Prioritising accessibility issues
Why it’s important
When accessibility issues have been discovered, either as a result of an accessibility audit, user test or complaint, your team will need to know how to review and prioritise the resolution of these issues. This is so your information is accessible to everyone.
How to get it right
There is no single way to review and prioritise defects. Each organisation, team, project is different, with different deadlines, priorities, budgets and understanding of accessibility.
However, the following points can be used as a guide:
- Complaint – This should be treated with utmost urgency. You have users that are being actively impacted by inaccessibility and may not be able to complete their digital journey. The reputational and legal risk is being realised and must be addressed.
- Defect severity – Typically, accessibility audits will categorise defects based on a High, Medium, or Low basis. You should start by fixing the highs, then the mediums, then the lows, in that order.
- Prevalence – Are the defect(s) across site-wide templates, or a single instance in an isolated journey? Defects that can be fixed once (i.e., in a component library), but impact multiple journeys should be considered for prioritisation over defects that aren’t as prevalent. This should not override defect severity.
- Journey traffic – Are the defect(s) found within core user journeys, or in an obscure, low-traffic journey? Defects in core journeys are likely to impact customers more often – you should prioritise these.
- Lifecycle – Defects found in journeys due to be retired should be lower in priority, than those in strategic journeys. Unless prioritised for other reasons, there is little reason why you should be fixing something that will soon be not applicable.
- Time and cost to fix – Quick and cheap > Slow and expensive. Being agile in delivery is important to ensure fixes are consistently being delivered to your colleagues or customers. Show progress, as time spent trying to fix something will not be recognised or understood if not actually delivered.
Defining High, Medium, or Low
- High: The defect blocks the user journey, meaning some users will be excluded from completing the user journey – for example: controls with no keyboard access.
-
Medium: The defect causes problems for some users, slowing them down
and giving them a frustrating experience, but doesn’t block the
user journey. A workaround to mitigate problems may be acceptable at
times, but multiple workarounds may cumulatively increase severity to
a ‘High’.
- Low: The defect is minor or cosmetic – something is technically ‘wrong’, but it isn’t likely to affect users much or at all.
Who should be involved in prioritisation?
Include representation from all disciplines that impact delivery. You’ll want your product owner, project manager, and leads for engineering and design as a foundation.
If you have an accessibility specialist aligned with the delivery, then it’s strongly recommended for them to be included in that core group too. This will accelerate team understanding and ensure the prioritisation efforts are impactful.