Hierarchies and Hidden Barriers: Navigating Systems for Disabled and Neurodivergent Voices

Introduction

Hierarchical structures pervade modern organizations, social systems, and informal networks, shaping interactions, access to resources, and the agency of individuals within them.While hierarchies can provide clarity, efficiency, and accountability, they can also create barriers that disproportionately affect disabled and neurodivergent people. These barriers, procedural, psychological, and cultural, often operate invisibly, compounding exclusion and limiting autonomy.

In my own experiences navigating institutional systems, I have repeatedly encountered scenarios where policies, though designed with neutrality in mind, inadvertently restricted participation.For example, requesting accommodations in an educational or organizational context often involved navigating multi-step approval processes, each assuming normative cognitive and physical abilities. Each stage required additional clarification, documentation, and follow-up, emphasizing how hierarchies, even unintentionally, can marginalize those who diverge from standard expectations.

Recognizing both the benefits and constraints of hierarchical systems is essential. It allows for a more informed approach to advocacy, reform, and the creation of inclusive structures that genuinely account for diverse experiences.

The Architecture of Hierarchies

Hierarchies function as multi-tiered arrangements where authority, responsibility, and privilege are unevenly distributed. They appear across corporate structures, government agencies, educational institutions, and social organizations. In principle, hierarchies provide operational clarity, centralize decision-making, and establish accountability. In practice, however, they often create invisible divides between decision-makers and those subject to decisions.

For disabled and neurodivergent individuals, these divides can have profound consequences. Within my advocacy work, I have witnessed policy initiatives that, despite intentions to enhance accessibility, failed to incorporate insights from those most affected. Feedback provided from lived experience often faced procedural delays or dilution through bureaucratic layers, underscoring how hierarchical design can unintentionally obscure critical perspectives.

Hierarchies also affect the perception of agency. The farther an individual is from decision-making power, the more likely they are to experience systemic friction and emotional labor in attempting to influence outcomes. This dynamic underscores the need to analyze not only the structural mechanics of hierarchies but also the lived experiences of individuals navigating them.

Overwhelming Barriers Within

Barriers within hierarchical systems manifest across several dimensions, often intersecting and compounding to create significant challenges for those in marginalized positions.

• Procedural Barriers – Organizational processes, while designed to ensure fairness and consistency, can become labyrinthine. I have navigated multi-step approval protocols for accommodations in educational and professional settings, each step assuming standardized comprehension, memory, and communication. Repeated explanations, follow-ups, and clarifications were required, demonstrating how procedural complexity can itself become a gatekeeping mechanism.
• Psychological Barriers – Hierarchies often foster internalized deference and self-censorship. In my own experiences, hesitation to assert needs or challenge norms emerged from the perception that authority figures would undervalue or misinterpret neurodivergent perspectives. This internalized inhibition can suppress creativity, initiative, and advocacy, effectively reinforcing structural inequities.
• Access Barriers – Resource distribution frequently mirrors hierarchical status. In institutional contexts, individuals with lower visibility or positional authority often have limited access to information, professional development, and decision-making forums. I have personally observed instances where colleagues in higher tiers received priority access to influence outcomes, while those with practical experience or alternative insight were excluded, despite their capacity to contribute meaningfully.
• Cultural Barriers – Implicit norms embedded within hierarchies often assume conformity to dominant modes of cognition, communication, or mobility. During collaborative projects, I noticed that contributions from neurodivergent participants were sometimes overlooked, reframed, or normalized to fit majority expectations, subtly eroding both confidence and visibility.

These barriers do not operate in isolation. The interaction of procedural, psychological, access, and cultural obstacles generates cumulative weight, producing an environment that can feel overwhelming even to highly competent and motivated individuals.

The Interplay Between Structure and Agency

Hierarchies simultaneously enable order and constrain action. Individuals must navigate the tension between compliance and initiative, balancing the desire to effect change with the risk of reprisal or marginalization.

In my own advocacy efforts, I have found that effective navigation requires strategy, patience, and the cultivation of allies. For example, when advocating for the inclusion of neurodivergent perspectives in policy review committees, I prepared detailed proposals, leveraged institutional knowledge, and strategically engaged supportive colleagues to amplify myvoice. While the process was labor-intensive, it demonstrated that thoughtful navigation can create meaningful opportunities within even rigid hierarchical frameworks.

Understanding the interplay between structure and agency emphasizes that barriers are not only external; they are also perceived and internalized. Recognizing this duality is essential for both individuals seeking to operate within hierarchies and for organizations aiming to design inclusive, responsive systems.

Mitigating the Effects of Barriers

Several strategies can he[p mitigate the impact of hierarchical barriers while preserving the benefits of structured organization:

• Transparent Communication: Open, accessible channels between levels reduce miscommunication and distance. Implementing feedback forums where lower-tier voices can be heard without excessive filtration can enhance both engagement and equity.

• Empowerment Initiatives: Mentorship, participatory decision-making, and structured opportunities for feedback amplify marginalized voices. I have mentored peers in navigating bureaucracies, modeling approaches to advocacy that balance assertiveness with procedural compliance.
• Adaptive Structures: Flexibility within hierarchical design, such as rotating leadership roles, project-based authority, or cross-level collaboration, can redistribute influence and foster inclusivity.
• Cultural Reformation: Shifting organizational norms to recognize diverse modes of cognition, communication, and ability reduces invisible barriers. Through dialogue and reflective practice, colleagues and leaders can cultivate a culture of awareness, adaptability, and equity.

While these strategies do not dismantle hierarchy, they recalibrate its impact, promoting greater access, resilience, and collective agency.

Conclusion

Hierarchical structures are both organizing principles and sources of constraint. For disabled and neurodivergent individuals, their implementation, embedded norms, and procedural design can either facilitate empowerment or exacerbate exclusion. Personal experiences navigating these systems reveal the subtle ways in which barriers emerge, interact, and compound, highlighting the necessity of strategies that enhance accessibility, amplify marginalized voices, and recalibrate procedural norms.

The challenge lies not in dismantling hierarchies entirely, but in cultivating systems that are transparent, adaptive, and responsive to those most affected. My experiences navigating these structures have been both instructive and illuminating, shaping a perspective that values strategic engagement, reflective advocacy, and systemic reform that balances structure with agency.

Note of Thanks

To readers: thank you for engaging with this exploration of hierarchy, barriers, and lived experience. Your attention to these dynamics, especially as they impact disabled and neurodivergent communities, is vital for fostering understanding, equity, and meaningful change. I hope this piece encourages reflection, dialogue, and action in your own contexts and serves as a reminder that even within complex systems, thoughtful navigation and advocacy can create opportunities for inclusion and empowerment.

Ian Allan

Self-Advocate for The Arc of Northern Virginia

Ian Allan is a self-advocate with a deep commitment to policy literacy, systems change, and disability justice. 11’1rough 11’1e Arc of Northern Virginia, he works to ensure that people with intellectual and developmental disabilities are not merely served by systems, but are actively shaping them.