Leaving accommodation decisions to individual managers introduces personal bias, fear, and legal ignorance, creating massive risk. The solution is a standardized process where managers immediately escalate any disability-related issue to a trained, centralized HR team.

Non-disabled employees closely observe how their company handles disability accommodations. Fair and supportive processes create psychological safety for the entire workforce, boosting retention as employees see a potential safety net for their own future needs.

Capital allocation isn't just about multi-million dollar acquisitions. Hiring a single employee is also a major investment; a $100k salary represents a discounted million-dollar commitment over time. Applying the same rigor to hiring decisions as you would to CapEx ensures you're investing your human capital wisely.

A common misconception is that accommodating employees means accepting lower output. The correct approach is to maintain the same performance, attendance, and safety standards for everyone, but to provide different tools and methods—the accommodations—to help employees meet those standards.

Companies that for years claimed remote work or flexible schedules were unreasonable for disabled employees instantly implemented those exact policies for everyone during the pandemic. This exposed that the barriers were never about feasibility but about corporate willingness and systemic ableism.

Jim Clayton believed over 80% of legal claims originate from a failure to deliver customer satisfaction. Instead of hiring lawyers to fight, he personally called angry customers or visited homes to fix problems, solving the root cause for a fraction of the cost of litigation.

Salaried, remote professionals can often self-accommodate. The disability employment crisis is concentrated among lower-wage workers whose jobs require physical presence and are subject to more rigid management, as 90% of accommodation requests come from the lower half of the pay scale.

Hesitating to start a project for fear of wasting time and money is a paradox. The most significant waste is the opportunity cost of inaction—staying on the sidelines while revenue and experience are left on the table.

Many businesses avoid adopting new tools like online scheduling because they fixate on potential outlier problems (e.g., a complex booking). This "paralysis by analysis" over imaginary scenarios prevents them from capturing the majority of leads who would benefit from convenience, ultimately costing them business.