This post explores some observations I’ve made on corporate branding and its relationship to accessibility. How organizations approach accessibility is a part of how they wish to be perceived by the public.

In this issue:

Story: Accessibility is Branding

In 2013 I bought a meditation timer (called Insight Timer) and used it almost every day for the next six years. I finally got rid of the app after finding it growing less usable with each new update. While I liked that the app kept track of my meditation sessions and allowed me to connect with other meditators around the world, I found the hassle of using the app contradicted the intent of my meditation practice.

The meditation timer went from having a simple user interface to becoming more work than it was worth. The decision to drop the app came after repeated interactions with the timer’s customer support group. These interactions sometimes concluded in customer support saying they would refer my support request to the software development team. The referrals had no apparent impact as the app has gotten progressively worse over time. As the timer became less usable with each new version, it became obvious the company had little interest in keeping me as a customer. I’ve since found a spiritually based meditation timer that does everything I need it to do. I think the Buddha would approve.

I was recently on a call, focused on branding, for a conference taking place next year. In reviewing the conference web page, I made it a point to reinforce the design team’s attention to accessible design. I had the revelation that accessibility is branding. I did some looking at how branding is defined by marketing professionals. I quickly came across the following: “Your brand is built to be a true representation of who you are as a business, and how you wish to be perceived” (Smithson, 2015) . The quote serves to reinforce my revelation that accessibility is branding..

Lessons learned:

When I apply the assertion that accessibility is branding to my experiences with the meditation timer, I conclude that the timer developer is not concerned with how their company is perceived by its end users. I had been working on the assumption that, as the end user of the timer, I was the timer’s primary customer. This may have been true when I originally purchased the app. Since that time the company has changed hands and has changed their business model. The developer stopped charging for the app and started promoting the app as a sales platform for producers of meditation programs. In essence, the customers are the producers of meditation programs and the timer’s end user (in this case, me) is the product.

The developer of the timer has repeatedly shared the message that I am not someone they value as part of their product’s user base. Since I never considered my meditation practice as a commercial revenue source, this doesn’t really bother me. The replacement timer I found is provided by a religious order that I am much more likely to support.

The fact that Insight Timer has chosen not to support Apple’s Voice Over feature in their product development cycle is annoying to me but doesn’t really matter. Insight Network, Incorporated is guilty of not having a well designed product testing program but they didn’t purposely set out to create a barrier to the use of their product. As a brand, I perceive Insight Network Incorporated as being indifferent to their end users and having poor quality control in the development of their products.

In the grand scheme of things, it doesn’t really bother me that Insight Network, Incorporated is indifferent to me as a user of their product. They don’t respect me as a person and I’ve lost respect for them as a company. This works fine when there are many customers and many suppliers. Things are not always this simple. When there is strong competition for customers, it’s simply bad business to be indifferent to customer needs. When there are few suppliers, being indifferent to customer needs can range from rude to cruel and (possibly) criminal. I use the following criteria in managing my expectations of accessibility:

• I expect companies/organizations that claim to be “Open to the public” to be open to all members of the public.
• If an organization presents itself as private or for members only, it’s my responsibility to find out if I’m welcome before joining.
• If an organization accepts any sort of public funding, I expect it to be open to the public (including me).
• I expect to be served by individuals working in a public setting, even if those people are associated with private/members only organizations outside of the role they have in the public setting.

In the case of the meditation app, it was a reasonable expectation that the app would be accessible by any member of the public. The app was sold through Apple’s “App Store.” All Apple products include accessibility features for persons with disabilities. Anyone who knows how to use SIRI can test if an app is accessible to a blind person by saying “Turn Voice Over on/off.” Apple also provides developers with documentation for confirming that their products can be used with its operating system. It is a reasonable (but apparently false) expectation that the developer tested their product before releasing it to the public. Given the number of available options in meditation timers, I just moved on.

Full disclosure: As a person with a visual disability, I used to think of myself as some sort of second class citizen. I’ve given that up as the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is 29 years in the rear view mirror. I consider myself a member of the public and expect service providers, facilities, and products on offer to the public to take into account decades old civil rights law.

Applying the lessons:

As noted above, it doesn’t bother me to have the perception of the Insight Network Incorporated brand as being indifferent to the needs of their end-users. I found the experience to be an interesting exercise in reflecting on how brand perceptions are developed. In doing this reflection, I realized I’ve been talking about relationships. Relationships between: myself and organizations; my self and other individuals; how I perceive others; how others perceive me. Here are a few thoughts for your own reflection:

• Who do you consider to be your customers? Are they the same as the end-user of your products?
• How do you want to be perceived by those you interact with.
• How do you confirm the fit between your brand presentation and brand perception?
• How do you manage the expectations of persons who are/are not the target of your focus?
• How do you let others know that the target of your focus is changing and may/may not include them in the future?

References

• Plumb Village Community of Engaged Buddhism. (2019) “Plumb village app.” Plum Village app
• SMITHSON, ELIZABETH. 14 OCT 2015. Brandium, Inc. Ltd. Link to article

Get these posts in your inbox

• If you would like to receive my monthly newsletter you can join the mailing list by clicking here
• I never sell my mailing list.

For more information:

Dan Lococo, PhD
, Barrier Knocker Downer
dan.lococo@gmail.com
414.333.5846

Copyright 2019, Dan Lococo, All rights reserved