Evidence Domain

Accessibility

What it studies

The design of environments, services and systems usable by people across the full range of human ability: mobility, sensory, cognitive and psychological. It spans regulatory compliance, universal design as a discipline, and the participatory knowledge of disabled users themselves.

Why it matters

Accessibility is simultaneously a legal floor, an inclusion commitment and a design-quality multiplier: environments designed for ability variation are measurably better for everyone (the curb-cut effect). In workplace strategy it must operate as a base condition across every requirement family — settings, circulation, wayfinding, technology, sensory environment — not as a compliance chapter appended to a finished design.

Questions it answers
  • What does this workforce's ability variation actually require — beyond the regulatory minimum?
  • Where does the current or proposed workplace disable people the design could enable?
  • How do sharing models and unassigned settings interact with accessibility needs?
  • How can needs inform design without forcing disclosure?
Evidence sources
  • Universal design research and standards (EN 17210 and national codes as floors)
  • Participatory research with disabled employees
  • Consent-based aggregate need data (Workplace Passport)
  • Access audits of existing environments
Design and policy implications

Accessibility as base specification in every setting requirement profile; unassigned environments tested specifically — sharing models can silently withdraw accommodations that assigned settings provided; sensory accessibility (acoustic, visual, cognitive load) treated as seriously as mobility; consent-based need channels so provision doesn't depend on disclosure.

Related methods
Common misuse

Compliance-minimum thinking: the code met, the workplace still disabling. The regulatory floor was never the evidence-based ceiling, and desk-sharing environments create accessibility failures that compliant buildings can still contain — the adjustable desk that exists but is never available, the quiet setting that exists but cannot be reserved.

Further research

Accessibility in flexible and shared workplace models is under-researched relative to its growing relevance; participatory evaluation methods are the most promising development.