Giftedness as an Uncomfortable Outsider

What exactly is giftedness? Is it about talent? About being “smarter”? Or is the cognitive aspect just a small part of giftedness? And can it also cause difficulties?

Those who delve into neurodiversity — the idea that there are multiple ways in which a brain can function — notice that giftedness is often conspicuously absent from the conversation. And those who advocate for gifted individuals, in turn, regularly see reluctance to associate with the label ‘neurodivergent’.

Why is this such a struggle? Why is giftedness so often kept out of discussions about neurodiversity? Can we view giftedness as a form of neurodivergence? Why or why not? And most importantly: what if we can develop a broader, more inclusive perspective precisely from this discomfort?

What is Neurodivergence Exactly?

If we want to understand whether giftedness can be seen as a form of neurodivergence, we should start by clarifying what we mean by “neurodivergence”.

The “Encyclopedia of Social Sciences” considers someone neurodivergent when their “brain and cognitive development falls outside the typical bandwidth” (Goldberg, 2023). Neurodivergence refers to atypical development and a difference in functioning. It is therefore not a euphemism for a diagnosis, and that is crucial.

Diagnoses such as Autism Spectrum Disorder and Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder fit within a medical perspective, where most people are “healthy,” and people who function differently are seen as “disordered” and in need of treatment. If you don’t need treatment, you don’t have a disorder, and no diagnosis.

The neurodiversity paradigm gives us a very different lens through which to view differences. When we talk about neurodiversity, we’re talking about the richness of differences. We call such a difference a “divergence”: it’s different from the norm, but equally valid. A neurodivergence is therefore not necessarily a disorder and does not require treatment.

Of course, there is an overlap: there are indeed neurodivergent people who experience their neurotype as a disorder, and who seek professional help to lead their best life. But there are just as many neurodivergent people who experience their neurotype as a superpower, and who are convinced that without that difference, they would be much less strong in work and/or life. Most see their neurodivergence more nuanced: they sometimes experience the differences as a hindrance, and sometimes as a superpower, often depending on the context.

And What about Giftedness?

What is Giftedness?

Unlike neurotypes such as autism or ADHD, there is not one generally accepted definition of giftedness (Subotnik et al., 2011). However, there are 2 components that can be found in the most common descriptions:

• a cognitive talent, which is sometimes translated into an IQ that is at least 2 standard deviations above the norm, and
• characteristics of being such as creativity, autonomy or emotional depth (Kieboom, 2015). There is much debate about these characteristics: according to some authors, you cannot speak of “giftedness” if these characteristics are not present, but on the other hand, there is no broad quantitative substantiation of these characteristics.

A Delphi project resulted in the following definition:

“A gifted person is a quick and smart thinker, who can handle complex matters. Autonomous, driven and curious by nature. A sensitive and emotional person, living intensely. He or she takes pleasure in creating.” (Kooijman – van Thiel, 2008)

As you can see, this definition also pays attention to both cognitive talent (the first sentence) and characteristics of being (the following sentences).

Is Giftedness a Disorder?

Giftedness is not a diagnosis: the medical world does not see a higher IQ as a disorder that needs treatment. At the same time, we do see a portion of the gifted indicating that they have difficulties with their giftedness, and this can involve both communication problems due to their faster thinking, and the characteristics of being that are experienced as pitfalls because they lead to stress or isolation. Experiential stories often focus on this, and at the same time it’s important to realize that this concerns a relatively small group. Larger studies (Rinn & Bishop, 2015) show that gifted individuals are usually happy with their lives.

Is Giftedness a Form of Neurodivergence?

Those who see neurodivergence as a euphemism for a diagnosis or disorder obviously do not see giftedness as neurodivergence. However, that is not what “neurodivergent” means.

Those who understand neurodivergence as a “significant difference in cognitive development” do see giftedness as a form of neurodivergence.

Those who are gifted have a brain and cognitive development that falls outside the typical bandwidth, and are thus by definition neurodivergent. This is also confirmed by research. In a comparative study, gifted respondents scored significantly differently than neurotypical participants, with higher scores on rational decision-making and more cognitive reflection. These differences were consistent and comparable to the differences found in other neurotypes, such as autism or ADHD (Van Rijswijk & Curşeu, 2025).

Why Focus on Neurodivergence?

You can undoubtedly see giftedness as a form of neurodivergence, and there are certainly advantages to naming it as such.

To begin with, you come less into an exceptional position: then you don’t just “belong” to that 2.5% of the population called gifted, but also to the 20% of the population that is neurodivergent.

More importantly, this makes the conversation about your specific strengths and pitfalls easier. Many people find it difficult to share their neurotype by name, for example with their boss. Whether we like it or not, the fact is that many of these words evoke stereotypes. Gifted? You mean arrogant. Autistic? You mean incompetent. ADHD? You mean scatterbrain. Highly sensitive? You mean crybaby. Dyslexic? You mean stupid. And we could go on. Precisely because neurodivergent is such a broad concept, it’s less prone to being fixed in prejudices. This allows you to have a conversation about your personal strengths and pitfalls, without first having to fight the stereotype. You can then discuss with your boss how abstract reasoning comes easily to you, and how you sometimes need some help to make the connection with the concrete situation. Or how you need concrete details and examples to really be able to place abstract concepts. Or…

And finally, a broad concept such as neurodiversity or neurodivergence makes a different kind of conversation possible about inclusion in the workplace. The reality is that our society and our organizations have gradually become more standardized. We expect everyone to work in the same way: everyone must have an electronic calendar, collaboration means meetings, and we communicate with lengthy emails. No one becomes happier (or more productive) from that, but those who are neurodivergent can really get stuck there.

By working more neuro-inclusively, organizations can improve the productivity and employability of their entire staff. We absolutely want to have that conversation, and by talking about neurodiversity and neurodivergence, we kill two birds with one stone. On the one hand, the group is large enough to take structural measures for. On the other hand, the differences within that group ensure that we really work inclusively by designing processes universally, rather than by designing a maze of specific processes for each neurotype. If you were to work only on giftedness, you might say: when you as a manager know that someone is gifted, you give them more autonomy in execution. But: not every gifted person wants more autonomy, and there are also people who are not (aware that they are) gifted who need more autonomy. If, on the other hand, you say: “as a manager, determine how much autonomy someone needs”, and you also provide a guideline to do so, then you have a universal process that works for everyone: gifted or not, in need of more autonomy or just more structure.

The circle is complete when you realize that these universal processes also mean that most people no longer need to share their neurotype with their (potential) employer. And that’s a win-win-win. The risk of stereotyping becomes smaller, as a manager you don’t need to study psychology, and as an employer you reduce the risk of complaints of discrimination. What’s not to like?

Conclusion: the Shared Experience and the Personal Journey

Those who fall outside the norm feel it. You put out your feelers, and depending on what you notice, you adapt as best you can to the environment, or you feel free to be yourself. Collaborating with developmental peers can be liberating. Conversations that go as fast and as deep as your head works. Shared humor and eyes rolling at the same situations. Many neurodivergent individuals share that experience – whether they are gifted or not.

Does that mean we can forget about individual diagnoses and labels? That it no longer matters to know that you’re gifted and/or autistic, that you have dyspraxia or are highly sensitive? No, not that either.

A label or a diagnosis can give you the beginning of your own manual. Knowing that you’re gifted and that many gifted individuals have a greater need for autonomy, for example, can be a starting point to figure out for yourself in which context you need to be able to function independently. And once you know that, you can arrange your work and your life accordingly.

On your personal journey towards a life more in line with your nature, a specific neurotype can be helpful, and then we certainly encourage you to search for that. In the work that Mindflow does with organizations, and in the awareness we’d like to create in the broader society, the idea of neurodivergence is very helpful. So it’s not either-or, but both-and. And that, in turn, aligns nicely with the paradigm of neurodiversity 😉