In the IT industry—and especially when it comes to advanced B2B systems—there’s still a myth that digital accessibility doesn’t apply to professionals. As a UX researcher with many years of experience, I know this is a mistake. Let’s imagine a very likely scenario: our fleet manager, Steve, is working late because he’s swamped with responsibilities. He’s tired, probably a little irritated, and his eyes are strained after a full day in front of the screen. We want to make it easier for him to complete his task. Our system must provide him with clear messages, well-designed forms, and fonts of an appropriate size with good contrast to support him in his work. When we imagine this situation, it becomes much easier for us to empathize with the user and acknowledge that accessibility guidelines are simply necessary. The training on the European Accessibility Act helped us organize the technical knowledge needed to effectively implement these principles.
For us, digital accessibility is not only an obligation, but above all, the foundation of responsible development of useful technologies. At some point in our lives, each of us experiences at least a temporary disability or injury. But it’s also a matter of the context of use. A fleet manager, for example, while using our service, is often answering phone calls, replying to emails, and arranging roadside assistance for one of their drivers all at the same time. They can’t devote 100 percent of their attention to the app. He doesn’t have time to figure out the nuances and intricacies of our system. Technology is meant to help him, not hinder him. So I consider accessibility as an organic, human experience.
As Wojtek Kutyła, an expert in this field, points out, while usability design itself is often based on common sense, digital accessibility requires the addition of solid technical knowledge—empathy alone isn’t enough here; you need to know how to fix the code. A single poor design decision can completely prevent someone from completing a task or simply ruin their day. Obvious mistakes are unforgivable today. The main benefit is that our systems are becoming safer and do not exclude any users. The internet won’t fix itself, which is why we take full responsibility for making these improvements within our products.
In solutions for drivers, such as NaviExpert app, we prioritized voice control, high contrast, and voice prompts. In traffic conditions, these are simply safety issues. Although interactive maps themselves are subject to certain exemptions under the regulations, the other elements of our systems are not.
That is why we are adapting our fleet dashboards, login processes, and services to AA-level accessibility standards. Among other things, we are introducing the ability to navigate entirely via the keyboard, optimizing contrast, and ensuring clear and understandable error messages in forms, while eliminating incomprehensible technical jargon.
Wojtek Kutyła provides some very insightful context there. He notes that we’re surrounded by reasonably good digital solutions in our daily lives, so when designing UX, that “common sense” is often enough to keep us from making any catastrophic mistakes. You can learn the basics of UX relatively quickly—you’ll get familiar with the user journey map, learn how to click around in Figma, and you’ll be able to deliver a project as such.
It doesn’t work that way with accessibility, though, because it’s extremely interdisciplinary. Kutyła emphasizes that if an interface doesn’t work for someone using, say, a screen reader, empathy alone won’t fix it. You have to “figure out” why it doesn’t work technically, and that requires a combination of behavioral science, visual design, and often knowledge of code optimization or even the backend. This confrontation with such technical complexity can be quite shocking and intimidating for organizations at first.
