Jump to a video summary of our individual as a catalyst finding.
The importance of the individual as a catalyst for change was another theme. We asked where the drive for improvement started. Most participants thought they played a key role. They became a catalyst for change through:
- increasing their own knowledge and skills
- advocacy
- tenacity and drive to see the change through
The participants demonstrated high levels of commitment. They persisted, no matter how small the level of buy-in would be.
The above led to discussions on how to influence change. Common reflections included:
- personal drive
- tone of voice
- behaviour change principles
There were reflections on how complex the change was. This complexity made it harder to influence. We added a follow-up question to our discussions. We realised that influencing on this scale is challenging. We asked interviewees how being a catalyst for change affected their resilience.
Personal drive
The interview sample had a bias. We selected participants for their accessibility experience. We wanted to know more about why they were advocates of accessibility. And how they brought this passion into their work context. All participants understand that meeting the needs of all users is “…the right thing to do.”
Some individuals had personal accessibility requirements. Some had friends and family with accessibility needs. This was often the reason for their initial interest. Empathy was a major motivation. They recognised that people have diverse needs. It resulted in an individual drive for change.
The introduction of The Public Sector Bodies (Websites and Mobile Applications) Accessibility Regulations 2018 (PSBAR) had an impact on the majority of the participants. The guidelines were clear for those in digital development and design roles. WCAG set out the technical guidance for websites and apps. For others, the direct impact on roles was unclear. But the individual’s passion and intention to serve the public as a public sector worker motivated them. They had the drive to use their role to make content more inclusive.
Tone of voice
In the scoping interviews, we asked for reflections on potential barriers. One response focused on influencing others to adopt a best-practice approach. These approaches can be “a bit too earnest”. And people can feel “like [they are] being told off”. Accessibility aims to reduce inequalities. So, it is unsurprising that tone and language can often be emotive.
Being aware of personal tone came up in the main interviews as well. The individuals knew they needed an effective approach to influence. Many participants recognised they had not always gotten it right in the past. Some may have been too “shouty”. Or, as one participant said, they may have been seen as the “grumpy old woman in the corner”.
“I started off trying not to be preachy and nag. But I probably was a bit with the hashtags and the camel case stuff, saying, ‘please do this. This is why.’ And it had no impact, really.”
Behaviour change principles
All interviewees adopted a slower, and more realistic, approach to change. They realised how important it was to “bring people along with them”. One example is using a “show not tell” approach in conversations and training. This was a more effective way to create change:
“I sent around a video of camel case and non-camel case hashtags being read out by a screen reader. I got a flurry of emails back from people commenting, ‘oh, that’s awful. I had no idea. This is really bad.
“I thought, okay, all I’ve done is show people this is what it’s like. It’s helped them to understand and empathise. And so that’s the approach that I’ve taken throughout this. I’ve also tried to make it fun.”
One participant used an external partner to influence change. They had service users from the Royal National Institute of Blind (RNIB) feedback on content. Feedback from the RNIB helped one participant to get their team of developers onboard. The result was a consistent approach to accessibility across the team:
“It was a real soul-searching day because you were sitting looking at things that we knew we’d cut corners on. You weren’t feeling quite so chipper when somebody was in the room having a problem with it.”
One individual reflected on advice for those starting their journeys. Empathy mapping and finding a point of understanding is vital, in their opinion. Along with patience. They recommended the use of a COM-B approach in advance of conversations. This can help with buy-in across all levels of seniority.
Personal resilience
The ability of individuals to drive change was impressive. The scale of what needs to change is huge. We wanted to understand the impact on their personal resilience. What impact did a change programme have on them?
The individuals faced a myriad of barriers:
- lack of awareness and support
- the pressure of managing stakeholders
- plain language debates
- the use of PDFs
- differing content design approaches
- lack of training
The list goes on and on.
Those in a speciality role, such as a graphic designer or software developer, reported their resilience as okay. They experienced the challenges of accessibility delivery and change. But their areas of responsibility and influence were clearly defined.
There were a few positive personal moments along the way. Participants were proud of the change they influenced. And saw great value in being an expert:
“In that moment when someone gets [it], the change isn’t that hard. You know that what they’re gonna be doing is fifty per cent not one hundred percent better than what was happening before.
So, you know that person has made that change. That they’ll always be looking at the structure of the document whether you’re there or not. You kind of think it’s like a, you know, like a little ripple effect.”
For those driving the change, they reported their resilience as “depleted”. The years of influencing and driving change took its toll.
“I’m not sure if I could do it all again at this point if I’m honest.”
Leaders need to watch the resilience of individuals driving change. And ensure change programmes have clear roles and appropriate levels of support.
Inclusive communications 