Browse by Barriers

Closed-door technical committees

Standards are often developed by technical committee members, behind closed doors. Public consultation may happen later, but opportunities to give feedback are limited and may not be meaningful. Many D/deaf and D/disabled people have valuable experience that could improve the standard, but there is usually no way for outsiders to join or contribute, even temporarily. This limits diverse input and can reduce the quality and accessibility of the standard.

• Open up committee meetings and allow outside participation

Communication styles default to Western norms

Committees often use Western communication styles by default. As a result, some voices may be overlooked, and the group may miss valuable input. Common Western norms include:

• Speaking often without being asked or invited to speak
• Being assertive or dominant in discussions
• Interrupting to join the conversation
• Openly disagreeing with others

This can exclude or disadvantage members who:

• Prefer listening before speaking
• Prefer communication in chat
• Prefer giving brief or thoughtful contributions
• Value reflective or quiet communication

• Empower chairs and facilitators to manage conflict
• Make communications multi-modal and consistent

Consultation fatigue in D/deaf and D/disabled communities

Many D/deaf and D/disabled community members are often asked for feedback, but rarely see real changes. This can lead to consultation fatigue, making people less willing to participate and reducing trust in standards organizations.

Common problems include:

• Skepticism about whether participation will make a difference.
• Feeling that feedback is ignored or not acted on.
• Being asked for input many times without clear follow-up, leading to emotional and mental fatigue.

• Establish continuous feedback loops
• Help with information management
• Help with travel planning
• Set clear and realistic timelines for reviews, drafts, or revisions
• Show accountability and build trust with D/deaf and D/disabled people

Difficulty receiving and communicating information

When access needs are not considered, many people will have trouble getting or understanding information. Some things to consider include:

• Language is often too technical and full of jargon.
• Documents and materials are often not shared early enough to allow people to prepare.
• PDFs, videos, or online content are not always accessible (e.g., screen-reader friendly, captioned, or transcribed).
• In fast or large group discussions, many people get left behind, especially when they are new to the subject matter. This is magnified for D/deaf and Hard of Hearing people who rely on sign language/interpretation.
• Blind or low-vision people often can’t see body language, facial expressions, or visual cues that clarifies information being communicated.
• Visual content like slides, diagrams, or infographics are often not described clearly.
• Using multiple channels at once, such as chat, email and verbal discussion, can be confusing and often does not work well for people using screen readers.

People may also have trouble sharing their thoughts or participating. Some things to consider include:

• Meetings that lack structured ways to take turns or contribute often leave out neurodiverse people who require clear structures. This can also be a disadvantage for people who depend on sign language/interpretation, such as D/deaf and Hard of Hearing people.
• Without clear cues, new members often worry about interrupting and miss opportunities to contribute.
• Lack of quiet or low-stimulation options can make participation harder for people with sensory sensitivities.
• Poor audio, video, or caption quality in remote meetings can prevent people from fully participating.
• People are less likely to continue sharing when they don’t get feedback on whether their contributions were received or understood.

• Host onboarding meetings before committee work begins
• Make communications multi-modal and consistent
• Plan what to do if goals aren’t met
• Provide a welcome package for new members
• Provide translation and interpretation for everyone

Dominant “expert” culture

Some committees treat long-time members and technical experts as the most important voices.

This can lead to:

• A few people dominating meetings while others stay quiet.
• New members feeling unsure about speaking up or feeling they have to prove themselves before being taken seriously.
• Jargon and insider language making it hard for new members to understand.
• Questions from new members being dismissed instead of answered.
• Non-technical people feeling less valued and pressured to speak like technical experts instead of sharing their real-world knowledge of marginalization or disability.
• Long-time members having more influence, even without formal authority.
• Decisions being made during side conversations instead of openly.

• Empower chairs and facilitators to manage conflict
• Host onboarding meetings before committee work begins
• Use inclusive approaches for decision-making

Inaccessible digital collaboration tools

Some digital tools used for meetings and teamwork are not accessible to everyone. When tools are hard to use or not available to all, some people are left out and cannot fully take part.

Common problems include:

• Tools that don’t work with screen readers or other assistive technologies
• Buttons or features that are hard to use with a keyboard
• Missing or limited captions, screen reader support, keyboard navigation, high-contrast modes, and sign language/interpretation support.
• Security settings that block accessibility features
• Platforms blocked in some countries
• Tools that need fast internet or powerful devices

• Ensure all documents are accessible
• Ensure websites are accessible
• Plan what to do if goals aren’t met

Inaccessible digital documents

Some documents, like drafts, reports, and agendas, are not made accessible. This can make them hard or impossible for some people to read and use. When this happens, people may not be able to review them, give feedback, or fully take part in the discussion.

Common problems include:

• PDFs and scanned files that screen readers can’t read
• Small text, poor contrast, or missing headings
• Images, charts, or tables without descriptions
• Images that contain text
• Complex or technical language
• Long documents with no plain-language summary
• Formats that cannot be edited or adapted

• Check and improve accessibility
• Ensure all documents are accessible
• Help with information management

Inaccessible hybrid meetings

During hybrid meetings, where some people are physically in the room and others are online, people in the room often have an advantage. If the meeting is not set up well, remote and disabled participants can miss important information or have their input overlooked.

Common problems include:

• Poor sound, background noise, or people speaking without microphones.
• Cameras not showing who is speaking.
• Slides or visuals not described out loud, which is also a problem for blind and low vision people who are in the room.
• Captions missing or incorrect.
• People providing sign language/interpretation not visible to everyone.
• Documents and tools that do not work with screen readers or other assistive technologies.
• Materials shared only during the meeting, not in advance.
• No clear system for taking turns.
• Facilitators focusing mostly on people in the room.
• Online contributions being missed or ignored.
• Side conversations happening in the room that remote participants are left out of.
• Technology delays or platform problems.

• Choose accessible meeting spaces
• Make remote/virtual/online meetings accessible
• Plan meetings so people worldwide can join
• Provide translation and interpretation for everyone
• Set meeting language captions correctly
• Use accessible hybrid meeting practices

Inaccessible in-person meetings

In-person meetings often take place in spaces that are not accessible to everyone. This can make it hard for some people to attend, participate, or feel included.

Common problems include:

• Travel that is long, costly, or hard to access
• Fatigue from travel, especially for people with chronic pain or low energy
• Buildings without ramps, elevators, or accessible restrooms
• Not enough space for wheelchairs or assistive devices
• No power outlets for assistive devices
• No captions or sign language interpreters
• Poor lighting or uncomfortable seating
• People speaking over each other or no microphones used
• No quiet space or flexible breaks
• Networking in informal spaces that aren’t accessible

• Build in travel funding
• Choose accessible meeting spaces
• Help with travel planning
• Provide translation and interpretation for everyone

Inaccessible virtual meetings

Virtual meetings can create barriers if they are not planned with accessibility in mind. This makes it difficult for everyone to participate. A virtual meeting will not be able to meet all accessibility needs, but they should be set up to address the accessibility needs of the people participating.

Common problems include:

• Materials not shared before the meeting so people have time to prepare.
• Poor sound or no microphones.
• No video of the speakers or poor lighting which makes lip reading impossible.
• Slides or images not described aloud.
• Small or hard-to-read text.
• No captions, or captions that are wrong.
• No sign language/interpretation.
• No chat monitoring.
• Chat used in such a way that it interrupts screen readers, forcing people who use screen readers to either ignore the chat or miss the content in the main meeting.
• Documents that don’t work with screen readers or other assistive technologies.
• Fast-paced live editing, which is not clearly described as it is happening.
• Online tools like polls, whiteboards or chat services that are hard to use or don’t work with assistive technologies
• Internet or platform problems, or incompatibility with assistive technologies

• Check and improve accessibility
• Make remote/virtual/online meetings accessible
• Plan meetings so people worldwide can join
• Set meeting language captions correctly

Inaccessible feedback mechanisms

Most feedback systems use digital tools that not everyone can use. Some online forms do not work with screen readers or other assistive technology. Requiring people to email a committee chair instead of using the standard feedback channels can deter people from providing feedback.

• Allow anonymous feedback opportunities
• Check and improve accessibility
• Ensure websites are accessible
• Establish continuous feedback loops
• Measure the developed standard's impact with affected communities
• Provide more than one way to give feedback

Inaccessible registration systems

Many standard development organizations' application processes are not accessible, which makes it harder for people to participate. Some common examples include:

• Not having alternative registration options, such as phone, email, or paper sign-up
• Websites or application portals that don’t work with screen readers or other assistive technology
• Having no way to request accommodations during registration, or having a request option that is difficult to find
• CAPTCHAs that are hard or impossible to use with screen readers
• Time limits that log people out before they finish the form
• Forms that are long, complicated, and not written in plain language
• Forms that aren’t keyboard accessible and can’t be completed without a mouse
• Required fields that don’t make sense or force people to share personal information
• Mobile-unfriendly forms that are a barrier for people who rely on phones or tablets
• Requiring a specific file format for documents that need to be uploaded
• Not having a save-and-return option, which people who need more time or breaks require
• Error messages that are unclear, aren’t read by screen readers, or don’t explain how to fix the problem
• Language barriers, including not having a translation option or using overly technical wording
• Confirmation emails that don’t arrive or are inaccessible, for example, they have images instead of text or unclear next steps

• Be transparent in the application process
• Check and improve accessibility
• Ensure all documents are accessible
• Ensure websites are accessible

Lack of clear and accessible onboarding process

Many organizations don’t have an onboarding process for new members, which can cause several problems including:

• New members may have to figure things out on their own or rely on friends or colleagues for guidance.
• Members can feel overwhelmed, unsure of what’s expected, or confused about how to work with others.
• The amount and complexity of information can be intimidating, especially if there’s no guidance on where to start and could cause new members to leave.
• For members with accessibility needs, accommodations may not be put in place early enough.

• Agree together how the committee will work
• Be transparent in the application process
• Host onboarding meetings before committee work begins
• Plan what to do if goals aren’t met
• Provide a welcome package for new members

Lack of financial support or payment

Most standards work is unpaid but takes a lot of time and expertise. Some people get support from their employers, but for many D/deaf and D/disabled people, this is not available. Membership fees and unpaid work make it harder or impossible for them to participate.

• Build in travel funding
• Create a shared support system
• Provide monetary compensation and financial support

Lack of organizational support

A major barrier to inclusive recruitment is whether the standards organization is committed to including D/deaf and D/disabled people and whether it has the systems to support that inclusion. Participation is not guaranteed. When political or social priorities change, diverse communities can be pushed aside or left out completely.

This lack of support often shows up as:

• No clear policies for including and supporting people with disabilities in standards work
• No dedicated staff or funding for outreach to diverse communities
• Little or no support for inclusive recruitment practices

• Be transparent in the application process
• Create a shared support system
• Organizational and operational commitment
• Provide chairs with practical support and tools for accessibility

Lack of public awareness of the standards feedback process

Many people don’t know they can give input on standards during the enquiry stage. When people don’t know how or when to provide feedback, participation is low, and standards may not meet everyone’s needs.

Common problems include:

• People being unaware of when public consultation periods happen.
• Drafts being published online but without outreach, so few people see them.
• Less contribution because of missed notifications.

• Allow anonymous feedback opportunities
• Create an opportunity for public feedback before withdrawal
• Establish continuous feedback loops
• Measure the developed standard's impact with affected communities
• Provide more than one way to give feedback

Lack of training and support for chairs and facilitators

Chairs and facilitators often need help to run inclusive and accessible meetings, but support is limited. Common problems include:

• Few resources are available on how to lead inclusively and accessibly to ensure everyone, including D/deaf and D/disabled people, can participate.
• Little guidance is provided on managing diverse or cross-cultural groups.
• Time and resources to manage both technical and accessibility tasks are limited.
• Handling conflict resolution without enough training and support.
• Knowledge of accessible technology for virtual meetings and document sharing is not common.

• Choose accessible meeting spaces
• Empower chairs and facilitators to manage conflict
• Host onboarding meetings before committee work begins
• Make remote/virtual/online meetings accessible
• Provide chairs with practical support and tools for accessibility
• Provide ongoing accessibility and inclusion training
• Provide translation and interpretation for everyone
• Use inclusive approaches for decision-making

Lack of training and support for committee members

Committee members often require mentoring and training in order to participate effectively. Challenges include:

• Long, confusing, or overwhelming getting started guides.
• No guidance for navigating the volume of information and resources.
• Lack of mentoring and peer support for committee work.
• Little or no training on collaboration, teamwork, or technical processes.
• Limited awareness or guidance on accessibility, equity, and inclusive participation.
• No clear pathway to develop skills for becoming a chair or leading working groups.

• Host onboarding meetings before committee work begins
• Provide guidance and ongoing support to new members
• Provide ongoing accessibility and inclusion training
• Provide translation and interpretation for everyone

Lack of transparency in how feedback is processed

People often do not know what happens to their feedback or if it makes a difference. This can make participation feel pointless, especially for marginalized communities. When the process is unclear, people may stop taking part.

Common problems include:

• No clear explanation of how feedback is evaluated or decisions are made.
• No explanation about why some suggestions are accepted and others are rejected.
• Feedback that affects communities disproportionately may carry less weight.
• Lack of transparency reduces trust in the process.

• Establish continuous feedback loops
• Provide more than one way to give feedback
• Use fair and transparent decision-making

Limited meeting times and time zone exclusion

Meetings are often scheduled based on North American or European work hours. This limits participation and excludes voices from many regions. People in Asia, Oceania, Africa, and other places may be unable to attend. Differences in Daylight Savings Time can make this worse when meeting times shift and are inconsistent.

• Make remote/virtual/online meetings accessible
• Plan meetings so people worldwide can join

No clear or inclusive process for retiring standards

Standards can be withdrawn without clear rules, public consultation, or timely communication. Decisions may focus mainly on technical reasons, without considering social impact or the needs of affected communities.

Without a transparent and inclusive process, standards may be removed too soon, kept for too long, or withdrawn without people knowing. This can reduce transparency, accountability, and trust in the standards system - especially for people whose rights or access depend on those standards. It can also cause confusion, mistakes, or harm.

Common problems include:

• No clear or transparent criteria for deciding when a standard is outdated
• Little or no consultation with affected communities, including D/deaf and D/disabled communities
• Decisions focused only on technical details, not real-life impact
• Important protections or accessibility guidance being removed
• No clear public notice that a standard is being withdrawn
• People continuing to use an outdated standard without knowing
• Policies or contracts still referring to a withdrawn standard
• No clear information about what replaces the standard

• Co-develop criteria for withdrawal
• Create an opportunity for public feedback before withdrawal
• Offer opportunities to request revisions rather than removal
• Use clear, accessible, and open language in withdrawal notices

No clear way to report problems or get help

Some committees do not have a clear way for people to report accessibility problems or problems with how people treat each other. When there is no clear process:

• People may feel scared to speak up because they worry about social consequences.
• New or marginalized members may feel left out or stay silent.
• People may not know who to contact when something goes wrong.
• Complaints may fall through the cracks and the same problems may keep happening.
• People may feel unsafe and decide to leave the committee.
• People may be afraid to ask for accommodations in the future.
• Trust in the system may go down.

• Create a shared support system
• Empower chairs and facilitators to manage conflict
• Provide guidance and ongoing support to new members

No funding for accessibility accommodations

Many organizations don’t set aside money for accessibility. This makes it hard for people with disabilities to fully participate. When there is no dedicated funding, accessibility is often treated as optional instead of essential, which can prevent full participation.

Common problems include:

• No budget for sign language interpreters or live captions
• No support for accessible tools, platforms, or documents
• No help with travel or personal assistance
• Increased stress and fatigue for participants who have to manage accessibility themselves
• No funds for extra staffing needed to support accessibility

• Allocate a dedicated accessibility budget
• Build in travel funding
• Create a shared support system
• Help with travel planning
• Provide monetary compensation and financial support

No support when a standard is removed

People and organizations often rely on a standard for accessibility, buying decisions, or designing services. When it is removed, they may not know what to do next. Without guidance, it can be hard to adjust, which can cause confusion and weaken protections.

Common problems include:

• No clear guidance on what replaces the withdrawn standard
• Confusion about how to stay compliant with laws or policies
• Difficulty updating internal rules, contracts, or procedures
• Loss of a reference for accessibility or human rights protections
• No advice on how to request or advocate for a new or updated standard

• Provide transition guidance when withdrawing a standard
• Use clear, accessible, and open language in withdrawal notices

No way to track the real-world impact of a standard

Organizations often do not have tools to know if a standard is being used, understood correctly, or making a difference. Without ways to measure impact, standards may not reach their goals or serve all communities they intend to.

Common problems include:

• No data on who is using the standard and how.
• Difficulty improving standards because real-world effects are unknown.
• No feedback on challenges or barriers in applying the standard.
• Limited understanding of unintended negative impacts on marginalized groups.

• Create an opportunity for public feedback before withdrawal
• Establish continuous feedback loops
• Make published standards free and easy to access
• Measure the developed standard's impact with affected communities

People don’t start at the same place

Standards work is often very technical and complex, and assumes people already know how things work. When information is too technical, it is hard for newcomers or people without a technical background to participate. Efforts to diversify participation need to recognize that people have different levels of experience and knowledge. Without proper support, many people will be left out.

• Empower chairs and facilitators to manage conflict
• Ensure all documents are accessible
• Help with information management
• Host onboarding meetings before committee work begins
• Plan for regular check-ins with new members
• Provide a welcome package for new members
• Provide diverse, accessible knowledge-building opportunities
• Provide guidance and ongoing support to new members

Publishing standards does not guarantee awareness or access

Publishing a standard does not mean people will see it or be able to use it. If people are not aware of it or cannot access it, it will not help the communities it is meant to support.

Common problems include:

• Limited outreach can leave out small organizations or marginalized communities.
• People or organizations may not know the standard exists.
• The standard may be written in complex or technical language that is hard to understand.
• A lack of accessible formats can prevent some people from reading or using the standard.

• Establish continuous feedback loops
• Make published standards free and easy to access
• Measure the developed standard's impact with affected communities
• Promote standards in the communities they affect

Recruiting for diversity

Even when an organization wants more diverse participation, it may not know how to recruit in an inclusive way.

Important questions to ask:

• Are you always reaching out to the same people or groups?
• Do you mostly recruit through personal or professional contacts, which can leave others out?
• Are your outreach methods accessible and offered in different formats?
• Are you reaching the communities you actually want to include?
• Do you have the time and resources to build trust with underrepresented communities?
• Are your recruitment steps and requirements inclusive, or do they accidentally exclude people?

• Build in travel funding
• Check and improve accessibility
• Make communications multi-modal and consistent
• Promote standards in the communities they affect
• Recruit across D/disability and intersectional identity

Default meeting language is English

When meetings are held only in English, people who speak English fluently have an advantage. Others may find it harder to join discussions, which limits participation.

Common problems include:

• Non-English speakers miss out on important points.
• People feel less confident speaking or asking questions.
• People stay quiet even when they have valuable ideas.

• Empower chairs and facilitators to manage conflict

Too much background information for new members

New members must learn a lot before joining the standards process, including how the process works, how decision-making is done, what the committee roles are, the standard history and versions, meeting rules and tools, and technical and legal language. This information is often long, complex, and not in plain language. It can be especially hard for people who are new, have learning disabilities, limited digital skills, or come from different professional backgrounds. This can make members feel confused, overwhelmed, or excluded, which may lead them to leave.

• Ensure all documents are accessible
• Help with information management
• Plan for regular check-ins with new members
• Provide a welcome package for new members
• Provide diverse, accessible knowledge-building opportunities
• Provide guidance and ongoing support to new members

Travel barriers for D/deaf and D/disabled people

Travel can be harder for D/deaf and D/disabled people, making it more expensive, stressful, and tiring. This can make it difficult to attend in-person meetings, and some members may not be able to participate or may attend under extra strain.

Common problems include:

• Support and guidance problems
  • No clear contact person to help with accessibility planning
  • No guidance on how to arrange accommodations for specific needs
  • Traveling without regular caregiver or personal support.
  • Higher travel stress, physical pain and fatigue because of limited support and long journeys
• Accessibility support issues
  • Not having access to personal equipment or a full technology setup while travelling
  • Risk of mobility equipment being damaged during travel
  • No access to sign language interpreters during travel
• Inaccessible spaces
  • Airports, trains, or taxis that are not fully accessible.
  • Limited information about accessibility in the host city
• Funding and expense problems
  • Extra costs and difficulty finding accessible transport, hotels, or flights
  • Paying out of pocket for mobility equipment, support workers, or special insurance

• Build in travel funding
• Help with travel planning

Unclear participation information

Many standards organizations do not clearly explain what committee roles involve at the time of application. Providing details like who is on the committee, what they do, and how to contact them is necessary.

As a result, people are often left with basic unanswered questions, such as:

• Eligibility and who the role is for
  • Who can apply?
  • Who is the committee looking for?
  • What does “expertise” mean (formal credentials, lived experience, or both)?
  • What experience or skills are required?
• Role expectations and responsibilities
  • What will I actually be doing in this role?
  • What are the main responsibilities?
  • How much influence do members have?
  • How are decisions made (consensus, voting, chair decision)?
• Time and workload
  • What is the time commitment (hours per month)?
  • How often are meetings?
  • How long are meetings?
  • What is the expected length of membership (months/years)?
• Meetings and participation format
  • Are meetings online, hybrid, or in-person?
  • What time zone are meetings based in?
  • Are meetings during work hours or evenings?
  • Will I need to travel?
• Accessibility and accommodations
  • Will accommodations be provided (sign language/interpretation, captions, accessible documents)?
  • How do I request accommodations, and when?
  • Are plain language versions available?
  • What happens if I face accessibility barriers during the process?
• Costs, pay, and support
  • Is the role paid, volunteer, or supported with an honorarium?
  • Who covers costs like travel, internet, or software?
  • Will support be provided for assistive technology needs?
• Application process and next steps
  • What happens after I apply?
  • How long will it take to hear back?
  • Who can I contact if I have questions before applying?
• Safety, inclusion, and accountability
  • How will diversity and intersectionality be considered?
  • What is the process if someone experiences discrimination or harm?
  • What happens if I need to step back temporarily due to disability, caregiving, or health?
• Recognition and credit
  • How will my contribution be recognized?
  • Will my name be listed publicly?
  • Will I be credited in the final standard or related materials?

• Be transparent in the application process
• Create a shared support system
• Host onboarding meetings before committee work begins
• Make communications multi-modal and consistent
• Provide a welcome package for new members

Underestimated workloads

Committee work often takes more time than people think. This can become too much for people to manage, leading to fatigue and distress. It can be especially hard for people with disabilities, who may have changing energy levels, caregiving responsibilities, or need more time because of access needs.

Many members experience:

• Too many meetings
• Tasks that take longer than planned, like reading, writing, or editing
• Pressure to do both technical work and advocate for underrepresented communities

• Ensure all documents are accessible
• Help with information management
• Plan for regular check-ins with new members
• Set clear and realistic timelines for reviews, drafts, or revisions