How to communicate digital Accessibility Activities to B2B and B2C

In this article, we will focus on internal and external communication on digital accessibility activities. In practice, this topic is often neglected or only addressed to a very limited extent.

We will begin with external communication and first examine the business customer segment (B2B).

The Growing Importance for Business Customers

Commercial software products such as Jira, SAP, or hardware solutions are typically purchased by companies and public authorities rather than private individuals. These business customers increasingly require precise information regarding accessibility. In particular, clients from the public sector are legally obligated to consider accessibility requirements. As a result, B2B customers are requesting such evidence more actively than ever before.

While international providers such as Slack and Jira routinely publish accessibility statements online, this is still relatively uncommon among European digital products. However, such documentation is essential for demonstrating compliance with the relevant accessibility standards. When products are sold to both private-sector organizations and public authorities, the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) and EN 301 549 serve as the primary evaluation criteria.

Development Cycles

This information must always be kept up to date. Since the development cycles of web applications and cloud-based apps change rapidly—partly due to security updates—the stated assessment date should not be more than one year old. Technological changes can affect the accessibility of an application at any time, which must be continuously reflected in the accessibility documentation.

International and National Standards

For the international market, the free VPAT (Voluntary Product Accessibility Template) has become the established standard. It is available in various versions, including those based on WCAG, U.S. Section 508 requirements, or the European standard EN 301 549.

A VPAT serves as a transparent accessibility report. It does not certify that a product is completely free of accessibility issues; rather, it provides a detailed overview of which criteria are met and which known issues remain. In Germany, this format is less widely recognized, and a traditional accessibility report is more commonly used.

Responsiveness to Inquiries and Quality Assurance

Organizations must be prepared to respond to customer inquiries and provide accurate information. Outdated documentation can lead to significant problems. Accessibility characteristics often change substantially between major releases of content management systems or specialized software applications. Incorrect or outdated assurances can negatively impact the provider’s credibility.

If accessibility information is not publicly available on the website, providing timely and accurate information upon request is essential. In this context, providers should also make trial or demo versions available to their customers. Verifying software accessibility before purchase is now considered a standard part of a modern procurement process.

Communication with Consumers (B2C) and End Users

The second aspect concerns communication with the actual end users who use the application either privately or professionally. Transparent communication is particularly important in this context.

Terminology and Findability

In a legal context, it is important to distinguish between the two requirements: the BFSG mandates the provision of “accessibility information,” whereas the BITV requires an “accessibility statement.” Although these obligations originate from different legal frameworks, the term “accessibility statement” has become the commonly accepted designation in both contexts.

Different requirements apply regarding the discoverability of this statement depending on the sector:

Public Sector: The accessibility statement must be directly accessible from every page of the website or, in the case of mobile applications, through the extended navigation structure.
Private Sector: Accessibility information must also be positioned in a way that is easy to find and access for users.

Contents of the Accessibility Statement

Since achieving complete accessibility across an entire product is rarely possible in practice from the outset, any remaining accessibility barriers must be transparently documented in the accessibility statement. Concealing known issues is contrary to legal requirements.

Users do not need a detailed list of every individual source code defect. Instead, the most significant limitations should be summarized in a clear and understandable manner and organized by topic. Typical examples include:

Embedded PDF documents that are not fully accessible
Errors in form structure and labeling
Limitations affecting keyboard-only navigation

The statement must include the date of the most recent accessibility assessment. This assessment should be updated at least once per year and whenever significant functional changes are made to the application.

Feedback Mechanisms and Contact Options

A central and mandatory component of the accessibility statement—particularly in the public sector—is the feedback mechanism. It enables users to report existing accessibility barriers directly to the responsible organization.

The following standards should be observed:

Dedicated Contact Point: Rather than using a general service address (such as info@example.com), organizations should provide a dedicated contact address for accessibility-related inquiries (such as accessibility@example.com).
Multiple Communication Channels: The European standard EN 301 549 requires effective communication through various channels. Since not all users can rely on email, alternative contact methods such as a telephone number or postal address must also be provided.

The Conciliation Procedure

For the public sector, the BITV additionally requires an explicit reference to the statutory conciliation procedure. Users may contact the federal or state conciliation body if the responsible organization fails to respond, or does not respond adequately, to an accessibility-related report.

The effectiveness of this mechanism has been demonstrated through successful cases in the past. For example, a conciliation procedure concerning inaccessible CAPTCHA mechanisms in the login process of Deutsche Bahn ultimately resulted in the complete removal of this barrier after several months.

Incoming feedback must be addressed within a reasonable period. In the public sector, a response time of approximately three to four weeks is generally considered appropriate. Within this period, the responsible organization should acknowledge receipt of the report, investigate the issue, and ideally initiate measures to resolve the reported accessibility barrier.

If the responsible organization does not respond, or does not respond adequately, affected individuals may initiate a formal conciliation procedure as the next step. Provided that the reported accessibility barriers are substantiated, the conciliation body is legally required to open proceedings against the provider.

Quality and Competence in Customer Support

A common challenge in practice is the insufficient qualification of first-level support staff when handling accessibility-related inquiries. Even when separate contact forms exist, specific accessibility requests are often routed to general customer service channels.

Practical Example: In response to a report submitted to a financial institution concerning a faulty and disruptive ARIA alert (a technical attribute used to control screen reader behavior), customer support incorrectly recommended switching browsers or deleting cookies. Such responses lack any technical basis, create confusion for affected users, and discourage them from reporting accessibility issues in the future. Only after several weeks and multiple escalation stages was a technically competent response finally provided.

```html id="w7k4mz"

This example illustrates the importance of competent and timely handling of accessibility-related inquiries. Companies and public authorities must expect that accessibility questions may also come from specialists or highly knowledgeable users. Standardized but technically incorrect responses damage the provider’s credibility.

A professional process should include the following steps:

Technical Review: Forwarding the inquiry to the responsible development team or quality assurance department.
Transparent Communication: Providing a respectful response to the user regarding the expected timeframe for resolving the issue.
Resolution Notification: Proactively informing the reporting individual once the accessibility barrier has been successfully removed.

Users should nevertheless be explicitly encouraged to report accessibility barriers consistently. Only through direct feedback can organizations identify shortcomings and improve their processes.

External Communication and Public Relations (PR)

As a third aspect, communicating accessibility efforts to the wider public can be highly beneficial. Organizations can use successfully implemented accessibility measures to generate positive visibility, for example through their social media channels.

However, two fundamental principles should be observed:

Realistic Representation Rather Than Exaggeration: Claims such as “fully accessible” should generally be avoided, as even well-designed products typically contain minor limitations. Promoting so-called accessibility overlays (automated software plugins) is particularly counterproductive, as these tools rarely solve accessibility issues sustainably and are widely criticized within the accessibility community. Instead, organizations should clearly communicate which improvements have been achieved and why accessibility is a priority.
Accessibility of the Communication Itself: Any public communication regarding inclusion and accessibility must itself be accessible. This includes, among other things:
- Alternative text for images and graphics on social media platforms.
- A correct heading hierarchy in digital documents and on websites.
- Accessible and properly labeled form fields in feedback tools.

Only through consistent, competent, and accessible communication can organizations build long-term trust and maintain a positive public image.

Internal Communication on Digital Accessibility

The final—and often underestimated—aspect is internal communication. It is primarily directed at employees and communicates the values and priorities of the organization.

Transparency and Internal Motivation

When communicating accessibility initiatives internally, the same level of transparency recommended for external communication should be applied. It is entirely appropriate to explain that certain measures are driven by legal requirements. At the same time, the broader benefits should be emphasized: accessibility is a quality characteristic that benefits all users and represents an essential component of diversity strategies and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR).

To establish accessibility as a sustainable organizational priority, concrete achievements and initiatives should be made visible:

Technical Milestones: The accessible design of internal component libraries and the completion of accessibility optimization projects.
Internal Accessibility: The accessible implementation of the intranet and internal documents.
Awareness Raising: The provision of training programs, short informational videos (“learning nuggets”), and practical guidelines to continuously strengthen employee awareness.

Qualification and Awareness in Customer-Facing Roles

A critical factor is the training of employees who are directly involved in communication. This applies not only to corporate communications teams, social media managers, and web editors, who must publish content in an accessible manner. Employees working directly with customers—such as support staff, telephone hotline agents, and personnel in outsourced call centers—also require appropriate training.

These teams do not need to become accessibility specialists, but they should possess:

Awareness and Understanding: A basic understanding of the barriers encountered by people with disabilities.
Clear Processes: Knowledge of the appropriate internal contact point to which accessibility-related inquiries must be forwarded immediately.

Even in environments with high staff turnover or extensive use of external service providers, a standardized briefing process is essential. The goal should be to provide a reliable and professional initial response, such as:

“We have received your accessibility-related inquiry and forwarded it to our specialist department. You will receive a response as soon as possible.”

Conclusion and Outlook

To date, interactions with accessibility contacts in German-speaking countries have often been unsatisfactory for affected users. Unqualified responses can discourage individuals who are particularly sensitive to accessibility barriers or less inclined to pursue lengthy escalation processes. This makes it all the more important to continue advocating for accessibility consistently.

Only through ongoing dialogue and the continuous reporting of accessibility barriers can the topic remain a priority for decision-makers and responsible organizations.