Ian Streets, Managing Director of About Access, explains how you should look close to home for the approach which can set accessibility standards globally
We’ve come across so many examples of town centres and even individual buildings which can’t achieve consistency of accessible design that maybe we should be at least a little daunted by the ambitions of one organisation to develop an approach which works globally.
But we’re not. We welcome the ambition because we know it comes with an awareness that such a project will not be easy and that there’s no such thing as one size fits all.
The particular business is concentrating for now on setting accessibility standards and inclusion across its international network of offices and our role is to help them achieve that in practical terms.
The issues which are perhaps the most obvious are not necessarily the most important as far as we are concerned.
There are different legislative requirements around the world and the organisation we’re working with will need to adhere to the rules in all the territories where it operates.
The US has various pieces of legislation as we do in the UK with the Equality Act 2010. Ireland and the rest of the EU have similar legislation, but there will be some countries where this business operates which do not.
Some legislative regimes are better than others but they all generally have caveats. Using an example which is close to home, the Equality Act says that adjustments have to be reasonable, but the legislation doesn’t tell you how to design something or which guidance to use. It just tells you what should be achieved.
Some countries might have different design and guidance, for example with stairs and handrails. Others may operate quota systems on how many disabled people should be employed and what sort of work they can do, but that clings to the outdated notion that disabled people can only do particular jobs instead of treating them as individuals who each have their own skills and who can help the company in a number of ways.
For example, it’s now recognised that neurodiverse people have particular skills that are well suited to particular jobs and processes, and by raising awareness of that we are also promoting an understanding of the social model of disability – not dwelling on the cause of a person’s impairment but instead concentrating on the things they can do and removing the barriers that others put in the way.
So our priority is to look at the environment which is in place, or which is proposed, and to consider what sort of obstacles that might present for an employee or visitor who has a physical impairment which limits their mobility or manual dexterity. We also consider the implications for someone who has a sensory impairment, a mental health condition, learning disabilities such as autism and Asperger’s syndrome and learning difficulties, including dyslexia and dyspraxia.
The key to assessing the impact is understanding the effect of an impairment on an individual’s confidence and competence in dealing with the barriers. We find an effective way of doing that is to consult with the users and we explore the issues with a variety of access groups because we recognise that the wide range of conditions, impairments and impacts can generate different attitudes an interpretations around the same accessibility scenario.
This, in turn, leads to a risk that one group of vocal and influential people might attempt to push through modifications which work for them, but without appreciating the impact on other people. Any solutions should work for as many people as possible and not create accessible options for some, while at the same time introducing fresh obstacles for others.
“The legislation doesn’t tell you how to design something or which guidance to use. It just tells you what should be achieved.”
Blister paving is an example of a feature which is intended to help blind and partially sighted people find a safe place to cross a road and it also has a drop kerb, which some wheelchair users find helpful. However, it can also create problems for other wheelchair users, for people who have arthritis in their feet or hips and for people who have to wear thin-soled shoes.
Yet the challenge of shaping the accessibility strategy for every office development in a global business network extends further. It must take into account the entire journey of an employee or visitor during their time in the premises and that embraces not just the physical features of doors, surfaces, décor and more but also the management policies.
In the same way that fire safety relies on extinguishers that work, escape routes which are unobstructed and marshals who know precisely what to do when the alarm sounds, so an effective accessibility policy depends on enforcing restrictions with accessible parking bays, checking that automatic doors operate safely and ensuring the constant presence of enough staff who are trained in disability confidence.
By focusing on official regulations and guidance, it should be easy enough to identify the minimum standards which you need to meet in a particular country, but by developing a strategy based on the lived experiences of different user access groups, and by balancing any conflicting needs, you can go further. You can get as close as possible to creating an environment which is accessible for everyone.
Ian Streets
Managing Director
About Access
Tel 01482 651101
Please note: this is a commercial profile.
