how organizations implement accessibility
DESCRIPTION
How organizations implement accessibility. Chris M. Law School of Business Information Technology RMIT University. Outline. 1. Background and impetus 2. Organizational responses 3. Resources used 4. Practical implications of different types of responses 5. Preliminary conclusions. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Chris M. Law, WANAU meeting, RMIT University, March 26, 2007; Slide 1
How organizations implement accessibility
Chris M. LawSchool of Business Information Technology
RMIT University
Chris M. Law, WANAU meeting, RMIT University, March 26, 2007; Slide 2
Outline
1. Background and impetus
2. Organizational responses
3. Resources used
4. Practical implications of different types of responses
5. Preliminary conclusions
Chris M. Law, WANAU meeting, RMIT University, March 26, 2007; Slide 3
1. Background
Chris M. Law, WANAU meeting, RMIT University, March 26, 2007; Slide 4
Chris M. Law, WANAU meeting, RMIT University, March 26, 2007; Slide 5
Guidelines Committees
AccessibilityProgram Offices
Designer(s)
End-User(s)
Consultant(s)
We know a lot
We know little
Key
Chris M. Law, WANAU meeting, RMIT University, March 26, 2007; Slide 6
Chris M. Law, WANAU meeting, RMIT University, March 26, 2007; Slide 7
Make our website accessible?... not on list
website inaccessible
Chris M. Law, WANAU meeting, RMIT University, March 26, 2007; Slide 8
Chris M. Law, WANAU meeting, RMIT University, March 26, 2007; Slide 9
Chris M. Law, WANAU meeting, RMIT University, March 26, 2007; Slide 10
product
developm
ent
context
1. Start thinking about accessibility
2. Consider options
3a. Conclude, decide on design path
3b. Review, decide on revisions
4. Commit to decision
Chris M. Law, WANAU meeting, RMIT University, March 26, 2007; Slide 11
Research studies on organizational responses
• National Council on Disability, USA– 2004 report: "Design for inclusion: Creating a new marketplace"– 6 technology industry companies
• Universal Design in Practice (UDiP)– 3 year project at Georgia Tech, USA– 4 technology industry companies, 4 government agencies
• Business decision making and accessibility– My current PhD study, completed / scheduled so far:– 12 organizations with goods / services available to the public– 4 disability access organizations– 12 experts
Chris M. Law, WANAU meeting, RMIT University, March 26, 2007; Slide 12
2. Organizational responses
Chris M. Law, WANAU meeting, RMIT University, March 26, 2007; Slide 13
Organizational structure
Executives
Marketing
Management
Development:
Design
Programming
Sales
Customer Service
Others
Organization X
AccessibilityConsultancy
AccessibilityConsultant
AccessibilityPoint-Person
(APP) Disability
Organization
Accessibility
ProgramOffice (APO)
NCD: 4 of 6
NCD: "Several"
UDiP: 7 of 8UDiP: 1 of 8
UDiP: "Several"
None: 2
Business Decision Makingand Accessibility (Australia)
6 2
1
1
Chris M. Law, WANAU meeting, RMIT University, March 26, 2007; Slide 14
APP/APO (stand-alone)
Executives
Marketing
Management
Development:
Design
Programming
Sales
Customer Service
Others
Organization X
APP / APO
20/26
18/20
Chris M. Law, WANAU meeting, RMIT University, March 26, 2007; Slide 15
A
APP/APO (integrated)
Executives
Marketing
Management
Development:
Design
Programming
Sales
Customer Service
Others
Organization X
APP / APO
1/20 successfully completed1/20 currently attempting
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
Chris M. Law, WANAU meeting, RMIT University, March 26, 2007; Slide 16
3. Resources used
Chris M. Law, WANAU meeting, RMIT University, March 26, 2007; Slide 17
APP/APOProgrammer(s)
End-User(s)
Universal AccessGuidelines & Tools
Feedback& Data
SoftwareDevelopment
Recommendations
AccessibilityEvaluation
Questions
?
Chris M. Law, WANAU meeting, RMIT University, March 26, 2007; Slide 18
Rest ofDev't team
Accessibility Team Interface Designer(s)and Programmer(s)
End-User(s)
Internal & External Accessibility Resources (Consultants, Guidelines, Tools, Websites, Books etc.)
Feedback& Data
Support & Advice
SoftwareDevelop-ment
Recommendations
AccessibilityEvaluation
Questions
?
Chris M. Law, WANAU meeting, RMIT University, March 26, 2007; Slide 19
4. Practical implications of different types of responses
Chris M. Law, WANAU meeting, RMIT University, March 26, 2007; Slide 20
Accessibility in the organization is...
• Ingrained, or marginalized?
• Everyone's responsibility, or a select few?
• Part of the mission, or a hassle?
• Well planned, or haphazard?
• etc. etc.
• Customers are taken care of, or seen as a nuisance?
Chris M. Law, WANAU meeting, RMIT University, March 26, 2007; Slide 21
Staffing and skill-sets• A possible problem...
• Who do you hire to address accessibility problems?– start with consultants– hire a person or a team of people
• they know about technology and accessibility, but not necessarily about design, manufacture, programming, management, etc.
• but they have to then convince all of the people in those other roles of what to do for accessibility
Chris M. Law, WANAU meeting, RMIT University, March 26, 2007; Slide 22
5. Preliminary conclusions
(and further work)
Chris M. Law, WANAU meeting, RMIT University, March 26, 2007; Slide 23
Preliminary conclusions
• Rarely about money
• Often about Australia's position in the marketplace– e.g., computers post-508; buses post-ADA;
telephone hardware design limitations
• Organizational responses rarely planned– even with Disability Action Plans– more evolutionary and dependent on
organizational structure and staff
Chris M. Law, WANAU meeting, RMIT University, March 26, 2007; Slide 24
Resource gaps
• Establishing what is possible is difficult for novices
• Resources not really designed for the observed organizational responses
• Design guidance and standards in universal design - there are a number of unresolved problems
• The business case is not well documented
Chris M. Law, WANAU meeting, RMIT University, March 26, 2007; Slide 25
The ideal response?• Take time to find out what's physically,
technologically and sociologically possible in all areas
• Consider how to make the organization's accessibility message consistent– e.g., Architecture and technology priorities
• Conduct training, set internal 'best practice' guides
• Better if it is everyone's responsibility
Chris M. Law, WANAU meeting, RMIT University, March 26, 2007; Slide 26
Thanks!
www.udprojects.com
Acknowledgments:Funding provided by - Media Access Australia- Australian Postgraduate Award Scholarship- Victoria ICT Scholarship