An Australian leadership advisor's provocative question about neurodivergence and societal definitions of 'normal' has unexpectedly captured global attention, with 92% of its online reach coming from outside his existing network. The question, posed by Mike Meyer, founder of M31, asks: "What if we've spent 200 years making people fit the system, then called the people who couldn't fit it the problem?"
The reaction to Meyer's question, which he shared on LinkedIn, has resonated across Australia, the UK, and the US, sparking conversations far beyond his usual professional audience. The idea challenges long-held assumptions about neurodivergence, disability, and what society considers 'normal.'
Meyer's original hypothesis suggested that as much as 40 to 50% of the population could potentially be neuro-complex, a figure that drew understandable scrutiny. But he argues the real substance lies in the conversation it opened: "What if neurodivergence isn't suddenly exploding? What if we're simply getting better at seeing people who were already here?"
Neurodevelopmental differences are strongly hereditary, yet many generations grew up when autism, ADHD, and other differences were poorly recognized or rarely diagnosed. Meyer points out that these individuals didn't suddenly become neurodivergent when their children or grandchildren were diagnosed—they were already there. The world they grew up in, shaped by the industrial age, demanded uniformity: turn up at the same time, sit still, follow the process, work the same hours, communicate the expected way. These systems worked, but Meyer argues that society eventually confused what worked for the system with what was normal 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 world those systems were built for is changing, creating a catalyst moment to question what we have been calling normal.
Meyer, who authored Weird is the New Normal: The Unlikely Path of Leadership, has long challenged conventional ideas about leadership and difference. He emphasizes that "normal" doesn't necessarily mean natural, and the popularity of this conversation suggests people are ready to ask bigger questions about neurodivergence than simply counting diagnoses.
He is not suggesting that everyone is neurodivergent or that 40 to 50% of people are disabled. Instead, he asks how much human capability has been overlooked because our definition of normal was too narrow. For some, neurodivergence is profoundly disabling, and that shouldn't be dismissed. But for others, part of the problem may be the collision between the person and a system built around somebody else's way of functioning. "Change the environment, and you don't change the person's neurology. You change the collision," Meyer explained.
The conversation, detailed in Meyer's article We're Not All Neurodivergent. So Why Does It Suddenly Look That Way?, builds on his earlier hypothesis in Beyond Diagnosis: What If We've Been Counting the Wrong People?. The interest from outside his network underscores a growing recognition that the conditions shaping the industrial age are evolving, making room for people to work, communicate, and lead differently.
Meyer remains open to challenge: "Maybe the 40 to 50% hypothesis turns out to be wrong. I want people to challenge it. But there's something underneath it we can't unsee. Maybe the people weren't always the problem. Maybe sometimes it was the system we were asking them to fit."
