H: Organizational Behavior
- Introduction
- H-1. What are the current barriers?
- H-2. What aspects of organizational behavior will facilitate the adoption of Accessible Design principles?
- H-3. How will the organization climate create or sustain barriers to the adoption of Accessible Design principles?
Introduction
Organizations face many barriers when it comes to incorporating accessible design. An evaluation of European organizations found the following barriers to be in place: the role of end users in the design process, the structure of the firm, perceptions of older people and people with disabilities, the role of these same populations within the design process, other priorities in the design process, the availability or awareness of material on accessibility issues, awareness of Design for All principles, and the nature of Design for All (European Commission, 1998).
Grudin (1993) identifies two barriers: the separation of the product definition and development processes, and the traditional, intentional separation of developers and users, which perpetuates ignorance of user needs. Aspects of organizational behavior that will facilitate the adoption of accessible design principles include offering human factors services free of charge to the design team or paying out of the overhead or other levels to encourage use by design teams; tailoring methods to the time and resources available; co-locating human factors experts with project design teams to permit quick access; and creating incentive programs for good designs. Raising awareness is the most important behavior an organization can adopt (Hartley, C). Without enabling the end user to participate in the design process and making distinct user and development environments, organizations will not overcome barriers to accessible design (Grudin, 1993).
H-1. What are the current barriers?
Organizations face several barriers when it comes to adopting accessible design principles in design, primarily due to the separation of the user and the developer and lack of awareness regarding the availability of accessible design resources. An evaluation of European organizations found such barriers as failure to include end users in the design process, the structure of the firm, negative or inaccurate perceptions of older people and people with disabilities, other priorities in the design process, the availability or awareness of material on accessibility issues, awareness of Design for All principles, and the nature of Design for All (European Commission, 1998). Grudin (1993) identifies two barriers: the separation of the product definition and development processes, and the traditional, intentional separation of developers and users, which perpetuates ignorance of user needs. Research conducted at the Trace Center (n.d.) indicated that the size of the company, the separation of the company from accessible design resources, and the perception of cost associated with accessible design were all associated with failure to adopt accessible design principles.
European Commission. (1998). Design for all and ICT business practice: Addressing the barriers. Examples of best practice (EC Ref. Number 98.70.022). Telematics Applications Programme: "Design-for-All" for an Inclusive Information Society, Brussels.
Grudin, J. (1993). Obstacles to participatory design in large product development organizations. In D. Schuler & A. Namioka (Eds.), Participatory design: Principles and practices (pp. 99-119). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Trace Center. Universal design research project. Retrieved January 25, 2001, from the World Wide Web:
http://www.trace.wisc.edu/docs/univ_design_res_proj/udrp.htm
H-2. What aspects of organizational behavior will facilitate the adoption of Accessible Design principles?
Research conducted at the Trace Center (n.d.) indicates that the fundamentally competitive nature of commercial product development will serve to facilitate the adoption of accessible design principles. That is, once some companies expand their target markets and increase profits by producing more accessible products, other companies will feel pressure to fall into step. In a similar vein, the aversion to litigation shared by all companies will compel organization leaders to investigate and improve the compliance of their products with federal regulations in order to prevent getting sued (Trace Center, n.d.). Finally, the ongoing research efforts in industry to produce more advanced products may contribute to increased awareness of accessible design and its implications for improved profits. Increased awareness may be one of the most important facilitators of the adoption of accessible design principles in design (Hartley, 1999).
European Commission. (1998). Design for all and ICT business practice: Addressing the barriers. Examples of best practice (EC Ref. Number 98.70.022). Telematics Applications Programme: "Design-for-All" for an Inclusive Information Society, Brussels.
Grudin, J. (1993). Obstacles to participatory design in large product development organizations. In D. Schuler & A. Namioka (Eds.), Participatory design: Principles and practices (pp. 99-119). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hartley, C. (October 20, 1999). Personal communication [email].
Trace Center. Universal design research project. Retrieved January 25, 2001, from the World Wide Web:
http://www.trace.wisc.edu/docs/univ_design_res_proj/udrp.htm
H-3. How will the organization climate create or sustain barriers to the adoption of Accessible Design principles?
Unfortunately the competitive and litigation-averse nature of organizations has also created and may sustain barriers to the adoption of accessible design principles. That is, unwillingness to take the time to research and train in accessible design, fear of increased cost incurred by accessible design, and fear of increased litigation due to failure to truly design for everyone are all associated with failure to adopt accessible design principles (Trace Center, n.d.). Increased awareness of accessible design and increased availability of resources and training may cater to these aspects of the organizational climate therefore making the adoption of accessible design principles the profitable choice. Another aspect of organizational design processes that may sustain barriers is the separation of product definition and product development processes, particularly for large companies (Grudin, 1993). While increasing awareness of the benefits of including users in the design process will likely improve organizational response to user needs, specialization in organizational departments may prevent these needs from leaping the gap between product definition and development.
Grudin, J. (1993). Obstacles to participatory design in large product development organizations. In D. Schuler & A. Namioka (Eds.), Participatory design: Principles and practices (pp. 99-119). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.