Abstract
Background
Supported employment programs have enhanced job placement and retention for autistic individuals and people with an intellectual disability; however, there is limited understanding of the supports that facilitate long-term career advancement, and the experiences associated with it.
Methods
A scoping review was undertaken, involving systematic searches across six databases: Scopus, PsycINFO, Embase, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Business Source Ultimate, guided by a structured search strategy. Eligible articles were subsequently coded and analysed to identify overarching themes and key points.
Objective
To answer the research question: “What does the literature say about the use of career planning practices to facilitate career advancement for autistic individuals and people with an intellectual disability?”
Results
Fifteen relevant studies revealed six key points: 1) autistic individuals and workers with an intellectual disability consistently desire career progression; 2) persistent barriers impede advancement; 3) progression is possible despite these barriers; 4) effective job coaching supports advancement; 5) positive workplace relationships and inclusive cultures improve outcomes; and 6) advancement requires individualized planning beyond traditional pathways.
Conclusions
Career progression for autistic individuals and people with an intellectual disability is achievable; however, supported employment practices must evolve to better facilitate long-term career goals and advancement, promoting meaningful workplace inclusion.
Keywords
Introduction
Despite increasing awareness of the benefits of workplace inclusion, the employment rate for Canadians with disabilities remains persistently low, with autistic individuals and people with an intellectual disability experiencing the greatest marginalization within the broader disability community (Bian, 2020; Boeltzig-Brown et al., 2013; Government of Canada, 2020; Meacham et al., 2017). These disparities are not only systemic but reflect patterns of ableism and structural exclusion that continue to shape the labor market.
While programmatic efforts to promote competitive integrated employment have demonstrated promising outcomes, particularly those grounded in the principles of supported employment (Beyer et al., 2016; Harker & Desenberg-Wines, 2017; Inge et al., 2024), these initiatives have largely focused on initial job placement and retention. Supported employment was originally designed to provide ongoing and individualized support to enhance both job retention and opportunities for advancement (Brooke et al., 1995; Wehman et al., 2012). However, critiques have emerged suggesting that supported employment, while facilitating entry into the workforce, may not adequately support long-term career growth or progression (Sharpe et al., 2022). For instance, systemic disincentives, such as the absence of requirements to support advancement beyond one year of employment, may limit the potential for supported employment to function as a platform for career development (Sharpe et al., 2022).
Although considerable literature documents support needs related to gaining and maintaining employment, much less is known about the conditions that enable or constrain career advancement among autistic individuals and people with an intellectual disability. In fact, the absence of advancement opportunities has been directly noted. In a 12-year longitudinal study, Weiner and Zivolich (2003) observed no meaningful career progression for three employees with an intellectual disability. Similarly, Taubner et al. (2022), in their review of employment sustainability, found no evidence of upward career trajectories in the literature. Instead, definitions of sustainability were largely based on job duration rather than progress or skill development. As they noted: “Regarding ‘stable or upward employment trajectory’, none of the explicit definitions in the included articles contained anything about employment trajectories” (p. 360).
These findings are echoed in broader research, where autistic adults are shown to experience uneven and unstable work histories, often marked by repeated placements in entry-level roles despite significant educational qualifications (Müller et al., 2003). This trend highlights a troubling disconnect between individual potential and available employment pathways, reinforcing the need to move beyond narrow definitions of job success. As Sinclair et al. (2024) argue, many individuals remain in roles not because they are thriving, but because of a lack of advancement opportunities and systemic discrimination. The pervasive notion that “any job is a good job” must be challenged in favor of an approach that prioritizes meaningful work, self-determination, and long-term career growth (Gilson et al., 2022; Sinclair et al., 2024). Indeed, career advancement should be understood as a dynamic process that includes not only wage increases or promotions but also the opportunity to acquire new skills and move into roles that align with personal aspirations (Sharpe et al., 2022).
This scoping review seeks to address this gap by examining the question: “What does the literature say about the use of career planning practices to facilitate career advancement for autistic individuals and people with an intellectual disability?”
Methods
Due to the anticipated scarcity of research on the career advancement experiences of autistic individuals and workers with an intellectual disability, a scoping review methodology was selected to summarize existing evidence and identify knowledge gaps (Arksey & O’Malley, 2005; Levac et al., 2010). Unlike systematic reviews, scoping reviews aim to provide a broad overview of the literature rather than a detailed synthesis (Peters et al., 2020). Six databases were searched, including Scopus, PsycINFO, Embase, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Business Source Ultimate.
To ensure methodological rigor, the PRISMA Scoping Review (PRISMA-ScR) and PRISMA for Searching (PRISMA-S) extensions were applied (Rethlefsen et al., 2021; Tricco et al., 2018). A study protocol was created outlining the inclusion, exclusion, and selection criteria (Arksey & O’Malley, 2005), although it was not formally published. Given the diverse terminology associated with career advancement, initial test searches were conducted to assess the relevance and scope of search results. Following several refinements, the final inclusion and exclusion criteria were established, as shown in Table 1.
Inclusion Criteria for Career Advancement Scoping Review.
The results from every database or platform were exported into Covidence for review. JCB then completed the title and abstract screening, as well as the full text review. If there was uncertainty about the inclusion of an article RH was consulted. Quality appraisal was not performed, in alignment with PRISMA-ScR guidelines, which considers this step optional (Tricco et al., 2018). The included studies were then imported into NVivo, a qualitative data analysis tool, for coding and thematic analysis. Each article was systematically coded, and thematic relationships were examined as they emerged. Preliminary findings and thematic connections were discussed collaboratively with the full research team and are presented below.
Results
The initial search identified 3,053 studies, from which 296 duplicates were removed. Titles and abstracts of the remaining 2,757 studies were screened for relevance, resulting in 203 studies selected for full-text review. Of these, fifteen studies met the inclusion criteria and were deemed relevant to the research question (see Figure 1 for the PRISMA flow diagram).
PRISMA flow diagram for career advancement scoping review.
The majority of included literature originated in North America, with ten studies from the United States and two from Canada. Additionally, two studies were conducted in Australia and one in the United Kingdom. A comprehensive legal and policy analysis is beyond the scope of this review; however, the literature indicates that these governments are actively prioritizing and advancing competitive employment within the conventional labor market (Callahan et al., 2011; Christianson-Barker et al., 2025; Dispenza, 2021; Taylor et al., 2021). Thus, while policies across these countries vary and may result in differing perspectives and experiences, scholarship from these contexts reflects the widespread adoption of supported employment programs, thereby establishing a common framework of supports within which these studies are conducted (Almalky, 2020; Beyer et al., 2016; Moore et al., 2018). A range of research methodologies was represented in the included literature, with qualitative approaches used most frequently and case studies emerging as the predominant methodological tool (n = 4). Notably, three studies originating in the United States (Brooke et al., 2018; Hall et al., 2018; Young Illies et al., 2021) include an analysis of state and federal data sets. Centralized funding mechanisms and large-scale service tracking systems enable the examination of extensive datasets to assess trends and patterns of service utilization. However, such infrastructure is not uniformly available across jurisdictions; for example, fragmented service systems in Canada pose challenges for systematically tracking trends (Christianson-Barker et al., 2025). A full summary of the included literature and their characteristics can be found in Table 2.
Included Literature of Career Advancement Scoping Review.
It is important to note that our findings differ substantially from those reported by Davies et al. (2024) in their scoping review, “Career Progression for Autistic People.” Although the research questions were similar, our inclusion criteria required that the study include a clear instance of career progression. Studies that described “career outcomes that do not build on previous experience or planning” were excluded. During the full-text screening, we observed that many excluded studies addressed barriers to progression or expressed a desire among supported employees to advance but lacked documented examples of actual progression. This distinction in inclusion criteria accounts for the differences in our study selection compared to Davies et al. (2024).
The fifteen studies that met our criteria revealed a consistent pattern of barriers and enablers related to career advancement. They also reflected a strong interest in progression among people with an intellectual disability and autistic workers. The following section provides a summary of these findings.
Desire for Progression
The included studies identified a clear desire amongst autistic individuals and people with an intellectual disability for meaningful career progression. Davies et al. (2024) found that while not universal, career advancement was a common and significant theme in the employment goals of autistic individuals, cited in seven studies within their literature review. Included literature specifically identified expressed aspirations for professional growth, skill development, and advancement into roles with greater responsibility (Cavanagh et al., 2021; Davies et al., 2024; Hayward et al., 2018). This includes a desire for supervisory or managerial positions that reflect their capabilities and ambitions (Gilson et al., 2022).
Beyond upward mobility, the literature emphasized the importance of work as a means of proving one's competence and challenging ableist perspectives and stigma associated with disability. Gilson et al. (2022) reported that participants viewed employment as a platform to demonstrate value, earn respect, and dismantle stereotypes, describing work as a “duty” to educate others and assert their place in the workforce. One participant shared, I don’t want to pursue something like that where it's like someone who has low or no high school diploma can do the same thing. I like to get the respect of getting some kind of work that makes a point that I’m an effective worker and worth the place I’m at. (Gilson et al., 2022, p. 381).
Stigma and Discrimination Limits Advancement
Both explicit and implicit forms of discrimination were documented across the reviewed literature. According to Davies et al. (2024), nine studies indicated that autistic individuals may encounter barriers to career progression specifically as a result of their autistic identity and/or traits. Gilson et al. (2022) illustrated this through one participant's account: “I was disappointed so I was asking why they haven’t moved me up. My manager had said that I can’t work in the deli. […] When I talked to my co-worker, my co-worker told me a person in the deli called me < ableist slur > and can only take out the trash” (p. 377).
Lack of Opportunities for Skill Development
Skill gaps and lack of both informal and formal professional development opportunities were identified as limiting advancement. Cavanagh et al. (2021) highlighted how limited training, and a lack of role diversity can restrict the development of workers with an intellectual disability, as illustrated by one participant: “We do not get any different training, we just stick at what we know. (WWID, Hotel 3) They do not know what to do with us so we just get stuck in the laundry” (p. 1745). Thus, opportunities for advancement are often limited by managerial assumptions and organizational structures. For instance, when asked about promotional prospects, one supervisor remarked, “I don’t feel there are. There might be more skills for him to acquire, but advancement in the sense of taking on a different role here - I don’t see that” (Lindstrom et al., 2014, p. 46).
In some cases, advancement was obstructed by unspoken workplace norms and social dynamics, as Davies et al. (2024) noted: “to get from the entry level to the upper level there are all these social niceties and all these politics of how you get there, not necessarily skills individuals with ASD are adept. It results in underemployment” (p. 2697). These social challenges are frequently linked to difficulties in interpreting and using social cues such as tone, facial expressions, and reciprocal communication (Di Francesco et al., 2021). As Longmire et al. (2025) explained, this may lead to a sense of “relational incongruence” within workgroups, undermining an autistic employee's sense of authenticity and belonging, particularly when facing the threat of marginalization (p. 65). Combined with limited access to skill development, gaps in education and employment history, can undermine confidence and aspirations. Davies et al. (2024) found in their review that autistic workers expressed self-doubt and felt that a lack of skills was preventing them from achieving their goals.
Precarious and Under Employment
The literature found that the above barriers experienced in the workplace often resulted in frequent change of jobs and underemployment, where roles and time spent working do not reflect the skills or qualifications of workers. In their scoping review on career progression for autistic people, Davies et al. (2024) established underemployment is a common experience for autistic workers, explaining that the many barriers experienced in the workplace result in burnout. Cavanagh et al. (2021) similarly found that barriers experienced led “some autistic employees to pursue more casual, part-time or precarious work arrangements” (Cavanagh et al., 2021, p. 2691). Hayward et al. (2018) shared the challenge of maintaining work experienced by one autistic man, I have had countless jobs. I could never work full time in one. I have tried and each time they have failed. Working in the same group [of people] for anything more than a few months requires navigating complex interpersonal developments that I find overwhelming - even though I am brilliant at leading groups at very specific projects/tasks … sustaining it for any lengthy period is very[,] very taxing. (p. 54)
Heyman et al. (2016) found that although some workers earn above minimum wage, most are limited to around fifteen hours per week due to a lack of opportunities for additional hours, leaving them ineligible for benefits such as health insurance. In some cases, reduced hours may reflect strategic decisions to preserve access to government or social assistance programs (Young Illies et al., 2021). Lindstrom et al. (2014) discussed the difficult trade-offs that individuals and their families often face when trying to remain within earning limits to retain government support, a constraint that can limit opportunities for career growth. Another structural factor contributing to underemployment, as identified in the literature, is the frequent mismatch between individuals’ skills and strengths, and the jobs individuals are supported into. As Lindstrom et al. (2014) explained, “these initial job placements did not always seem to be well suited to individuals’ strengths and goals. Many placements appeared to be based on job availability rather than participant preferences” (p. 44). Collectively, these patterns of underemployment and frequent job transitions create substantial obstacles to career progression and sustained professional advancement.
Supported Advancement
Despite the barriers outlined above, the literature underscores the potential for autistic individuals and workers with an intellectual disability to advance in the workplace. Documented forms of advancement include increased responsibilities (Brooke et al., 2018; Gilson et al., 2022; Lindstrom et al., 2014; Nicholas & Lau, 2019; Wehman et al., 2017), higher wages and expanded work hours (Davies et al., 2024; Heyman et al., 2016; Wehman et al., 2017; Young Illies et al., 2021), as well as transitions to new roles or overall career growth (Bross et al., 2020; Cavanagh et al., 2021; Gilson et al., 2022; Hayward et al., 2018). However, advancement in one domain, such as added responsibilities, did not always correspond with meaningful gains in others. As Lindstrom et al. (2014) illustrated, “Ann's promotion from serving french fries to working at the taco line was accompanied by a 20 cent per hour raise” (p. 46). They further noted that over a five- to eight-year period, wage increases were minimal and largely tied to small adjustments in the state minimum wage rather than reflective of personal or professional growth.
The concept of meaningful advancement also extended beyond job titles or pay. Gilson et al. (2022) highlighted the broader social value of meaningful employment, explaining that “work fosters growth of networks and opportunities with others beyond the immediate workplace, such as future job prospects or broader community connections” (p. 377). These findings suggest that while advancement is possible, its quality and impact vary significantly, underscoring the importance of understanding what the included literature says about the conditions that facilitate truly meaningful career growth, a topic explored further below.
Facilitators to Advancement
Several facilitators supporting advancement were noted in the included literature. Noted most frequently was the use of job coaching support (n = 12), which was also echoed in Davies et al.'s (2024) review. Job coaches played a central role not only in supporting initial job placement but also in promoting retention, advancement, and long-term success. Di Francesco et al. (2021) reported that over half of employers believed they would not have hired or successfully integrated employees without ongoing job coach support and employees themselves rated immediate, on-the-job training provided during impromptu visits by job coaches as the most helpful form of support.
Job coaching to maintain employment was a key focus. Brooke et al. (2018), in a longitudinal study on vocational rehabilitation services, found that six months into employment was a critical point for reassessing support needs. At this stage, new tasks or performance improvements often required additional training or enhanced social skill supports. “It appears that employees with ASD benefit from the continual assessment and support that occurs during the long-term supports phase of supported employment,” which may include ongoing job customization, lateral moves, or opportunities for advancement (Brooke et al., 2018, p. 191). Similarly, Bross et al. (2020) documented a case where an individualized intervention package, including targeted training, led to marked improvements in job performance and employer satisfaction. These findings reinforce the value of sustained, individualized support that bridges workplace expectations and employee needs, which Lindstrom et al. (2014) identified as key to long-term employment stability. Wehman et al. (2017) highlighted the breadth of long-term support services, including behavioral problem-solving, productivity coaching, task redesign, and assistance with workplace-specific challenges.
Beyond job retention, the literature emphasizes the role of job coaching in promoting stronger job-person fit, which is linked to improved employment outcomes, including higher wages. Young Illies et al. (2021) found that job counseling services were associated with the highest average salaries among support types, suggesting that aligning job placements with individual interests and strengths can significantly enhance outcomes. This is further supported by Hayward et al. (2018), who noted that achieving a strong “job-person fit is essential to positive employment experiences” (p. 57). However, Nicholas and Lau (2019) shared caution against viewing job fit as fixed, advocating instead for its continuous reassessment in alignment with individuals’ evolving goals and aspirations.
Job coaches are also recognized as critical relational facilitators who help bridge communication and understanding between coworkers and supervisors (Longmire et al., 2025). Employers saw job coaches not only as sources of employee support but also as valuable guides for managers in fostering inclusion (Nicholas & Lau, 2019). The significance of workplace belonging is further emphasized by Cavanagh et al. (2021), who found that “high-quality relationships at the workplace enhance learning because they promote mutual attentiveness and responsiveness to each other's learning and goal attainment,” enabling workers with an intellectual disability to pursue further development (p. 1743). This theme is echoed in Gilson et al. (2022), where one participant shared: “John shared an example in his custodial job, ‘[My coworker] was training me on how to use the floor scrubber. And I’d say [that] was kind of a tricky thing, but then I kind of figured how to use it the best way, with his help, of course’” (p. 377).
Building on the importance of positive workplace relationships, supportive workplace culture also plays a vital role. Lindstrom et al. (2014) reported that employers helped set a positive tone, encouraging respectful communication and flexibility among staff. Longmire et al. (2025) emphasized that an inclusive “organizational context (i.e., workgroup norms, managerial practices, and workgroup climate) fosters richer, more mutual dyadic coworker relationships, and, in turn, enhances individual workplace experiences for autistic adults” (p. 61), finding that “high-quality relationships with other workgroup members in particular are a vital component of positive work experiences” (p. 66).
To address stigma and improve relational dynamics in the workplace, training for managers and coworkers was identified as a valuable tool. Davies et al. (2024) noted that many studies recommended autism-focused training to improve awareness and understanding. Di Francesco et al. (2021) similarly argued that “providing training to employers and coworkers may also help the employee better fit into the workplace culture” (p. 293).
In addition to relational supports, access to skill development and training opportunities was identified as a key facilitator of advancement. Young Illies et al. (2021) reported that increased training services were associated with higher wages and more hours worked, noting, “increase in training services may indicate that clients have obtained additional skills that make them more marketable for specific jobs” (p. 224). Importantly, Davies et al. (2024) emphasized the need to move beyond conventional, linear pathways to advancement. They advocate for “a more holistic framework that recognises and values diverse strengths and career aspirations” (p. 2700), suggesting career development could also include non-traditional routes to career progression. As they explained, “This shift could involve creating pathways that emphasise skill development, project (rather than person) leadership or other forms of professional growth that do not necessarily require traditional managerial roles” (p. 2700).
Ultimately, the literature noted that thriving at work involves more than supported job performance alone, positive workplace relationships, inclusive culture, and self-determined aspirations are essential. As Cavanagh et al. (2021) explained, “Thriving at work is about an individual developing an inward energy where they are projected into a sense of wanting to succeed and often this is about seeking promotion through their work” (p. 1741).
Key Points Found in the Included Literature
Based on the reviewed literature, six key findings were identified:
Desire for Career Progression: Autistic individuals and workers with an intellectual disability consistently express a strong aspiration for career advancement. This includes seeking increased responsibilities, higher wages, expanded working hours, and upward mobility. Career success is also framed as a means of challenging ableist perceptions and stereotypes. Persistent Barriers: Major obstacles to advancement include stigma, limited access to training and skill development opportunities, as well as underemployment and precarious job arrangements. Evidence of Advancement: Despite these challenges, there is documented evidence of successful career progression among autistic individuals and workers with an intellectual disability. Role of Job Coaching: Accessible and effective job coaching has been shown to facilitate advancement by supporting job fit and performance, addressing communication challenges, and promoting job retention, an essential precursor to progression. Importance of Workplace Relationships: Positive workplace relationships and an inclusive organizational culture play a critical role in supporting high-quality employment experiences. These factors contribute to environments where individuals are more likely to seek and achieve career growth. Broadening Advancement Pathways: Supported career advancement should not be limited to conventional promotion trajectories (e.g., managerial roles). Instead, planning should consider individualized opportunities aligned with each person's skills, strengths, and interests.
Discussion
Although the sample is limited, the fifteen included studies offer valuable insight into the current state of career advancement for autistic individuals and workers with an intellectual disability. From the outset, we anticipated a modest return, given the scarcity of literature focused on this area, a prediction that proved accurate. This limited body of research reflects the prevailing practice of the employment support sector, which continues to prioritize access over justice (Gilson et al., 2022; Sinclair et al., 2024). Rather than centering equity, self-determination, and systemic change, much of the field remains focused on entry-level inclusion, with little attention to long-term career development.
The limited presence of literature documenting meaningful career advancement reflects both the slow pace of change within the employment sector and a disconnect between societal ideals of inclusion and the lived experiences of autistic individuals and people with an intellectual disability. Few studies have directly examined pathways to career growth, highlighting a significant gap and the need for further research that critically explores these trajectories. Despite this, the review did uncover instances of advancement, demonstrating that career progression is indeed possible and occurring. Key facilitators identified include job coaching, supportive workplace relationships, and opportunities for intentional skill development.
Notably absent from the literature, particularly in relation to supportive workplace relationships, was the role of mentorship in fostering career advancement. Given the well-documented benefits of mentorship in broader employment contexts (Corneille et al., 2019; Shields et al., 2023; Wu & Olagunju, 2024), its absence in this body of research is of note. Future studies would benefit from examining how mentorship may support not only workplace integration but also long-term career development for autistic individuals and people with an intellectual disability.
One prominent theme that emerged across the literature is the psychological and social significance of employment, with career advancement seen as a way to counter stigma and challenge ableist assumptions (Cavanagh et al., 2021; Davies et al., 2024; Gilson et al., 2022). For many, progress at work is not merely about status or wages, but about recognition, visibility, and belonging. Gilson et al. (2022), for example, emphasize the desire among participants to be “seen in their community,” which speaks to a deeper need for social and political recognition, an essential tenet of disability justice. Future research would benefit from exploring not only individual experiences of career advancement but also the transformative potential of these experiences in reshaping workplace culture, influencing co-worker attitudes, and challenging broader societal perceptions of disability.
Engagement in work that aligns well with an individual's skills and strengths, commonly referred to as a good “job-person fit,” has been identified as a key facilitator of both job retention and future career development (Di Francesco et al., 2021; Hayward et al., 2018; Young Illies et al., 2021). This alignment is associated with increased performance potential, as individuals are more likely to succeed when their roles are tailored to their specific capabilities. However, Nicholas and Lau (2019) cautioned against conceptualizing job fit as static, emphasizing the importance of allowing space for personal growth and evolving career goals. We extend this caution by suggesting that an overemphasis on achieving an ideal initial job match may be restrictive, as typical early career experiences are generally geared toward skill development and gaining workplace exposure rather than establishing a definitive career trajectory. Given the persistently high unemployment rates among autistic individuals and people with an intellectual disability, along with the risk of becoming stalled in the pre-employment planning phase, we propose that early employment experiences for these populations should parallel those of their non-disabled peers.
In addition, we advocate for a fundamental shift within the field of supported employment, from a narrow focus on initial job placement to a more dynamic, cyclical model of employment support that centers long-term career development and advancement. Securing a first job should not be regarded as the end goal, but rather the beginning of an ongoing process that fosters professional growth, skill development, and increasing autonomy. If we are to presume competence, we must also presume growth. Yet, current models often equate job maintenance with success, without critically examining why so many individuals remain in stagnant positions over extended periods. It is essential to question whether jobs align with individuals’ interests and whether transitions within or between roles build upon prior experience, wages, hours, and responsibilities. This call for a cyclical model of employment support requires adjustments in funding allocations and traditional support frameworks, placing new importance on career advancement support over the sole focus on initial job placement and maintenance activities.
Moreover, barriers to advancement, particularly underemployment and precarious work, must be understood within the context of ableism and structural inequality. The continued lack of upward mobility is not simply a programmatic oversight, but reflective of deeply embedded biases and assumptions about the capabilities and potential of autistic individuals and people with an intellectual disability. A disability justice framework demands that we confront these assumptions and address the compounding impacts of intersectional marginalization. Individuals who experience limited advancement in the general population, such as women, racialized individuals, and those from historically excluded communities, are often further disenfranchised when they also have a disability. Future research must move beyond a one-dimensional analysis of disability and include an intersectional lens to better understand how race, gender, class, and other social locations shape access to career advancement. As Lyons et al. (2022) highlight, a troubling aspect of the support system is the inequitable allocation of public resources, with individuals from racial and ethnic minority groups often receiving fewer services and lower levels of funding compared to their white counterparts. Without explicitly addressing such inequities, studies risk reinforcing the very disparities they seek to remedy. Career advancement must be reframed not only as an employment issue, but as a matter of equity, dignity, and self-determination.
A limitation of this review includes a lack of analysis on position characteristics, industry, and sector of employment experiences studied. Incorporating these dimensions in future research would be beneficial, as it would allow for deeper insights into sectoral trends that support career growth and facilitate critical examination of ableist assumptions regarding the types of work autistic individuals and workers with an intellectual disability are perceived to be capable of performing. Further, future research examining the availability of support, funding, and policy frameworks that support career advancement would be beneficial in understanding the contextual framework influencing career outcomes.
Conclusion
This scoping review answers the question, “What does the literature say about the use of career planning practices to facilitate career advancement for autistic individuals and people with an intellectual disability?” Fifteen studies were identified as relevant and analysed, resulting in six key points: 1) there is a documented and consistent desire for career progression among autistic individuals and workers with an intellectual disability; 2) enduring barriers continue to hinder advancement opportunities; 3) despite these barriers, career progression is both possible and evidenced in the literature; 4) accessible and effective job coaching enhances workplace experiences and facilitates advancement; 5) positive workplace relationships and inclusive organizational cultures significantly shape employment outcomes; and 6) career advancement should include individualized planning that extends beyond conventional promotional pathways. This review contributes to the literature by providing a comprehensive overview of the current state of supported career progression and advancement for autistic individuals and people with an intellectual disability. Findings establish a clear need for further research, particularly studies grounded in disability justice theory and attentive to intersectional experiences. Additionally, our review calls for systemic change across the employment support sector, emphasizing the importance of meaningful, person-centred career planning and career trajectories. Finally, we caution against equating the notion of “best job fit” with first job outcomes, urging for a more dynamic and developmental approach to career trajectories.
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the Government of Canada's Opportunities Fund for Persons with Disabilities for their continued investment in the Ready, Willing, and Able Initiative, through which this research is funded.
Ethics Statement
This scoping review did not require ethics review and approval.
Informed Consent
This scoping review did not directly involve participants.
Funding
This project was supported by the Ready, Willing, and Able Initiative, funded by the Government of Canada's Opportunities Fund for Persons with Disabilities. There is no funding number associated with this study.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.