This study explores labor force productivity through a comparative qualitative analysis of Deaf and hearing employees, examining how communication, inclusion, and organizational support influence workplace performance. Anchored on the Social Model of Disability, Human Capital Theory, and Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, the study emphasizes that productivity differences are largely shaped by social and structural factors rather than by hearing ability itself. Using a qualitative phenomenological design, data were gathered from 10 Deaf employees, 5 hearing employees, 4 employers, and 1 hearing supervisor through semi-structured interviews, focus group discussions, and workplace observations. Data were analyzed thematically to identify patterns of experience and meaning. Findings revealed five key themes: communication accessibility, workplace adaptation and support, perceptions and stereotypes, motivation and work commitment, and technology and inclusion. Deaf employees demonstrated strong commitment, attention to detail, and resilience when communication barriers were minimized through interpreters and assistive devices. However, where such supports were lacking, productivity suffered due to exclusion and miscommunication. Employers' attitudes were found to significantly influence the morale and efficiency of Deaf workers, underscoring the importance of inclusive leadership and organizational culture. The study concludes that productivity is a function of accessibility, equity, and inclusive practices rather than disability status. It recommends the promotion of communication accessibility, inclusive workplace policies, investment in adaptive technologies, and policy-driven research on Deaf employment. These measures can enhance equal participation, harness the full potential of Deaf individuals, and foster a more inclusive and productive workforce.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Albert Ulutorti Green
Anuforo Cajetan Chima
Achebe Gozie John
Niger State Polytechnic
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Green et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
www.synapsesocial.com/papers/69db37b04fe01fead37c5bb6 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19501221
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: