Refeyn
Neurodiversity Global
← All scenarios

Scenario 01

The accurate technician struggling with changing instructions

Manufacturing Technician · Dyslexia disclosed

Persona

Name
Maya
Age
29
Role
Manufacturing Technician
Disclosure
Maya has disclosed dyslexia. She has said she works best with clear written instructions, marked changes and time to check updated steps.
Context
Maya works in a production environment where precision matters. She supports the assembly of specialist scientific instruments and is known for being careful, consistent and reliable when the process is clear. The team has been under more pressure since the Q1 restructure. Production priorities are shifting quickly. Engineering changes, supplier delays and quality updates are being communicated through a mix of briefings, verbal updates and written instructions. Her supervisor changed two months ago.

Record

  • Strong practical skills.

  • Good attention to physical build quality.

  • Usually accurate when following a stable process.

  • Has made two recent mistakes after process changes were shared verbally.

  • Has asked for changes to be clearly marked in the written instructions.

  • Sometimes double-checks more than others, which can be seen as slowing things down.

Scenario

During a morning briefing, the supervisor explains that one stage of the assembly process has changed because of a quality update. The written work instruction has not yet been fully updated. Maya continues using the written instruction on the bench. Later that day, she follows the old sequence and misses the new check. The issue is caught before release, but it causes frustration because the team is already under pressure. The supervisor says: We covered this this morning. You need to listen properly when things change. Maya replies: I did listen. But the document in front of me still said the old thing. I thought that was the controlled version.

"I did listen. But the document in front of me still said the old thing. I thought that was the controlled version."

What happened after

Maya became quieter in team briefings and started asking colleagues to confirm changes privately before starting work. Her supervisor interpreted this as lack of confidence. Maya felt she was being blamed for a system that was not clear. The next week, another small documentation issue happened after a late process update.

Now, in your groups

Discuss in your group

  1. 01

    What is the visible performance concern, and what is sitting underneath it?

  2. 02

    Where did the system create risk?

  3. 03

    What standard cannot move, regardless of context?

  4. 04

    What should the manager say to Maya, and what should they say to the wider team?

The stretch of discussion

The easy answer is that Maya needs to pay more attention. The harder question is whether the team has a reliable way to communicate changes when precision, compliance and quality all matter. If the written instruction is supposed to be the source of truth, verbal changes need to be captured somewhere visible. Managers need to hold both truths at once. Maya missed a required check, and the process made that more likely.

What if there was no disclosure?

If Maya had not disclosed dyslexia, the manager should still look at the workflow before jumping to capability concerns. A good manager would ask: What instruction were you working from? Where was the change recorded? How are changes being confirmed across the team? Is this an individual mistake or a process risk? You do not need a disclosure to improve clarity. Good process design supports everyone.

Capture your thinking

Group output

Use this to note what your group lands on. One person can capture for the share-back, then save to send it to the facilitator review.