Accessibility: good business sense

"Any dietary requirements we should be aware of?"

More than a decade ago, this was not a common question. In India, vegetarian food options were abundant and taken for granted. Europe was my reality check. I'd pre-check menus before accepting any invite or request that a dish be re-made "sans viande ni poisson".

A different state of affairs now. Various needs are preempted and catered to, menus are filled with little symbols showing the range of options. And if not, consumers don't shy away from asking what they need, and the world has found ways to accommodate them.

Friends who run kitchens tell me menu designing is both art and a science, balancing what customers want with what's operationally viable. Some restaurants were early adopters of this shift, used it to differentiate themselves, and gained loyalty. It also gave consumers space to speak up. As they did, more information about preferences became available and restaurants could specialise. What started as optional accommodation became the norm.

I bring this up because I think accessibility is at a similar inflection point. 

I was invited to a lovely dinner few weeks back and the RSVP card had three fields: attendance, dietary needs, accessibility needs. 

I was pleasantly surprised to see the third checkbox and filled out the form as required. I wondered though if others felt the same. 

Years back I'd hesitate asking for a food modification. Are people hesitating today about flagging accessibility needs? Some may think it doesn’t apply, others may calculate how it affects perception and leave it blank. 

Flag a need and nothing changes, one stops flagging. Low disclosure leads to underinvestment, minimal change, and even less disclosure. And the loop continues.

What broke that loop in our restaurant example was the industry responding consistently and laying grounds for consumer engagement. Accessibility needs the same. 

And the market is bigger than most realise. 

Over a billion people live with some form of functional limitations. Add temporary injuries, pregnancy, and caregiving; the addressable market becomes significant.

Bigger companies as we know are already making strides: KLM has a thoughtful check-in process; NS trains in NL switched station screens to dark mode; Nike has EasyOn shoes. The time is now for mid-sized, high-growth companies to take it further. How? 

For starters, let go of a common misconception: accessibility doesn't drive revenue. Not true. If the addressable market is considered in totality as discussed above, consumer reach multiplies, and loyalty compounds. 

• Embedding accessibility is costly. False.

• Accessibility is a nice to have and doesn't drive revenue. Wrong.

• Accessibility means installing a ramp. Think bigger.

• Accessibility serves a small section of people in wheelchairs. Wrong.

We can agree that serving a variety of dietary needs is now table stakes. Not doing so was a lost business opportunity. Accessibility is the same opportunity, still under-utilized. Start by asking the question.

I work at the intersection of strategy, consumer insights, and accessibility. If you're rethinking how your business can serve and open up to more people, I’d value the conversation.