SAP Autism at Work — Neurodiversity Hiring for Digital-Sector Careers

Launched in 2013 at SAP's global headquarters in Walldorf, Germany, Autism at Work set out to recruit adults on the autism spectrum into mainstream technology and business roles — software testing, quality assurance, data analysis and other functions — through an adapted, skills-based hiring process: structured interviews are replaced with hands-on exercises, onboarding is extended, and hires get dedicated job coaches and sensory-adapted workspaces, rather than being routed into a segregated 'special' hiring track.

The programme redesigns the hiring pipeline itself, not just workplace accommodations after hiring: candidates go through hands-on skills exercises instead of conventional structured interviews, receive extended onboarding, and are supported by dedicated job coaches and sensory-adapted workspaces once hired.

As of 2023, the programme reported more than 215 autistic employees across 16 countries — including Germany, the United States, India, Canada, Brazil, Argentina, Australia, China, France, Ireland, New Zealand and the Czech Republic — working across more than 140 teams and 28 role types. SAP reports an internal retention rate of around 90% for these hires, notably higher than the company's general workforce average, though this figure is company self-reported rather than externally audited. A widely cited example is Nicolás Neumann, an accounts-payable analyst in Buenos Aires, who built an automation tool that cut processing time for complex, multi-cost-allocation invoices from two to three days down to about 20 minutes; SAP recognised the innovation with its internal Hasso Plattner Founders' Award.

The programme has been documented by independent outlets covering workplace neurodiversity (Autism Spectrum News) and used as a reference case by the European Round Table for Industry's 'Embrace Difference' initiative, which supports other employers building similar hiring pipelines. Because most published figures originate from SAP itself rather than an independent audit, and the programme operates inside a single large, well-resourced multinational rather than having been proven at SMEs, its retention and productivity claims should be read as descriptive/self-reported evidence rather than a causally evaluated outcome.