I was recently asked, “how do you influence a client who rejects your design decision” and I immediately thought of accessibility.

I have so many arguments about this. I currently work in an environment where creative and visual design is paramount; UI that is inclusive and accessible is second to opinion. I know I cannot change the culture of my company, but I can certainly influence the projects I work on.

Accessibility is not an option, but it is a choice.

Accessibility is a requirement. However, until we live in a world where inaccessible websites are by default removed from the internet, it will always be possible for a company to choose to make a website inaccessible, and see how long they can get away with it.

So the job of those UX people who work in immature environments, is to influence that choice.

The four hammers

Everyone wants something. And every stakeholder wants and needs something in order to succeed in their role.

The flip side of this is that everyone is scared of something which means that they perceive risk. And risk is best friend of any UX person who wants to do something properly, because UX processes and practices mitigate risk.

UX processes and practices mitigate risk

Similarly, refusing to adhere to accessibility standards comes with added risk, and not just the obvious legal one. In fact, there are four different risks you can demonstrate to stakeholders. I call these the four hammers.

(Note.. I considered calling these “levers”, but honestly with some people, a hammer is more effective..)

Hammer #1. Legal requirement

By now most people know that digital accessibility is a legal requirement. If you’re in the UK, it’s the Disability Discrimination Act 1995, the Equality Act 2010, and The Public Sector Bodies (Websites and Mobile Applications) Accessibility Regulations 2018. In Europe, there is the European Accessibility Act, and in the US there is the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

There have been many successful lawsuits against websites and digital products and services.

This alone can be enough to influence at least the legal departments of most big companies. The outcome for your project is likely to be adherence to the minimal box-checking of WCAG rather than a proper inclusive design process, but at least your design work won’t be shamefully discriminatory and illegal.

Hammer #2. Moral imperative

Occasionally, you may be able to influence stakeholders by helping them understand the needs of other humans and the moral imperative of allowing access to all.

Naturally, if your client company is interested in doing good in the world, they are probably already following inclusive design practices and delivering accessible products, but if not, you may still be able to build empathy at a stakeholder level.

This can be achieved via educational presentations, user research with a wider range of participants whose needs are varied, or by building some version of an accessibility lab, such as used by the Gov.UK team.

Hammer #3. Public humiliation

Most stakeholders dislike bad publicity. In fact, the more a stakeholder wants to impose their opinions rather than be guided by user needs or, you know, evidence, the more likely that they won’t want the rest of the internet pointing out that a design is bad.

So highlighting any case studies or examples of where the public, social media or the press has exposed the inaccessibility of a product or service is a great hammer.

(*cough. Sydney Olympics)

Hammer #4. Loss of engagement

We have to remember that accessibility is not about designing for disability, it’s about designing for inclusion.

So many projects are about encouraging sign up, purchase, dwell time — why on earth would stakeholders want to put up even more barriers and reduce their customer base further, especially when they are paying UX people good money to reduce barriers?

If rational argument isn’t working here, then try selling a positive story of engagement potential. Because the flipside to loss of engagement, is of course increased engagement. It’s amazing how many more users and customers you can get when you’re not deliberately excluding 15% of the world’s population.

Demonstrating a success story can be effective, and the best one out there currently is the design of The Last of Us Part 2 on Playstation, which has the most accessibility options of any game ever made. You can check out the incredible specs here.

Not only was the game a brilliant feat of accessible design and engineering, it actively and purposefully set out to include all humans. The internet responded accordingly with an enormous amount of coverage on social media and in the press, and no doubt a massive positive brand impact for Playstation.

You still can’t win them all

The four hammers will work with most clients and stakeholders. However, if they truly perceive no legal risk, if they are content with a life without moral purpose, if they have no fear of humiliation and they lack ambition for their project’s increased engagement then honestly — you’re never going to win.

As with all UX and design decisions, it is not for the designer to “die trying”. Ultimately, your job is to provide evidence-based guidance and recommendations — as strongly as you can in a professional environment — and if you still cannot change stakeholders’ minds, simply document your recommendation and their decision; and move on.

The stakeholders have now accepted the risk.