When It Comes to Accessibility, Is Your Organization Reactive or Proactive?

Recently, I visited a car dealership with the intention of buying a truck. A salesman quickly approached me, but the second he realized I was Deaf, his demeanor changed noticeably. When I asked for a pen and paper to help us communicate, he balked at the idea.

“Why don’t you come back in a few hours?” he suggested. “By then, we’ll have another salesperson in who can help you find a more affordable truck.” 

Angered that he had interpreted my Deafness as an indication that I couldn’t afford the truck I intended to buy, I went to another dealership that quickly proved itself more accessible and Deaf-friendly. There, I bought the truck I wanted. On its surface, this story might seem to reference a salesman whose ignorance cost himself and his company a single sale, but it’s far more than that. My experiences that day compelled me to share the story with everyone I knew. My family and friends were so upset about what happened with the first dealer that even those who had been loyal to the dealership for years refused to ever buy a car from them again. Further, many of the people I spoke to wound up visiting the second dealership to trade in their old vehicles and purchase new ones.

Put simply, the first dealership’s reactive, bare minimum accommodating approach to managing a potential customer with a disability cost them far more than one sale. Meanwhile, the second dealership’s proactive, accessible system raised their profile among the Deaf community considerably. The bottom line is that when your organization is genuinely, proactively accessible, as most companies know, one customer is never “one” customer because the word spreads fast.

Unfortunately, this is not the norm for most organizations, in part because the laws require them to do the bare minimum when it comes to accessibility, and in part because too many leaders don’t fully realize what doing the bare minimum is costing them. They aren’t simply losing the occasional Deaf customer; they’re missing out on a large, rabidly loyal community that wants nothing more than to do business on equal ground.

Accommodation Isn’t Enough

The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 was the first to require federal agencies to make their information accessible to people with disabilities. This certainly led to a number of positive developments for many disabled communities, but the wording of the act created some unfortunate unintended consequences. The problematic words include the mandate for organizations to provide reasonable “accommodation” for “qualified individuals” with disabilities. This unfortunate language has permeated the culture, spreading to far too many organizations in the political and professional worlds.

Last year, my extended family and I began planning a cruise vacation. Like any other traveler, our first step was to research as many potential cruise providers as we could. All of them offered attractive amenities, attractions, and excursions, but in the end, the choice was a no-brainer. Rather than cruising with a company that offered “accommodations” for Deaf passengers, we chose the one that promoted its accessibility via American Sign Language (ASL) proficient staff.

The words “accommodation” and “qualified individuals” mean that organizations merely need to make efforts to help disabled customers rather than creating an environment of genuine accessibility. What’s the difference? Accommodation requires in-the-moment adaptation to a model standardized exclusively for able-bodied people, while accessibility means that an organization is prepared for the needs of any and all disabled customers ahead of time; it means they have created an environment where a disabled person doesn’t need to ask to have his/her needs met. It is the difference between going on a cruise where you have to actively seek out someone willing to try communicating with you and going on a cruise where ASL interpreters, signed video announcements, etc. are there to provide an equitable experience without having to ask or figure something out. 

Put another way, a reactive organization that merely seeks to provide accommodation effectively places the burden on the customer to prove that he/she is a “qualified individual” who needs extra services because of his/her disability. The frustration, aggravation, and even the embarrassment that can come from this requirement should be obvious.

There is a world of difference between accommodating a group of customers and providing genuine accessibility. The latter means that the customer does not have to specifically request an extra service or speak about a disability that he/she may prefer not to discuss. Accessibility means that an organization has taken steps to ensure that everyone, no matter what their background, language, or personal needs, can feel comfortable in the space and with the services that organization provides. 

Accessibility Requires Cultural Understanding and Universal Design

Imagine that you are Deaf and you are trying to communicate with the customer service department of an IT company. The well-meaning service rep suggests shifting the conversation to chat. As a Hearing person unfamiliar with the culture and communication of the Deaf community, this might seem like a reasonable accommodation. But it falls far short of accessibility because it assumes that every Deaf customer is as proficient with the English language as they are with their native ASL. 

Services like online chat, TTY, or calling through VRS (Video Relay Service) can certainly accommodate many Deaf customers, but it is mere accommodation simply because these are services that the customer must request to use; services that require the customer to carry the burden of communicating in English instead of ASL or going through a third-party gatekeeper like VRS. 

To achieve genuine accessibility for the Deaf community, an organization must seek to incorporate authentic cultural understanding. The best way to do this is to employ people from the Deaf community; people who use ASL to communicate; people who can provide the ultimate customer experience rather than just handling the interaction via VRS or online chat.

As a second and highly important step, organizations must strive for universal design—meaning that they must design their products, services, and environments in a way that is mindful of all potential customers’ needs. Universal design eliminates the need for adaptation or accommodation by meeting the broadest possible community of potential customers who bring varying abilities and disabilities. 

Cultural understanding and universal design may sound like monumental efforts, but they are very much achievable with the right strategies and partnerships. Connect Direct helps any organization become genuinely accessible to the millions-strong Deaf and Hard of Hearing communities by providing in-house, non-third-party customer service staff who are not only ASL-fluent but personally familiar with Deaf culture. With Connect Direct, any organization can transform itself from providing accommodations to projecting genuine accessibility, creating an overwhelmingly positive impact on cultural connection, customer service, community outreach, hiring diversity, and ultimately, the bottom line.