Why now is the right moment for Accessibility

Good design ends where people fail

We often experience the same moment in projects: A website looks good, loads quickly, has clear messages – and yet someone still can’t get in.

It can start with something completely mundane. You want to fill out a form, but the focus jumps invisibly somewhere. You want to open a menu, but it only responds to hover. Or you want to understand a video, but without subtitles it remains silent.

For many, this is a minor annoyance. For others, it is exclusion.

And that is exactly where Accessibility becomes a question of digital inclusion: access to information, to offerings, to education, to help. Not as a friendly add-on, but as a basic requirement.

Why is this so urgent right now? Because the gap on the web is huge – and becoming visible. Audits show that the vast majority of websites fail to meet basic Accessibility requirements. One analysis speaks of more than 95 percent. testparty.ai↗

If you read this and think „Then we’re not alone“, that’s true. But that’s exactly the point: If almost everyone fails, accessible quality becomes a real differentiator.

Our most important shift in perspective: Accessibility is not just a technology issue. It is a promise of quality. And it is closely related to what we stand for at Pola: „Access for all“ – as the social part of sustainable digital work.

In our projects, a small heuristic helps us with this, quickly creating clarity: „Can you do it without eyes, without a mouse, without sound?“ If the answer is „no“ in several places, that is not a flaw on your part – but a signal that real users are currently running into walls.

And then the question is no longer whether you should take care of it. But how.

Many barriers remain invisible in analytics

When we talk to teams about accessibility, one sentence often comes up, honestly meant: „But we hardly have any users with disabilities.“

The problem: You rarely see them – precisely because barriers make them leave early.

Nearly 89 million people with disabilities live in the EU. European Commission↗ In Germany, around 7.8 million people with severe disabilities are cited. digitalagenten.com↗ These are not niche figures, they are lived realities.

And it’s not just about „disability“ as a fixed category. It’s about situations: glaring sunlight on your phone, an arm in a sling, a baby in your arms, stress, fatigue. Barriers also arise when language is too complex or interfaces are overloaded.

There is also a digital divide that we should not ignore. People with severe disabilities use the internet less often than people without disabilities – 78 percent compared with 93 percent in the EU (2024). thueringen.de↗ Part of this gap is infrastructure, part is education – and part is barriers in digital services.

That’s why our first „Unique Angle“ is deliberately human: Digital inclusion is not just compliance. It is participation.

In workshops, we often ask: „What task does someone have to accomplish here when they have no resources available right now?“ A person who wants to submit an application. Someone who urgently needs a replacement part from the shop. Someone looking for a therapy appointment. In moments like these, your website is not marketing – it is infrastructure.

When it is then not usable, that does not come across as neutral. It comes across as exclusionary.

And that is precisely why accessibility is also brand work for us: Not in the sense of „we’re showing it off“, but in the sense of trustworthy, fair digital relationships. Making things easy for you shows respect. Making things impossible for you sends – often unintentionally – the opposite message.

Minimum quality becomes mandatory for many services

With 2025, the issue has taken on a new urgency in Europe. The European Accessibility Act takes effect in Germany through the Accessibility Strengthening Act (BFSG) – particularly relevant for many digital products and services in the private sector.

We deliberately write „many“, because the details depend on the service, size, industry and specific product. What is changing, however: Accessibility is no longer merely „nice“, but expected minimum quality in numerous cases.

In practice, we see two risks when teams put the issue off for too long.

First: You end up under time pressure. And time pressure is the worst state in which to implement accessibility well. Then people turn to supposed shortcuts – and end up with overlays or cosmetic fixes.

Secondly: You underestimate the consequences. The BFSG provides for fines for violations, with amounts of up to 100,000 euros being reported in the media. musnuss.de↗ But even if legal action is not your first pain point: Damage to your reputation and lost trust are often more expensive than any penalty.

We like to use a second heuristic in our consulting work that has proven effective: “The law is the starting gun, not the finish line.”

This sounds counterintuitive because many articles on the web start exactly the other way around: “You must.” We see it this way: If you optimize only for compliance, you usually end up with screens that are just about AA-compliant – but not with a truly good, robust experience.

Our second “Unique Angle” is therefore: Accessibility as part of sustainable digital quality. As with performance or security, you do not achieve it with a one-time project completion, but with a process.

If you are currently planning to relaunch your website, now is the right time. And if you already have an existing site, it is still not too late: With a structured audit, you can quickly identify the biggest barriers – and prioritize them based on impact.

The only important thing is: do not wait until 2025 catches up with you.

Four principles make requirements concrete

At first, the WCAG can feel like a set of rules from another world. Many teams know the feeling: You read “perceivable, operable, understandable, robust” – and wonder what that concretely means for your homepage.

We therefore do not use the WCAG as a checklist to tick off, but as a common language within the team. As soon as Design, Development and Content share the same principles, Accessibility suddenly becomes plannable.

The four principles can be translated as follows:

Perceivable: Content must get through – even without perfect vision or without sound. An image without alternative text is simply invisible to screen readers. Light gray text on a white background disappears for many people.

Operable: Everything must work with a keyboard. No mouse, no touch – only Tab, Enter, arrow keys. That sounds strict, but it is the fastest reality check we know.

Understandable: Language, structure and interaction must be predictable. This is where a lot of silent failure happens: overly complex forms, unclear error messages, “Click here” links.

Robust: Clean code, semantic structure, no makeshift solutions. So that assistive technologies can interpret the site reliably – today and in two years.

If you have a team that doesn’t live in the WCAG universe every day, a simple working rule that we use again and again helps: “Principle first, pixels second.”

That’s our third “Unique Angle” – and at the same time a method: We first define what an element means (navigation, button, notice, error message), and then design the visual appearance. This creates semantic clarity in the code and visual clarity in the interface.

WCAG levels (A, AA, AAA) are like seat belts in different grades of protection. In many legal contexts, WCAG 2.1 Level AA is the relevant target state. digitalagenten.com↗

Our practical tip: Don’t start with all criteria at once. Start with the user journeys that involve money, trust, or participation – contact, purchase, appointment, application. If these work accessibly, the most important step has already been taken.

Exclusion costs reach, revenue, and trust

There’s a sentence we hear more often in day-to-day project work than we’d like: “Accessibility is important – but we also have to keep an eye on the budget.”

That’s understandable. And yet it’s often a fallacy, because it treats accessibility as a cost center.

The numbers tell a different story. One study reports that 71 percent of customers with accessibility needs leave a website if it is difficult to use. wonderful.io↗ That means: You don’t necessarily get complaints. You get silence. And lost conversions.

At the same time, the market potential is huge: The global “Disability Market” is estimated to represent around 13 trillion US dollars in purchasing power. testparty.ai↗ This isn’t an “extra audience”, it’s part of the market.

What particularly convinces us: Accessibility often pays off not only through new target groups, but through less friction for everyone. One documented example: After an accessible redesign, conversion increased by 31 percent, including measurable ROI. accessibility-test.org↗

If you translate that, it’s ultimately simple: Accessibility reduces misunderstandings, dead ends, and drop-offs.

In cases like these, we like to think in terms of “friction costs”. Every point where people fail creates follow-up costs: support requests, queries, manual processes, poor reviews, lost leads.

And this is where our perspective as a sustainable digital agency comes into play: Good accessibility is often resource-efficient, too. Clear structures, fewer unnecessary effects, sensibly used media – this not only makes sites more accessible, but often faster and lighter as well. It’s a quiet, but real synergy between social and technical quality.

So when you think about ROI, don’t just ask yourself “What does it cost?”. Also ask yourself: What does it cost you every month when people drop off – and you don’t even notice?

Good intentions often fail because of false assumptions

When Accessibility gets stuck in teams, it’s rarely due to a lack of willingness. Usually, it’s myths that feel plausible – and still steer you in the wrong direction.

The most common myth: “It only affects a few people.” In fact, around 15 percent of the world’s population lives with a disability. a11ymyths.com↗ And even if you were to ignore that figure: “Temporary barriers” catch up with all of us. That’s precisely why Accessibility is not a special discipline, but part of good UX.

The second myth: “Accessibility makes design ugly.” We see the opposite. When you’re forced to solve structure, contrast, and hierarchy cleanly, an interface often becomes calmer, clearer, more mature. Not because it becomes boring, but because it has less to guess.

The third myth is the most dangerous: “We’ll just install an Accessibility overlay.” Overlays can help individual users in the short term, for example by adjusting font sizes. But they don’t solve the underlying causes. And they can create new problems because they work “on top of” the content.

Here, a hard but fair fact helps: Automated tests only find some of the accessibility problems – one study cites around 57 percent. Deque↗ So if you rely only on scanners and widgets, almost half of the problems remain invisible.

The fourth myth: “That’s the developers’ job.” In reality, Accessibility often fails as early as in the content (unclear language, missing image descriptions) or in the design (focus not accounted for, contrast not checked). Accessibility is teamwork – and that’s exactly why it needs a process.

We use a simple internal rule for this that quickly takes the emotion out of discussions: “Whoever creates the barrier also helps remove it.” If a button is created without a label, it’s not just a code issue. If a text is incomprehensible, it’s not just a layout issue. It sounds strict, but it leads to something good: responsibility is shared – and the topic becomes easier.

And if you’re thinking right now “This is a lot”: Yes. But it’s not chaotic. It’s structured. And it can be learned.

Three loops bring accessibility into the process

At Pola, we treat accessibility like performance or security: not as a checkpoint at the end, but as part of product maturity.

So that this doesn’t sound like “more effort”, we work with a field-tested method that works especially well in small and medium-sized teams: A11y in three loops: Recognize, Design, Document.

Recognize means: We start with an audit that doesn’t just run tools, but walks through user flows. “Can you get in touch? Can you buy? Can you read?” We test with keyboard, zoom, screen reader quick checks and look for patterns.

Design means: We translate findings into a design and content system. Not every page gets its own patch. We fix components: buttons, forms, navigation, typography, error messages. This pays off later because you don’t have the same problem in 30 places.

Document means: We create evidence and routine. Accessibility becomes visible in the project: as acceptance criteria in tickets, as a QA step, as documentation in the design system.

What always helps here is a clear division of roles. Design ensures that focus, contrast, states and hierarchy are not “forgotten”. Development ensures semantic HTML and robust components. Content ensures clarity, alt texts, meaningful link texts.

If you’re just starting to tackle the topic, this process may seem big. Our learning: It only gets big when you put it off.

And one more thing that is rarely said out loud: Accessibility is also relationship building. As soon as you test with real users or simply use a screen reader for real, your perspective changes. “Criteria” becomes “experience”.

That’s exactly where the mindset we so often see in purpose-driven brands emerges: not “How do we get through the test?”, but “How do we make it fair?”

If you want, we’ll take this journey with you – transparently, step by step, without false promises.

Find the biggest barriers in 30 minutes

If you want to take away just one thing from this article, let it be this: You don’t have to solve everything right away. You have to make the biggest barriers visible first.

Here is our short Quick Check, which we also use internally when we see a page for the first time. It is deliberately pragmatic – not fully WCAG, but honest enough to give you a direction.

1) Keyboard check: Open your page and navigate for 2 minutes using only Tab, Shift+Tab and Enter. Can you get everywhere? Can you always clearly see where you are?

2) Contrast check: Check key texts and buttons with a contrast tool such as the WebAIM Contrast Checker. Are the most important elements easy to read?

3) Form check: Are there labels, clear error messages, and understandable instructions? Or do you have to guess what is wrong?

4) Media check: Are there videos without subtitles or information that is only conveyed in the image? Then people miss the content.

If you get stuck on two or more points, that is not a judgment – it is a starting point.

What we then do in practice: We translate these observations into priorities. A checkout flow is more important than a “cool” animated slider. An appointment booking is more important than a perfectly polished About page.

And one more thought we like to share because it takes the pressure off teams: Accessibility is rarely “all or nothing”. It is often a series of 20 small decisions that, taken together, either open or close doors.

If you start with keyboard and contrast today, you are already doing more than most. And you are building a foundation you can continue to work on – without having to redo everything later.

Automated checks only see part of the picture

Tools are great – as long as you use them as a flashlight, not a judge.

To get started, we like to recommend a small combination of tools that you can use in 30 minutes:

• WAVE for a quick visual scan
• Lighthouse in Chrome for basic scores and guidance
• axe DevTools for more thorough technical findings

But: Automated tests are limited. One study describes automated testing as detecting about 57 percent of problems on average. Deque↗

The remaining 43 percent are often the crucial ones: Is the alternative text meaningful? Is the order logical? Can you understand the error message? No machine can reliably assess that.

That is why we always include a manual part. And it is less mysterious than it sounds.

We usually start with a Screen reader reality check: On macOS/iOS with VoiceOver, on Windows with NVDA. You do not have to be a professional. It is enough to hear once how your page “sounds”. Suddenly you notice where structure is missing – and where you only “see” things but do not “express” them.

Then we test the critical flows: contact, checkout, sign-up. And we check focus management for modals or menus. Many problems are found exactly there.

It is also important to us that Accessibility does not exist as a final test, but as a routine. A small example: If you reuse components, you can solve Accessibility in the component – and it is better everywhere.

If you already have a design system, that is a gift. If you do not, Accessibility is a good reason to build one.

And if you’re wondering whether you need external help for this: It depends less on “can we do this?” and more on “do we want to establish it as a process?”. If so, an audit plus enablement is almost always worthwhile – because it will make your team faster in the long term.

Those who build processes today will have less to improve tomorrow

If you see 2025 as the target date, you’re thinking too short-term – even if that’s how the law currently appears.

We expect accessibility to experience three major shifts in the coming years.

First: Standards are evolving. WCAG 2.2 introduces new criteria, and WCAG 3.0 is in development. This means: Those who only “fix” things selectively today will have to rework them again tomorrow. Those who build processes and systems today will be much more relaxed.

Second: Demographics are making accessibility mainstream. As the population ages, visual, hearing and motor impairments are increasing. This is not some special future scenario, it is a realistic trend that is changing the user base.

Third: Technology helps – but does not replace. AI can now generate captions, describe images or simplify content. At the same time, the key quality comes from the interplay of structure, language and interaction.

We are already seeing large companies increasingly require accessibility from partners and suppliers. One statistic states that 89 percent of companies expect WCAG compliance from vendors. allaccessible.org↗

This is a quiet but powerful pressure: It’s not just legislators, markets are also demanding inclusion.

Our view is hopeful: When accessibility becomes standard, better products emerge. Not perfect, but more human. Less friction, more clarity.

And for purpose-driven brands, it is even more: a credible translation of values into interface decisions.

If you don’t want to “catch up” in 2030, but rather “help shape” it, now is a good time to lay the foundation: design systems, content routines, QA processes, responsibility within the team.

Then accessibility is no longer the project you’ll “also get around to” at some point.

Then it’s simply: digital quality.