There’s a pattern I see often.
An organisation is doing “well” with disability inclusion.
There’s momentum. There are conversations happening. There are initiatives underway.
And almost always, there’s a person behind it.
A committed leader. A passionate HR manager. A staff member with lived experience who keeps raising the issues.
The work moves because they move it.
And that’s where the fragility begins.
The Myth of the Champion
We celebrate champions.
And yes — committed individuals matter.
But when disability inclusion relies on a single person (or a small cluster of them), it isn’t embedded. It’s carried.
Carried in:
- Calendar reminders
- Emotional labour
- Unpaid advocacy
- Hallway conversations
- Constant nudging
That’s not sustainability.
That’s stamina.
And stamina has limits.
What Happens When They Leave?
Here’s the test I often ask leaders:
If your inclusion champion resigned tomorrow, what would happen?
Would the work:
- Continue at the same depth?
- Be redistributed structurally?
- Appear in governance and reporting?
- Still be prioritised under pressure?
Or would it slow down quietly? Become optional? Disappear into “next year’s priorities”?
If inclusion collapses when one person leaves, it was never structural to begin with.
Good People Can’t Carry Structural Gaps
Most organisations I work with are not lacking commitment.
They’re lacking infrastructure.
Disability inclusion drifts when:
- Accountability isn’t named at the executive or board level
- Access is treated as reactive
- Reporting focuses on activity rather than structural shift
- Governance documents don’t reflect inclusion commitments
- Inclusion is culturally supported but procedurally vague
Good people can push for change.
But they cannot replace systems.
What Structural Inclusion Actually Looks Like
Sustainable inclusion means:
- Responsibility is shared and documented
- Access is standard, not negotiated
- Inclusion appears in governance and risk conversations
- Leaders are accountable for progress
- It survives leadership turnover
- It holds when budgets tighten
It’s quieter work.
Less visible than events. Less inspiring than campaign launches.
But it’s what allows inclusion to outlast individuals.
Why This Matters Now
Over the next few years, most organisations will face:
- Budget constraints
- Leadership change
- Shifting political or market pressures
- Competing strategic priorities
In that context, disability inclusion will either hold — or it won’t.
And whether it holds won’t depend on how passionate your champion is.
It will depend on how embedded your systems are.
A Different Question to Ask
Instead of asking:
“How committed are we?”
Ask:
“Where is inclusion structurally embedded — and where is it personality-dependent?”
That’s a more useful starting point.
If This Feels Familiar
If you suspect your organisation is relying on a small number of committed people to keep inclusion moving…
That’s not a failure.
It’s a design issue.
And design issues can be addressed.
Over To You
Take a moment to consider:
- Who currently carries disability inclusion in your organisation?
- If they stepped back tomorrow, what would continue — and what would stall?
- Where is inclusion written into governance, reporting and accountability structures?
- Where does it rely on informal effort or goodwill?
Sustainable inclusion isn’t about finding better champions.
It’s about designing systems that don’t need one.
If you’d like to talk through where your inclusion work might be fragile — and what would make it more durable — I’m always open to a conversation.
