear sense of how appropriate the materials and approaches employers are using for the intended audience. Our partners were able to provide constructive feedback and allowed us to arrive at recommendations that have a practical application, real world examples that employers can use or adapt as necessary. All of the workstreams have cross overs and this is particularly the case with this workstream. If the employer uses IT systems (and almost everyone does) there is a clear connection to the Digital Access workstream which was looking at eLearning materials and in-house systems. We asked all of the employers in this workstream to complete the Digital Access Questionnaire, and this proved to be a very worthwhile exercise.

Workstream Employers

Four employers agreed to participate in this workstream following the Employer Assessment & Action Plan process.

Workstream 1 Activities

Induction and Onboarding

Reviews of Employers’ Induction Materials

Each employer, when undergoing the Self-Assessment and Report & Recommendations process identified inductions as an area they would like to investigate further. SUSE developed a brief detailing the process we and our partners would follow to complete a review of each induction process to ensure this was done consistently across employers.

This explained how the materials should be reviewed and what detail should be included in the report and feedback. Members of the SUSE Experience Network, representing a range of disabilities including Sensory Loss, Autism and Cerebral Palsy, led on the review of each employer’s documents. Their lived experience of as a disabled person meant they were able to develop a range of recommendations for employers which they could use to improve the accessibility of their documents.

Reviews varied according to the employer – determined by their needs and current resources. Some focused on adapting their current induction processes and company handbooks to be more accessible, others needed an induction process with a checklist to ensure consistency, while one employer chose to focus on developing an accessible Health & Wellbeing Passport for employees, as they had not used this tool before. We have described below.

A wide variety of employer documents were reviewed and recommendations were developed to make them more accessible and appropriate for disabled employees. We have used the findings of this exercise to arrive at recommendation in the Employer Guidance that addresses the most common issues we found. Examples of documents we reviewed include:

• HR policy documents
• New staff induction checklist
• New induction plans
• Employee handbooks
• Recruitment policies – relating to induction and in-work support
• New staff welcome PowerPoint presentations
• Learning & Development policies
• Standard Induction Booklets
• Retention policies

Given the limited time available to complete these reviews we have not been able to gather appropriate data on how successful to implementation of changes has been for the individual employers, as they will be used for new recruits and there were few examples of new staff starting in the final stages of the project and completing the induction process.

However, each employer now has a range of resources in place, developed in partnership with SUSE and using our accessibility guidance documents which gives easy to follow advice on how to write documents to make them appropriate for all staff.

Induction Checklist

When delivering the workstream we also found that some employers did not have any materials relating to inducting or onboarding new staff. SUSE supported these employers by offering training courses with a focus on induction and onboarding in an accessible way e.g. Mental Health and Wellbeing and Reverse Mentoring. We also worked with them to produce a template of an Induction Checklist. This would help them identify the key areas relevant to their organisation and develop their own internal checklist of topics that should be covered in a new employee’s induction.

We broke this down in sections:

• Personal - Information and Contacts, Contract of Employment, Payroll
• Reasonable Adjustments
• Essential Training - (e.g. First Aid, Health & Safety, GDPR) Communications Preferences
• Role Specific Training
• Team - Key Colleagues, Line Manager, Organisation Chart
• Key Policies and Procedures

In-Work Support

Health & Wellbeing Passport – Case Study

Significant work was completed with a manufacturing employer, who worked with our partner Alliance for Inclusion to introduce a Health and Wellbeing Passport as a tool to review and improve their in-work support for all staff. This employer has a large cohort of disabled employees (70%) and while the disabled workforce was stable, they had a higher turnover of operations managers who were struggling to understand the needs of all employees. Therefore, a health & wellbeing passport was suggested as a method for managers to learn and stay up to date on the needs of their staff.

A Health and Wellbeing Passport is a document that provides detail for an employer and/or manager relating to both the impact of any health condition(s) and any workplace adjustment(s) that have been made for an employee. The passport can then be used by the employee to discuss any changes in circumstances with current or managers, either in their existing role or new roles.

A Passport can make it much easier for an employee to have a positive conversation with a new manager about their individual needs. It can reduce the burden on what can be a daunting prospect and supplement any manager specific disability awareness training. Furthermore, it can facilitate a smooth transition if a manager is replaced, or an employee is moved to a new department within an organisation.

Alliance for Inclusion met with the employer several times to upskill their Operations Manager on how to implement a Passport. This involved discussions on the following topics:

• Ownership & Privacy
• Initial Setup & agreement
• Implementation and Storage
• Review Process
• Management Action
• Best practices
• Data Protection

Alliance for Inclusion was able to provide guidance and examples of what a passport document may look like and how it could be customised to suit the needs of the employees. The employer felt this helped a great deal with employee buy-in as it gave assurances on how the information would be used to support individuals.

The employer was encouraged to include employees in the design of the passport to ensure their needs were met and the aims of the passport were understood.

Early feedback shows a real enthusiasm for this method of gathering employee data and a true alignment of values between the employer and what the passport aims to achieve.

The next step is to roll out the Passport to all staff as a pilot. This will enable them to collect valuable data and insights into how their staff feel about the Passport and if it is fully accessible for their needs. Alliance for Inclusion has continued to offer advice on how to gather the feedback and use this to make any necessary changes to the Passport before the final layout is agreed.

The Health & Wellbeing Passport we have developed has the following sections:

• Introduction and rationale for passport - this should give assurances to staff about how information is handled and who it is shared with going forward
• Adjustment holder’s personal details - this is a confidential document and should be stored securely
• Description of condition/impairment and impact on work role - staff can describe how their disability/health condition affects them both in-work and outside work
• Fluctuating Conditions - how does the condition affect them on a good day and on a bad day
• Agreed Adjustments - signed off by staff member and line manager – any future changes need to be agreed by both parties
• Additional Advice i.e. has an application to Access to Work been sent and accepted? Is occupational health involved?
• Workplace Adjustments FAQs
• Adjustment review record
• Useful links and resources - this should include internal and external resources staff can access for support and advice such as company policy documents, diversity and inclusion strategies and occupational health information

In-Work Support Plan

The In‑Work Support Plan is a structured framework used within Supported Employment services to help a disabled employees settle into their role, learn job tasks, and build confidence and independence at work. It sets out how managers, job coaches, and the employee work together to provide consistent, accessible, and bespoke support. The plan is underpinned by principles of accessibility and inclusion, using clear communication, predictable routines, and practical task breakdowns to remove barriers and support successful employment.

The plan also explains how support should gradually reduce over time so the employee becomes increasingly independent and relies on standard workplace supports rather than long‑term external help (from a job coach). It provides clear guidance for induction, skill development, reasonable adjustments, ongoing review, and wellbeing, ensuring support is tailored to individual needs while maintaining fair job expectations and promoting sustainable employment.

SUSE has used an adaptation of a plan with a Making It Work employer to test if it will benefit some of their employees. The employer is continuing to develop the plan with two of their employees.

The key elements of the plan are:

• Purpose and principles of in‑work support, including accessibility, consistency, and independence, tailored to the individual employee
• Defined roles and responsibilities for line managers, job coaches (if available), workplace mentors and the employee to deliver the plan
• Structured support stages from induction through to independent working and ongoing support including details of how these will be delivered
• Use of SMART goals to track learning, progress, and confidence
• Reasonable adjustments and support strategies to be implemented
• A manager checklist to support inclusive supervision and review progress effectively

Reverse Mentoring

Our partners at Alliance for Inclusion supported the employers in this workstream by hosting introductory sessions on Reverse Mentoring and some follow up 1-to-1 sessions. These gave an overview of the objectives, structure and aims of the programme as well as thoughts on its implementation in real workplace situations. This activity is more fully described in the later section on Workstream 4: Improving Workplace Consultations and is included in the Employer Guide to Equitable Induction & In-Work Support.

Training that Supported the Activity

Employers were offered training to support their activities following the Employer Self-Assessment and Report & Recommendations process and as needs emerged during the activity.

Workstream employers had the opportunity to participate in the following:

• Disability Awareness Training
• Mental Health and Wellbeing
• Improving Workplace Consultation
• Reverse Mentoring

As part of their action plan, one of the employers, a voluntary sector regeneration agency, was interested in attending Mental Health and Wellbeing training with a focus on induction processes and practices. We were able to organise a session with a delivery partner and promote it across the Making it Work project. The employer promoted this to businesses they have a relationship with in the Forth Valley area to support SUSE with broadening our contacts in the area. A number of private and third sector businesses took part in the training and five of the businesses indicated they would be interested in hearing more about SUSE and its projects.

Findings & Conclusions from Workstream 1

• Employers typically have not considered if their materials are accessible for disabled employees
• There is significant scope for more widespread use of Wellbeing Passports
• In-Work support plans can be a useful tool for disabled employees during their first year in work
• There is limited knowledge of Supported Employment tools that can be beneficial for both employee and employer
• Mentoring activities can be very beneficial for both induction and in-work support. This can be peer mentoring carried out by colleagues for new workers or Reverse Mentoring that can build capacity with supervisors and managers

Output

A guide to Equitable Induction & In-Work Support with example resources has been developed.

Workstream 2: Positive Workplace Conversations (including the Why You Askin’? Campaign)

Rationale for the Workstream

We have learned that some of the key elements in achieving culture change in workplaces are positive and honest conversations about disability, encouraging transparency and openness, and supporting employers to overcome their fears and mistaken beliefs. If disabled people can freely discuss their support needs, they are more likely to succeed in their jobs and sustain paid employment. This also creates space to discuss and introduce reasonable adjustments that will work for a diverse workforce, including disabled people, that make it more likely that employees will thrive in their roles and be less likely to lose their jobs and become economically inactive.

Why You Askin’? is a campaign that is delivered inside workplaces to encourage disabled people to disclose to their employer by creating an environment where they can have open conversations about their support needs and feel confident that the employer will be empathetic and supportive. Disability disclosure can be a significant issue in some businesses as there is often under-reporting and employers therefore do not understand the support needs of their employees.

This initiative was devised in the final stages of the PSP, with the Experience Network playing a leading role in developing the materials and messages. However, the activity has not been tested with employers beyond distributing some materials they could use. This intervention has now been significantly improved by adding an employer induction, training and support to embed the campaign in businesses over an extended period so that it can demonstrate its worth in changing workplace cultures. We believe this can now be used to have significant impact and produce a model that can be applied extensively in the Scottish business community.

Aim

The workstream was intended to encourage disability disclosure through positive workplace conversations, reducing the fears and barriers that prevent these conversations taking place.

The early intended output of the workstream was to produce a Why You Askin’? Campaign Plan and resources that can be used by employers going forward. This has now developed into the production of an Employer Guide that includes the Why You Askin’ campaign as an example of a workplace campaign that employers can use or they may choose to develop their own resources, using Why You Askin’ as a template. The Guide will also include the key steps on the Turning Insight Into Actions programme.

Workstream Employers

Four employers agreed to participate in this workstream following the Employer Assessment & Action Plan process.

Workstream 2 Activities

The Why You Askin’? Workplace Campaign

The Positive Conversations workstream was intended to build on previous activity carried out by SUSE – the development of the Why You Askin’? resources in 2024 during the Apt Public Social Partnership, that we have been testing with a range of employers. This is a workplace campaign that employers are supported to roll out in their business.

We were aware that the campaign induction and resources by themselves were not enough to achieve real change in workplaces. Therefore the Positive Conversations workstream combined Why You Askin’ with a major additional element – a structured programme of support delivered by our partner, Changing the Chemistry titled Turning Insight Into Action. We have detailed those activities later in this report.

Why You Askin’? encourages disabled people and people with long term conditions to have confidence to disclose to their employer and supports the employer to engage in conversations without fear of getting it wrong or causing offence.

The 4 workstream employers were taken through the Why You Askin’ induction and supported during the life of the project. SUSE supplies materials for the workplaces including leaflets and posters.

We are still gathering feedback from the employers but some early feedback from two Making It Work employers suggest that the Why You Askin’ resources (when combined with the Inclusive Turning Insights Into Actions programme, described below) are encouraging important conversations, making accommodations and support more likely, fostering a greater understanding of disability and its implications and contributing to positive changes in attitudes.

The Why You Askin’ campaign takes time to show measurable results, therefore we cannot point to a clear outcome for the Making It Work project at this time but an employer we inducted in early 2025 told us, “Our disclosure rates for disabilities have increased and the feedback from staff is that people now feel more comfortable discussing their disability, workplace adjustments and are encouraged by the work which this been supported by the Why You Askin campaign.” (NHS 24)

The Why You Askin’ Induction is a presentation to the employer with follow up meetings.

Turning Insights Into Actions

The Turning Insights Into Action programme supported employers in the Positive Conversations workstream to build confidence and practical capability in holding inclusive conversations about disability and long-term health in the workplace. It combined workshops, peer learning and real-world application to move beyond awareness and support behavioural change. SUSE commissioned Changing The Chemistry to deliver a series of workshops for our employers with a complimentary workbook with structured activities to be carried out.

Ideally the programme would have been delivered over a 12 month period, but the late start to the project required us to truncate it and we were able to deliver it in 5 months.

Participants engaged positively throughout, with consistently strong feedback and sustained participation across sessions. Confidence developed progressively over time, supported by structured opportunities for practice and reflection. Participants reported increased confidence and provided consistent examples of applying the model in real workplace situations, indicating that learning is translating into everyday workplace interactions.

There is early evidence of behaviour change, including more proactive conversations, more inclusive use of language, and a shift from problem-solving to collaborative exploration of support. These changes represent important foundations for more inclusive workplace practices. Alongside these positive outcomes, the programme also highlighted areas for further development that will help strengthen engagement and impact in future delivery.

Overall, the programme demonstrates a strong and credible progression from awareness to application, with emerging evidence of sustained behavioural change and a solid foundation for ongoing cultural development.

SUSE commissioned this activity to compliment the Why You Askin’? campaign that the workstream employers had agreed to undertake. It was recognised that a structured programme of support was needed if employers and their staff were to gain the confidence and skills to have properly inclusion conversations which ensure disabled people feel able to discuss their needs and employers are open to addressing them.

The programme was delivered in partnership by SUSE and Changing the Chemistry to address a common gap between awareness and practice. While many organisations recognise the importance of inclusion, participants often report uncertainty about how to approach conversations in practice. We aimed to build the confidence and capability to act in real workplace situations.

Specifically, our goals were to:

• Build confidence in initiating and responding to inclusive conversations
• Develop practical skills that can be applied in everyday interactions
• Support behaviours that contribute to trust, openness and psychological safety
• Strengthen the link between campaign messaging and day-to-day workplace practice

The programme adopted a structured and applied development approach. It was intentionally designed as a multi-stage development journey rather than a standalone training intervention. It combined learning, application and reflection to support sustained behaviour change over time. This approach reflects the understanding that confidence in inclusive conversations develops through practice and experience, not through one-off training alone.

We hosted two core workshops for the employers - Workshop 1 introduced the Inclusive Conversations Model, established shared understanding, and created a foundation for practice and Workshop 2 focused on application, reflection, consolidation and forward planning. A supplementary Workshop 1 Recap session was added which ensured that new participants could engage fully, while reinforcing learning for the existing employers.

We also held Peer Learning Sets for the employers to come together to discuss the issues that were coming up in their workplaces and share experiences. SUSE staff provided regular support, mentoring and advice to the employers between each of the planned sessions. This helped to keep the employers engaged and supported the transition from understanding the model to applying it in practice.

Programme Workbook

Following the first Workshop the employers were given a workbook to work through in their business. The aim of the workbook was to encourage employers to reflect on the conversations they were having with their staff, support the steady development of new skills, reinforce the 5 stage Inclusive Conversations Model (see below) and enable the employers to track their progress.

The employers were also offered the opportunity to practise conversations with individuals with lived experience of disability. This intended to provide additional depth by increasing realism, building empathy and strengthening their confidence in navigating sensitive conversations

Our learning from the Turning Insights Into Actions programme will be included in the Positive Workplace Conversation Employer Guide. Specifically we will provide an introduction to the principles of the Inclusive Conversation Model we have tested.

The Inclusive Conversations Model (delivered in the Turning Insights Into Actions programme):

• Step 1 Empathy, Purpose & Learning Mindset
• Step 2
• Share Observations Not Assumptions
• Step 3
• Ask Open, Respectful Questions
• Step 4 Explore Support & Adjustments Together
• Step 5
• Next Steps & Follow-Up

Step 1: Empathy, purpose and learning mindset.

Step 2: Share observations not assumptions.

Step 3: Ask open, respectful questions.

Step 4: Explore support and adjustments together.

Step 5: Next steps and follow-up.

Each of the stages included exercise for employers to carry out, guidance on how to do so and an opportunity for reflection.

Employer Feedback

SUSE and Changing the Chemistry regularly gathered feedback from the employers. It was noted that the shortened timescale was challenging but nevertheless the employers reported that:

• The 5-Step Model was clear and practical
• There were good opportunities to practise and reflect on real conversations
• The programme provided supportive and psychologically safe learning environment

Specifically, the employers found that the opportunity to have open and honest conversations with peers about the challenges they faced was of great value. This was a shared learning experience and getting input from others was very helpful. Applying the resources in practical settings was difficult for some of the employers due to the nature of their operations or workforce. In particular, this workstream highlighted the difference between applying new strategies in professional office based environment where staff typically have structured supervision processes and ‘shop-floor’ such as light manufacturing. The group worked together to arrive at adaptations to the approach to make it work in these very different settings. We took this into account in the employer guide which should be appropriate for employers of different size and settings.

Training that Supported the Activity

Employers were offered training to support their activities following the Employer Self-Assessment and Report & Recommendations process and as needs emerged during the activity.

Workstream employers participated in the following:

• Reasonable Adjustments and Access to Work
• Introduction to Sensory Awareness
• Disability Awareness
• Communication For All

Findings & Conclusions from Workstream 2

• Employers are keen to engage in positive conversations but are wary of doing so
• There is enthusiasm among employers to develop these skills
• A structured programme of learning and support can be effective but must include flexibility for diverse workplaces
• Peer learning among employers is particularly effective
• Employers responded positively to the Why You Askin’ materials and induction and were expected them to produce good results

Output

An Employer’s Guide to Positive Workplace Conversations has been developed. This includes an introduction to the Why You Askin’ campaign as an example that employers can use or use as a template for their own campaign.

Workstream 3: Digital Access Review

Rationale for the Workstream

In the PSP, SUSE piloted Digital Recruitment Reviews that were intended to assess the accessibility of employers’ online recruitment platforms and make recommendations to make them fairer for disabled applicants.

For the Making It Work project we decided to move onto the next stage. When considering why people become economically inactive, we got feedback from the SUSE Experience Network that people can be left behind in the workplace. New systems and processes are introduced that are not tested with disabled people and they are unable to cope, employers do not know how to respond and they are at risk of dropping out of the workforce.

Therefore, we devised a model to test the in-house digital systems employers are using to learn if these are accessible for disabled people and make recommendations to tackle the issues we discover.

This is a huge topic – employers use a great many IT systems and workplaces are becoming increasingly dependent on technology. To make the process manageable and achieve a result within the timescale, we decided to focus on employers’ e-learning platforms.

The Digital Access Review (DAR) sessions were organised by SUSE with expert support and analysis conducted by our partner organisation, Cole AD. Their experienced staff and SUSE staff observed the testers and took detailed records on the accessibility of the platform being tested and any difficulties encountered.

Our Experience Network of colleagues with lived experience of disability supported us to carry out the reviews as paid testers. To make this more effective we recruited testers with diverse disabilities including people who have sight loss and/or hearing loss, people who have learning disabilities, and people who have physical disabilities.

Aim

The workstream set out to conduct a comprehensive assessment of employers’ eLearning resources and information systems used by staff, carried out by people who have lived experience with support from IT experts. The focus was on the in-work experience of disabled people and people who have long term conditions, to ensure they have equal access to information, resources and learning.

The findings of the DARs (and the DAR questionnaire we have reported on later) have been used to produce a guidance document for employers on how to make sites accessible and reasonable adjustments they can consider implementing; as well as how they can support their own disabled staff to test sites as they are in development and best practice if they are buying an ‘off the shelf’ product to use in their business, such as the questions they should ask and how to involve disabled employees (such as a Workplace Inclusion Group) in the process of introducing a system to their business.

Workstream Employers

Four employers agreed to participate in this workstream following the Employer Assessment & Action Plan process. We also carried out a less formal review of the e-learning videos developed by a voluntary sector partner for their staff.

Workstream 3 Activities

Digital Access Reviews

The Digital Access Review element of the Apt Making It Work project is a comprehensive assessment of employers’ eLearning resources and information systems used by staff. This focuses on the in-work experience of disabled people and people who have long term health conditions, to ensure they have equal access to information, resources and learning.

We’ve provided a detailed description of the findings from the testing carried out with each employer, this provides an insight to the unique circumstances that exist in each business.

Testing Results

Following their DAR testing and having time to review their bespoke reports, we asked each employer:

• How much they agree or disagree with the points raised in the reviews.
• How easy or difficult they anticipate implementing the recommendations.
• How effective they believe these reports and recommendations will be in encouraging change in their digital accessibility.
• How effective they believe the reports will be in contributing to ongoing development and accessibility awareness raising in their organisation.

Key - Average Scores

Our lived experience testers rated each of the digital tasks in the e-learning modules. Here are the average scores across the four employers we reviewed:

74% of tasks were rated as Easy or Ok to Complete

8% of tasks were rated as Unable to Complete

81% of testers would choose to take another course on that platform

Employer A

Industry: Energy (Oil and Gas/Renewables)

Numbers of Employees: 500

Summary:

Overall, a great result, with 54% of tasks being rated as easy to complete. All testers would use this e-learning platform again – except for one module as this had the most accessibility issues. Of the technical issues highlighted, most were found by users with assistive technology, specifically JAWS (which is the most commonly used screen reading software worldwide).

76% of tasks were rated as easy or ok to complete (above average) - Good

11% of tasks were unable to be completed (above average) - Poor

100% of testers would choose to complete another module (excludes one module which 75% would take it again) - Good

Employer Feedback:

“Really helpful and easy to understand. The report reflects our thinking and in many cases what we found when we did an internal review, so it’s good to confirm the points to improve. We know there is room for improvement. The scores are reassuring as we didn’t set out to design the modules with disability in mind but we are set on making those changes. It should be easy to make the changes as the modules are built in-house by our Learning and Development Advisor. However, we will definitely take up the offer of support. I will be speaking to my Manager about the reports.”

• Employer agrees with the findings
• It should be straightforward to make changes
• Employer is set on making the changes
• It’s helpful to understand how screen readers work and how to make changes to improve accessibility for those users.

Employer B

Industry: Social Housing

Number of Employees: 51-200

Summary:

Great result with 100% of testers saying they would be happy to use the e-learning modules again. Impressive as the testing was also carried out on 2 different screen readers (JAWS and SmartVision 3).

72% of tasks were rated as easy or ok to complete (around average) - Good

3% of tasks were unable to be completed (below average) - Good

100% of testers would choose to complete another module on that platform - Good

Employer Feedback:

Very pleased with the results – they will take a detailed look before getting back to us.

Employer C

Industry: Employability

Number of Employees: 51-200

Summary:

The results are mostly positive with 40% of tasks being rated as easy to complete, however there were a few issues found which have been highlighted in the reports:

14% of tasks were rated an unable to complete, which is comparatively high.

63% of tasks were rates as easy or ok to complete (below average) - Satisfactory

14% of tasks were unable to be completed (above average) - Poor

50% would choose to complete another course on that platform (below average) - Poor

Employer Feedback:

The Deputy Chief Executive and Corporate Team Leader met on 11^th March 2026 to discuss the reports and create a plan to implement the recommendations.

“The report clearly explained the main problems and what to fix first. The process was clear, helpful, and focused on real user issues. We hope to look at the issues in the near future as we look at our recruitment process in full.”

Employer D

Industry: Voluntary

Number of Employees: 50-250

Summary:

87% of tasks were rated as easy or ok to complete (above average) - Good

6% of tasks were unable to be completed (below average) - Good

75% would choose to take another course on this platform (below average) – Satisfactory

This employer opted out of further engagement in the project. No feedback available and did not complete a Digital Access Questionnaire. There was no reason given.

Evaluation of Long-term Change

Due to the restricted time to work with the employers we are unable to gather further data on what recommendations have been implemented or the long-term implications of those changes. Had there been more time to work individually with the employers we are confident Employer D would not have disengaged.

Key Themes

We asked the employers taking part in the Digital Access Review to complete a short questionnaire to help us build a picture of common workplace themes in:

Software usage:

• Software types used and essential platforms -

The most essential software to daily operations are industry specific platforms, followed by file storing and sharing (e.g. SharePoint)

• Decision factors/priorities for implementing new software -

The most common decision factor or priorities for adopting new or replacing current software is cost effectiveness and integration with existing systems.

Onboarding and integration of new staff:

• How new staff are onboarded (training methods) -

Shadowing experienced colleagues is the most common method for onboarding new employees successfully. This is followed by formal training sessions back up with written manuals and self-paced learning with guidance.

• The timeframe for new employees to become proficient with software -

These employers agree that it takes 3-4 weeks or longer for new staff to be proficient in the organisations’ software tools.

• Factors to make onboarding a smoother process -

a. More approachable ways of inviting people to come forward with individual needs.

b. Flexible approach which takes account of needs and learning styles.

Access and Assistive Technology:

• Accessibility challenges -

The employers did not have any common patterns in accessibility challenges reported by employees with 33% stating no challenges were reported.

The employers did report positively in how they would handle any highlighted accessibility barriers. One employer noted, “We work with Access to Work and Occupational Health – we implement whatever is recommended or what the person identifies during the recruitment or onboarding process.”

• Assistive Tech (ATech) -

67% of employers said they hadn’t encountered any assistive technology in the recruitment or onboarding process. Of the ATech that had been encountered screen readers, speech recognition, screen magnifiers, and text captioning were mentioned.

Ongoing Training and Learning:

• Whether ongoing software training is provided -

All employers stated they would provide further training “Occasionally, as needed” and part of this provision would be online learning.

• How CPD and ongoing training is delivered -

All employers use eLearning, with most (67%) providing a mix of webinars and mobile learning (allowing employees to learn as they work).

Digital Access Review Employer Survey

We were sceptical that the Digital Access Reviews to be carried out with the four employers that volunteered for this workstream would produce sufficient learning or data to allow the development of our Employer Guide. Therefore we decided to carry out a survey with a larger group of employers, some of whom had joined other workstreams and others from our large pool of stakeholders. Overall 32 employers completed a questionnaire we had developed in partnership with Cole AD. The questions we asked were:

• What is the size of your company?
• What industry does your company primarily operate in?
• Which of the following types of software does your company use regularly?
• Which software platforms are most essential to your daily operations?
• How do you decide which software to adopt or replace?
• When a new staff member joins, how do you introduce them to the software and tools they’ll need?
• How long does it typically take a new staff member to become proficient with your software tools?
• As part of the onboarding process which (if any) assistive technology solutions have you encountered?
• Do you provide ongoing software training for existing staff?
• What challenges do new staff usually face when integrating into your company’s workflow?
• What tools or methods have you found most effective in helping new staff adapt quickly?
• Are there any software tools you’re considering adopting in the near future?
• In your opinion, what would make the onboarding process smoother for new employees in your organisation?
• Do you provide general training and Continuing Professional Development (CPD) learning online and how is this delivered?

The key findings of the survey are set out below. These have been compiled in a separate report that has been shared with the Scottish Government.

Common challenges experienced

• Too many systems, insufficient integration
• Training focused on basics, not real workflows, this may be a time limitation factor
• Assistive tech separated from training
• Lack of protected time for learning
• Managers potentially under‑prepared to support IT or accessibility needs

Effective ways to support staff – suggested by employers

• Learning from experienced colleagues with structure
• Ongoing mentoring
• Clear, accessible reference materials
• Blended learning approaches
• Individualised support when needs emerge

Training that Supported the Activity

Employers were offered training to support their activities following the Employer Self-Assessment and Report & Recommendations process and as needs emerged during the activity.

Workstream employers participated in the following:

• Website Accessibility
• Accessible Information
• Communication for All

Findings & Conclusions from Workstream 3

• Size of an organisation doesn’t affect the pace at which staff learn how to use the software
• Industry specific software typically requires a longer learning period for new staff
• When assistive technology is used in a business it is rarely embedded in training strategy
• Ongoing training tends to be reactive, not proactive
• Webinars typically dominate CPD delivery, but this may limit what people learn
• Disability‑focused charities model best practice - even when small (based on our small sample)
• Businesses are often aware of what would help make onboarding for new staff a smoother process but lack the time, funding or internal capability to implement it

Specific Findings from the DAR Questionnaire Responses

• The time it takes staff to learn could be reduced by:
• There is a clear gap in:

• • Role‑specific, accessible learning journeys
  • Earlier integration of assistive technology into onboarding
  • Short, ongoing refreshers rather than “as needed”

• • Inclusive digital training that bridges assistive technology and core systems
  • Support tools designed for large, complex software environments

47% of respondents have recently adopted or actively looking to replace or add new software. Of those employers, 16% of respondents stated that they actively looking to make more use of AI in recruitment and generally in their daily operations.

Only 3% noted that they would like to make more use of the tools available in MS Office 365. While they did not specify what tools they were referring to, we are aware that many organisations do not make use of the in-built accessibility features.

Across sectors and sizes, the data points to a systemic gap: organisations invest in software, but often under‑invest in how people learn to use it confidently and accessibly over time.

Output

An Employer’s Guide on digital workplace accessibility has been developed. This provides advice on how to make e-learning & intranets accessible for all employees.

Workstream 4: Improving Workplace Consultations

Rationale for the Workstream

Our work with people with lived experience has often highlighted the need for greater consultation with disabled people and the lack of opportunities for disabled employees to share their views and have influence in the workplace. This is particularly the case during change processes with employers neglecting to consult with employees who may need reasonable adjustments or who are particularly impacted by new work processes, equipment or structures. This is a clear disadvantage for disabled people and increasing the likelihood of them dropping out of work and becoming economically inactive.

From the outset we sought to have a strong lived experience input in this workstream. Members of our Experience Network were enthusiastic about working with us and the employers and wanted to shape the activities carried out and the tools we used.

This proved to be the most challenging of the four workstreams. We had less engagement from employers than the other activities. This suggests that the activities were less attractive to employers either because they did not see them as valuable, or they may have been concerned that the activities were likely to be disruptive or requiring too great a commitment during the life of the project and on an ongoing basis.

Aim

We set out to work with employers to review their current processes for consultation, communication and feedback from disabled employees with a view to sharing some tools and approaches they may not be aware of, and that can be easily adopted without creating a great deal of extra work and costs.

The main element of the workstream was to encourage employers to create in-house groups of employees with lived experience of disability or long-term health conditions. These forums have value in allowing staff to discuss the reasonable adjustments that are in place and suggest new ones; how in-house communications are working and access to new opportunities such as promoted posts. They are also a forum to address issues before they become critical.

We recognised however that this offer may not be attractive to all employers, or their employees. Therefore we looked at other options such Pulse Surveys and informal opportunities for staff to feed in their views.

Workstream Employers

Three employers agreed to participate in this workstream following the Employer Assessment & Action Plan process. These were: two organisations from the Social Enterprise Sector; two from the Private Sector and one from the Voluntary Sector. This was a disappointing number but we were able to carry out some elements with employers in other workstreams and there was a natural crossover with Workstream 2: Positive Workplace Conversations.

Workstream 4 Activities

The workstream had two major activities, Improving Workplace Consultations and Reverse Mentoring, both of these activities involved training and mentoring sessions for the employers as a group and with 1-to-1 follow ups.

Engagement with employers was challenging, we found that they were less likely to make time available to participate in this workstream compared to the other three.

Improving Workplace Consultation

The activities in this part of the workstream were intended to explore what employers are currently doing, share practice and approaches and explore the range of options for effective consultation. These included:

• Employee consultation groups such as Employee Resource Groups and/or Disability Inclusion Groups
• Employee Advocates/Peer Supporters
• Workplace Champions
• Peer Support Networks
• Regular listening sessions, focus groups or roundtables either led by HR, management or employees
• Anonymous feedback platforms for all staff which can be an annual survey or online form.
• Quick pulse surveys to capture emerging issues (A pulse survey is a short, frequent questionnaire, usually under 20 questions, used gather employee opinion) engagement, or specific workplace topics. Conducted monthly or quarterly, these
• Accessible suggestion boxes which can be digital or physical, often anonymous
• Inclusive intranet spaces for sharing updates and inviting feedback

Overview

The activity focussed on effective staff engagement and consultation, including key principles, benefits, and practical approaches. Employers were encouraged to reflect on

current practice and their own experiences.

Staff Engagement

We explored the employers’ willingness to contribute beyond core role requirements, including initiative, collaboration, and participation in improvement activities. This led on to how this can influence day-to-day processes (rather than a one-off exercise), encompassing both formal mechanisms (e.g. supervision, team meetings) and informal interactions.

Benefits

We asked employers to identify the benefits for themselves and their staff. Findings included: improved staff retention; enhanced performance and productivity; stronger team cohesion and reduced reactive workload management, for the employers.

Staff benefits were identified to include an increased sense of value and recognition, greater confidence and enhanced opportunities for learning and development.

Core Principles of Effective Engagement

We worked with the employers to agree some core principles for future activities. Examples of what the employers identified include:

• Engagement is primarily built through positive working relationships, including trust and open communication
• Clarity of roles, expectations, and decision-making processes reduces uncertainty and supports performance
• Effective engagement requires visible follow-up on feedback, reinforcing that staff contributions are valued
• Managers play a key role as emotional leaders, influencing team culture through their responses to challenges and change
• Engagement is largely locally determined, with direct line management having the greatest impact

The final point was of particular interest as it indicates that this cannot be a top down initiative – it must have buy-in from front line managers and ideally be led by them.

Staff Consultation

The next stage of activity was focussed on approaches to staff consultation. This is a structured, two-way process through which organisations seek and consider staff views on specific issues or proposed changes. It is distinct from engagement in that it is typically time-limited and issue-specific. We covered Benefits, Good Practice, Challenges, Accessibility & Inclusion. This led onto a review and consideration of potential consultation methods they could use including employee groups, surveys and focus groups and how these may work in practice. We’ve summarised those in the next section.

a. Benefits

• Supports more robust and informed decision-making
• Encourages diverse perspectives and innovation
• Builds trust and strengthens organisational relationships
• Increases likelihood of staff support for change

b. Good Practice in Consultation

• Initiate consultation at an early stage, prior to decisions being finalised
• Clearly define the purpose, scope, and intended outcomes
• Ensure appropriate and inclusive representation of staff groups
• Select consultation methods suited to both the objectives and workforce needs
• Maintain transparency regarding decision-making processes and levels of influence
• Provide timely and meaningful feedback to participants, ensuring the process is closed appropriately

c. Accessibility and Inclusion

• Importance of adopting inclusive communication practices
• Ensuring information is accessible to all staff, taking account of diverse needs
• Proactively identifying and planning for reasonable adjustments
• Avoiding assumptions and supporting equitable participation

d. Common Challenges

• Perceptions of consultation as tokenistic where decisions appear predetermined
• Insufficient time allocated for meaningful participation
• Inadequate communication or follow-up
• Limited representation of diverse staff perspectives
• Impact of previous negative experiences on staff willingness to engage

Key Learning

We asked the employers and workstream leaders to reflect on the key learning for the work that was carried out: They identified that effective staff engagement and consultation need to be underpinned by:

• Clear and consistent communication
• Trust and transparency
• Early and meaningful involvement
• Demonstrable follow-up and accountability

Also, the role of managers is critical in embedding these practices and fostering a positive organisational culture.

Reverse Mentoring

This activity was offered to the employers in the Consultations workstream and two of them decided to participate. It was delivered in partnership with Alliance for Inclusion.

This activity involved workshops and mentoring to start the process of introducing a Reverse Mentoring programme aimed at strengthening disability inclusion and supporting cultural change within Making It Work employers. The programme took employers through the key principles of Reverse Mentoring, the objectives, how it is done effectively and the intended impact; alongside reflections on implementation in each of the businesses and the employer’s early experience.

The programme was designed to provide senior staff with insight into the lived experience of disabled people in the workplace, while increasing awareness, understanding, and ultimately leadership capability. It also sought to create a sustainable legacy through demonstrable organisational impact that would be in place after the project completed. The model draws on a previously successful approach implemented within large employers in the finance sector. The time constraints on the project mean that we have only carried out the earliest stages of the programme but this has nevertheless given us some valuable insights for our Employer Guide and the employers are able and willing to continue to make progress after the completion of the Making It Work project.

The Reverse Mentoring model pairs senior leaders (the mentees) and employees with lived experience of disability (the mentors). This approach ensured that the programme was both representative and aligned with its objectives.

To support consistency and effectiveness, a clear framework of commitments was established. Each mentoring partnership is expected to run over a 12-month period, including a minimum of five one-hour sessions, with at least three conducted face-to-face where possible. Mentees are also required to undertake a period of shadowing to gain a deeper understanding of their mentor’s experience, and to share their learning within their teams to promote wider awareness.

The roles of mentors and mentees must be clearly defined. Mentors provide guidance, share their experiences, and offer constructive challenge to support new ways of thinking. Mentees are expected to actively engage in the process, reflect on their learning, apply insights in their roles, and contribute to addressing barriers within the organisation.

A key feature of the programme is the expectation that each mentoring pair will work collaboratively to develop an idea or initiative that contributes to improving inclusion, accessibility, or representation within the organisation. This ensures that learning is translated into practical outcomes and supports longer-term change.

The sessions we delivered to our employers also acknowledged the wider organisational context, including post-pandemic working arrangements, economic pressures, and shifting priorities, which may impact the consistency of mentoring relationships. Participants were encouraged to integrate learning into their day-to-day practice and to use the mentoring relationship as a tool to inform leadership and decision-making.

To further support the programme, an informal peer network was established, enabling participants to share experiences, reflect on progress, and address challenges collectively. This has supported ongoing engagement and strengthened the overall effectiveness of the initiative. This has only met on a couple of occasions but we are optimistic it will continue.

An introduction to the Reverse Mentoring model is included in the Employer’s Guide on Improving Workplace Consultations. We strongly believe it is an attractive initiative for employers that can provide a structured and practical approach to advancing disability inclusion by fostering open dialogue, building understanding, and linking learning to practical actions which promote positive changes for both individuals and organisations.

Findings & Conclusions from Workstream 4

• There is some appetite for expanding consultation activities, but many employers are wary of the time and resource commitments required, often due to misconceptions
• As there is a greater interest among employers to undertake positive workplace conversations activities it may be advisable to start there before progressing to work on consultations
• Among the employers who were more enthusiastic there was a willingness to look at a range of options and a recognition that these need to be tailored to their organisation
• Reverse Mentoring appeared to be an attractive option for employers, but more time is needed to test it, ideally over a 12 month period

Training that Supported the Activity

Employer were offered training to support their activities following the Employer Self-Assessment and Report & Recommendations process and as needs emerged during the activity.

Workstream employers participated in the following:

• Improving Workplace Consultation
• Reverse Mentoring
• Disability Awareness and Reasonable Adjustments
• Mental Health and Wellbeing in the Workplace
• Sensory Loss Awareness

Output

An Employer’s Guide on Improving Workplace Consultations including Establishing Employee Groups has been developed.