Determination vs Resilience: What Leaders Need From Each in Disability Inclusion in the Workplace

Disability inclusion in the workplace is not a single decision or a one-time message. It is an ongoing way of working that asks leaders to stay committed while adapting when a process, assumption, or environment creates a barrier. Determination helps a team keep inclusion on the agenda; resilience helps it learn and adjust when the first approach does not work. Both matter, but they are not the same.

Discuss your organization’s goals with Aaron

What is the difference between determination and resilience?

Determination is commitment to a goal. It is the choice to keep working toward a result, even when progress takes effort. Resilience is the capacity to respond and adapt when conditions change or a setback occurs. It includes learning from what happened, finding another route, and continuing without pretending the difficulty was not real.

In a workplace, determination might mean a leader keeps accessibility and participation on the agenda after a busy quarter. Resilience might mean the team discovers that its chosen meeting format is not working for some colleagues and changes the format rather than blaming those colleagues or abandoning the goal.

Neither quality means forcing people to endure an avoidable barrier. Determination is not stubbornness, and resilience is not silent acceptance. A practical approach treats a problem as information: identify what is getting in the way, listen to the people affected, and make a change that supports meaningful participation.

The distinction matters because organizations can confuse activity with progress. A team can be determined to deliver a familiar program while being too rigid to notice who cannot participate. It can also adapt repeatedly without a clear commitment to the larger goal. Inclusion needs both a steady purpose and a willingness to adjust the method.

Why do both qualities matter for disability inclusion at work?

Disability inclusion is shaped by daily decisions: how meetings are run, how information is shared, how work is evaluated, and how people ask for what they need. Leaders rarely solve every issue with one announcement. They need sustained attention and the ability to respond to specific situations without assuming every person has the same experience.

Determination protects the purpose from being displaced by competing demands. If the team says that people should be able to contribute, leaders have to keep testing whether actual practices support that aim. Resilience protects the work from becoming brittle. A change in staffing, technology, or responsibilities may reveal that a previous solution needs to be revised.

A research summary on disability inclusion describes a business benefit: employees with disabilities may stay at jobs longer, reducing time and cost involved in recruiting, hiring, and training. Read the research summary on the business benefits of disability inclusion. This is not a reason to treat colleagues as a business case. It is a reminder that thoughtful inclusion can matter both to people and to how an organization works.

The UN Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia’s guide to workplace disability inclusion offers another useful reference for organizations considering how to make inclusion part of work practices. Leaders can use such resources to inform discussion, then ground decisions in the needs and experience of their own people.

For Aaron Golub, this connection is practical, not abstract. As the first legally blind Division I athlete to play in a game, and a Tulane football player and team captain, he has lived the challenge of navigating expectations and systems under pressure. His experience informs work with organizations on resilience, leadership, and how teams turn difficult moments into more effective ways of working.

How do determination and resilience look different in practice?

The same situation can call for both qualities, but they show up in different actions. The table below offers a way for managers and teams to distinguish them without turning either concept into a slogan.

These examples are not a checklist for judging an individual’s character. They are prompts for examining the work environment. When an employee is struggling to access a process, the first question should not be whether that person is determined enough. Leaders should first consider whether the process itself can be made clearer or more workable.

How can leaders turn commitment into everyday practice?

Determination becomes useful when it leads to observable action. A leader can move from an abstract intention to a routine that employees can experience. Start with a particular moment of work rather than a broad promise.

1. Choose one situation to examine. Pick a recurring meeting, onboarding step, training session, team communication channel, or performance conversation. Narrowing the focus makes it easier to see what happens in practice.
2. Ask who can participate fully. Consider whether people can receive information, contribute, ask questions, and follow up. Do not assume that a practice works for everyone just because it is familiar to most of the team.
3. Invite useful input. Ask people affected by the process what is working and what would make it more accessible. Make space for a private response as well as a group discussion. Do not require anyone to disclose a diagnosis or speak on behalf of all people with a disability.
4. Make a specific adjustment. Agree on an action, an owner, and a date to check whether it helped. Examples might include sending materials in advance, clarifying how people can contribute, or changing how the team shares follow-up information.
5. Review the result. Ask whether the change made participation more workable and whether there are unintended effects. Keep what helps; revise what does not.

This cycle shows determination as consistent attention, not pressure on an individual to push through. It also makes inclusion a shared leadership responsibility. The person who encounters a barrier should not have to design and administer the entire fix alone.

For organizations connecting this work to broader team goals, Aaron’s industry speaking and consulting work can be a starting point for considering how a message should fit the audience. His speaking program focused on achieving success is another option for teams seeking practical discussion about navigating challenges and goals.

How can teams build resilience without asking people to absorb barriers?

Resilience is often discussed as an individual trait. At work, that framing can hide the role of systems and leadership. If a process creates a repeated barrier, expecting each person to become more resilient is not a solution. A resilient team learns from the friction and improves the conditions around the work.

Leaders can make this distinction through a short review after a challenge:

• Describe what happened. Use specific, neutral language. For example: “The document was shared in a format that could not be used with the accessibility tool,” rather than “The employee could not keep up.”
• Separate the impact from intent. A process may have been created with good intentions and still have an exclusionary effect. Acknowledging impact helps the team respond without getting stuck in blame.
• Ask what needs to change. Identify whether the issue concerns tools, timing, communication, responsibilities, or an assumption that needs to be checked.
• Decide how to test the change. Identify who will make the adjustment, when the team will revisit it, and how people can share feedback.
• Carry learning forward. If a fix works, incorporate it into the routine so the same issue does not need to be solved from the beginning each time.

That approach helps people speak up early. It also keeps a setback from becoming someone’s identity or a reason to stop trying. The team learns, changes a condition, and keeps the intended outcome in view.

What can managers say when a colleague raises a barrier?

Good intentions do not guarantee a helpful response. A manager may feel pressure to solve the issue immediately or may worry about saying the wrong thing. A calm, respectful conversation can start with listening and a clear next step.

• “Thank you for telling me. Can you help me understand what part of the process is getting in the way?” This focuses on the work rather than asking someone to justify their experience.
• “What would make this task or meeting more workable for you?” This invites practical input without presuming the answer.
• “I will look into the options and come back to you by [date].” A specific follow-up prevents the conversation from ending with a vague promise.
• “We have changed the process. Would you be willing to tell me whether it is working better?” This gives the colleague an opportunity to respond without requiring them to take responsibility for the whole initiative.

Keep sensitive details private and share them only as needed to carry out the agreed next step. Follow the organization’s established procedures, and involve the appropriate support when a request requires it. A manager does not need perfect language to begin; they do need to listen, act responsibly, and follow through.

How can organizations keep inclusion from becoming a one-time effort?

A single event can open a conversation, but daily habits decide whether the conversation affects work. Organizations can build continuity by choosing a few practices they can repeat: asking for input at meaningful points, documenting decisions, making follow-up visible, and revisiting processes when circumstances change.

It also helps to connect inclusion with the team’s existing responsibilities. For example, a department can review how it communicates change, how it runs meetings, and how it equips managers to respond to questions. This is different from adding a separate slogan to every agenda. It means checking whether the ways a team already works allow people to contribute.

Leaders should pay attention to the quality of the conversation, not only whether an activity occurred. Did the team hear perspectives it had missed? Did it take a concrete step? Did someone own the next action? Did the organization learn from the result? These questions make progress more tangible without reducing inclusion to a single score.

Outside support can help teams practice difficult conversations and turn concepts into repeatable behavior. Aaron’s work spans keynotes, interactive workshops, team consulting, and coaching. Organizations can explore the advice and leadership resources to continue learning, or review one account of a client’s experience when considering how a tailored engagement may fit their needs. Any program should be shaped around the audience, its goals, and the work it needs to change.

What does an inclusion response look like from start to finish?

Consider a team preparing a quarterly planning session. The organizer circulates a slide deck with complex charts shortly before the meeting. A blind colleague cannot review the same visual information in the same way and asks for accessible materials. The team’s response can show the difference between determination and resilience.

First, keep the goal clear. The goal is for everyone who needs the information to have a meaningful opportunity to prepare and contribute. Determination means treating that goal as part of planning, not as an optional extra that can be postponed whenever the schedule gets tight.

Next, learn what is needed. The organizer can ask the colleague what format would be useful and when it needs to be available. The question should be practical and private, not a demand to explain a disability to the whole team. The organizer can also check what other participants need to follow the discussion.

Then, change the preparation process. The team might provide the materials earlier and add descriptions or written explanations for information that otherwise appears only in a chart. The exact solution depends on the materials and the colleague’s needs, so it is better to ask and confirm than to assume. The aim is not merely to send a file; it is to make the content usable in time to prepare.

Finally, review what happened. After the session, the organizer can ask whether the materials arrived in a useful form and whether the meeting allowed people to contribute. If the adjustment worked, add the step to the planning checklist. If it did not, ask what should change next time.

Determination appears in the team’s follow-through: the goal of participation remains important through the planning process. Resilience appears in its willingness to revise the process after learning where it fell short. Neither requires a dramatic intervention. The useful result is a more dependable way of preparing, with less last-minute friction for the colleague and the organizer alike.

This example also shows why leaders should avoid framing an access request as an interruption to the “real” work. Preparing usable information is part of enabling the work. When a team includes that step in its routine, the colleague does not have to start from zero at every meeting, and the organizer has a clearer process to follow.

Frequently asked questions

Is determination the same as resilience?

No. Determination is commitment to continue pursuing a goal. Resilience is adapting and recovering when circumstances change or a setback occurs. A team may need both: commitment to meaningful participation and flexibility about how it achieves it.

Can determination become counterproductive?

Yes. Determination becomes counterproductive when it means repeating an approach despite evidence that it is not working, or asking people to tolerate barriers that can be addressed. Keep the purpose steady, but be willing to examine and change the method.

How can a manager show resilience after making a mistake?

A manager can acknowledge the impact, listen without becoming defensive, correct what can be corrected, and identify a practical step to reduce the chance of repeating the mistake. Resilience in this context is learning and taking responsibility, not dismissing the concern and moving on.

Does disability inclusion require every solution to be the same?

No. People’s needs and work situations differ. A useful starting point is to ask what would make a particular task or interaction more workable, then follow the organization’s process and agree on appropriate next steps. Avoid assuming one adjustment fits everyone.

Connect with Aaron about a speaking or team engagement

Make inclusion a practice of commitment and learning

Determination gives a team a reason to stay engaged with disability inclusion in the workplace; resilience gives it the ability to learn when a practice needs to change. Leaders build trust when they listen, take responsibility for removing barriers, and follow through on specific actions. The result is not a perfect process on the first try, but a team that keeps improving how people can contribute.